Replies

This is the 4th in a series of investigative reports by my local paper that they have been running on consecutive Sundays. I initiated these stories by contacting the paper 6 or 8 weeks ago now.

Apparently, the bishop is on record admitting that this case was poorly handled, and that is why he referred to it as an isolated case.

In our locaL media, Adamec has repeatedly declared that the Luddy case was an isolated case of pedophilia, and that there were no other past or current cases.

It's clear that the prior bishop of this diocese was at fault to permit him to continue to serve as principal of Bishop Guilfoyle HS from 1977 - 1984.

Yes, quite clear. Skupien was my principle at Bishop Guilfoyle HS when I attended there '80-'84. He was then reassigned to other posts and parishes.

He died, according to official records from cirrhosis (my brother knew where he kept his bottle in his desk drawer in the principal's office, they would occasionally move it to see how long ot took till he got the DT's) but it is well known here he died of AIDS. One of these other priests mentioned in this article has his name on the AIDS quilt that travels around the country.

Regarding the testimonly of Msgr. Saylor, though it's clear it was given in 1994, it isn't at all clear what was the timeframe about which he was testifying.

(Msgr Saylor was my pastor growing up.) The case was limited to testimony of incidents after 1984, because of statutes of limitations (we're working with a big lobbying firm in Harrisburg -they took this case for free- to change PA's statutes, new legislation is passing this week to change the statute age to 30, we're trying for an amendment to it that would raise the statute to 40 for psychyitrists/psychologists/counselors/ministers, and were asking it be titled the "Adamec Amendment ;-)

nothing is reported here about the cases which led to recent removal. What's the story here? Are there cases of priests who were found to be molestors in the timeframe after Bishop Adamec became bishop?

We think there are more from Adamec's reign. However, cases known before Adamec became bishop were still hidden and reassigned by Adamec up till the present.

Adamec declined to be totally truthful about priests who had been removed in the months leading up to the conference. As bishop, Adamec has the ultimate authority and responsibility for the diocese, yet he wasn’t exactly sure how many priests were removed. That is simply unbelievable.

One of these priests "ministered" to my own 9 year old son last fall, before any of us knew any of this. It turns out an old grade school friend of mine was his victim. I have seen the letters hand signed by Adamec to this victim, promising to pay for his counseling, and promising this priest would never have access to boys again. The bishop is a liar. He had access to my own son. Thank God we were there and nothing happened. But apparently he was removed 6 weeks ago because something DID happen.

I spoke to the hospital administration(I'm a physician on staff there too) and asked them to put pressure on the diocese.

How the hell is the hospital supposed to run an effective criminal background check on their chaplains (required by state law) when the bishop lies and hides their crimes and local law enforcement refuses to press charges and victims will not come forward and speak so that we can rid our local population of these SOB's???

Are there cases of priests who were found to be molestors in the timeframe after Bishop Adamec became bishop? Can you relate any information about that?

There are at least 3 more priests currently serving here with histories of pedophilia known to the diocese. Two were removed quietly within the past 8 weeks.

The bishop claims these are "new cases" that have "just surfaced."

He is lying through his teeth. The media knows it. He knows it. He knows we know it, but still he refuses to act.

The newspaper, with this story, is laying the groundwork in the court of public opinion to prove the bishop's history of lies and deceit.

I'm assuming that next week's story will outline more of the most recent cases for which we have proof.

Plus the change in statute of limitation will cause a cascade of new suits by known victims who presently have no legal recourse because they are past age 20.

And there are RICO suits being filed for those already past age 30.

"How the hell is the hospital supposed to run an effective criminal background check on their chaplains ..."

As a practical matter, polycarp, this is indeed very difficult, particularly since it seems to be standard practice to assign a (possibly criminally or civilly liable) priest to a chaplaincy, either in a prison, old age home, or hospital.

Needless to say, this interferes not at all with their illicit activities. But it sure means that they are (a) useless as chaplains and (b) a possible source of liability for the institutions to which they have been assigned. I'd check them out really carefully, and then make it very clear, in writing and fully documented, that you had consulted the bishop and he had provided you with (written) authentication of this priest's suitability for the job. You might talk to your hospital's legal counsel about this.

One of the worst priests I ever knew, whose predilection was, believe it or not, women, was assigned as a chaplain to a special prison ward on Riker's Island (NY) for transvestites and homosexuals. This was supposed to keep him out of trouble, but I always suspected that he was probably carrying on there, too, since I didn't think he was particular about his sex objects. But I also knew that he pursued any female who crossed his threshold: a prisoner's sister, mother, even wife (oddly enough, some of them had wives). I'm sure lawsuits are even now surfacing about this guy.

It's a terrible thing to say, but from what I've seen, if priests are assigned as chaplains, it's because there's a problem. Sometimes it can actually be that they are too conservative and bishops or superiors don't like them (Fr. Fessio and Fr. Buckley). But if they're just ordinary guys who suddenly turn up as chaplains, I'd look at them very closely.