Priest, bishop clash in sex, theft scandals

THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^ | 11/12/2002 | George Archibald

[robowombat]

The Washington Times --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Priest, bishop clash in sex, theft scandals George Archibald THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Published 11/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A local Roman Catholic priest says he is being retaliated against by his bishop for providing evidence that three priests in separate incidents stole church collections, impregnated a married parishioner and collected homosexual pornography. The Rev. James R. Haley says he was suspended by Arlington Bishop Paul S. Loverde after blowing the whistle on the three priests in the Diocese of Arlington, The Washington Times has learned. "I believe that he's trying to strangle me out of the church," Father Haley testified in a civil lawsuit. He is barred from revealing any evidence of priestly wrongdoing to law-enforcement authorities or the public under a canonical "penal precept" issued by the bishop in October 2001.

The lawsuit was filed by a parishioner whose wife was impregnated by a Catholic pastor of a Manassas church.

Bishop Loverde, who declined repeated requests for interviews, declined to say why he took away Father Haley's priestly faculties, saying an explanation "would require the diocese to discuss detailed private matters involving him." "Father Haley has his own issues and in conjunction with him they are being addressed canonically. It would simply not be appropriate for the diocese to discuss these matters," the diocese said in a statement.

Bishop Loverde's handling of the incidents follows in the wake of lay questioning of the way American bishops have dealt with priests who violate their vows of celibacy. Last month, the Vatican declined to approve the U.S. bishops' plan for disciplining errant priests. Vatican spokesmen called the plan adopted in June by U.S. Roman Catholic bishops gathered in Dallas to address, primarily, the problem of priests sexually abusing children, too ambiguous and "difficult to reconcile" with church law.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, meeting this week in Washington on the sex-abuse policy, has declined to look into the Haley matter. On Oct. 10, Bishop Wilton D. Gregory of Belleview, Ill., head of the bishops' conference, denied Father Haley's appeal to review evidence that he brought to Bishop Loverde over the past four years and the priest's charges of retaliation.

Mark E. Chopko, general counsel of the bishops' conference, says the body did not have jurisdiction to investigate Father Haley's retaliation charges. "In the church, it is a matter that exists solely between Father Haley and Bishop Loverde," Mr. Chopko said in a letter to the priest's attorney, Gregory L. Murphy of Alexandria.

Father Haley, 46, says the bishop did not act on the information he disclosed. The scandals involved:

•The Rev. James A. Verrecchia, 45, former pastor of All Saints Catholic Church in Manassas, who he said carried on a yearlong sexual affair with the wife of a parishioner, Jim A. Lambert, and impregnated her in late December 1999. Mr. Verrecchia married Nancy Lambert the following year. Father Haley was subpoenaed to testify in a civil lawsuit brought by Mr. Lambert, who charged that Arlington Diocese's cover-up prevented him from winning custody of his three children. The lawsuit was dismissed in August.

•The Rev. William J. Erbacher, 55, former pastor of St. Lawrence Catholic Church on Franconia Road in Fairfax County who, according to Father Haley's July deposition, embezzled from church collections and collected homosexual pornography. Since last month, he has been at St. Stephen the Martyr in Middleburg, Va., where he is said to be "assisting the pastor."

•The Rev. Daniel E. Hamilton, 59, former pastor of St. Mary's Parish in Fredericksburg, who had an extensive collection of bondage pornography kept at the rectory. Father Hamilton resigned two months ago, after a judge refused to seal Father Haley's deposition.

Several priests in the diocese, speaking on the condition of anonymity, say the bishop is "angry" that Father Haley "invaded privacy rights" of Father Verrecchia, the woman with whom he was having an affair, and Fathers Erbacher and Hamilton.

Parishioners at Virginia churches where Father Haley has served since 1987 expressed shock and concern over his suspension. "He's very holy, and that's his problem," said Marie K. Shaughnessy of McLean, a parishioner at St. John's Catholic Church, where Father Haley was assistant pastor from 1995 to 1997. "He doesn't budge from the straight and narrow. He doesn't accommodate."

When seeking a pastor position at Our Lady of Hope in Sterling, Father Haley told the bishop that Father Verrecchia was having an adulterous affair with a married woman he was counseling for marital difficulties. Father Haley said he found Father Verrecchia and the woman together at 1:30 a.m. in a darkened rectory office, according to diocese and Arlington County court records. After the encounter, the woman complained in a letter to the bishop that Father Haley had asked parishioners "about my personal life."

The bishop then transferred Father Haley as assistant pastor to St. Lawrence in July 1999. Upon Father Haley's transfer to St. Lawrence, according to his deposition, he was told by Father Erbacher that there was a network of "gay priests" within the diocese, including Father Erbacher himself and the bishop's chancellor, the Rev. Robert J. Rippy. "I had no idea of the interconnections of all this until I lived with Father Erbacher," Father Haley testified. "I never knew that a diocese or bishop would knowingly ordain a homosexual man."

In February 2001, Father Haley talked to Bishop Loverde about Father Erbacher's disclosures of a homosexual network of priests. In another meeting, June 6, 2001, Father Haley set out what he said were details of Father Erbacher's library of homosexual pornography and evidence that he was stealing from church collections.

He gave the bishop photographs of pouches containing thousands of dollars of cash, stored in Father Erbacher's bedroom closet, and the priest's personal bank records showing deposits averaging more than $99,240 per year, 5½ times his annual income as a pastor. More than half the deposits were in cash.

Father Haley was transferred to St. Mary's in Fredericksburg three weeks after he sent the bishop the evidence about Father Erbacher's finances. The diocese began an internal investigation of the St. Lawrence theft accusations after it discovered "substantial financial irregularities" at another parish.

At St. Mary's, a maid told Father Haley that Father Hamilton had large quantities of homosexual pornography in his room, said Mr. Murphy, Father Haley's attorney. Father Haley asked the bishop for another transfer or leave of absence for "discernment" to find another diocese, Mr. Murphy says. The bishop refused in a letter Oct. 8, 2001. "I would direct that you remain as a parochial vicar at the church of St. Mary in Fredericksburg while continuing your initial discernment with your spiritual director," the bishop wrote.

Angered, Father Haley confronted the bishop Oct. 16, 2001, with "factual self-incriminating evidence on Father Hamilton's completely outrageous sexual addiction" in a further effort to be moved out of the rectory. "And at the end of the meeting, which was basically a slide show of the pictures of his incredible collection [of pornography], the bishop told me that I had better watch out, that I did not know what he was capable of doing," Father Haley testified.

A week later, Bishop Loverde summoned Father Haley to Arlington, gave him four hours to move out of the rectory and into a hotel in Fredericksburg, and ordered him not to return to the rectory without an escort. He stripped the priest of his faculties, which authorize him to wear a clerical collar, say Mass, take confessions, and perform baptisms and funerals.

In a series of "decrees" dated Oct. 23, 2001, the bishop also expelled Father Haley from any diocese post and gagged him with the canonical penal precept. Under the suspension, Father Haley has been denied church housing for the past year and restricted to monthly pay of about $2,000 for housing and all other expenses. He is living in a house trailer in Northern Virginia.

Bishop Loverde agreed only to answer written questions from The Times. Chancellor Rippy did not respond to questions nor requests for an interview. "Bishop Loverde takes very seriously any credible allegation of misconduct on the part of a diocesan priest, employee or volunteer. [He] has not and will not punish anyone for bringing him a concern or complaint." Regarding the bishop's action concerning Fathers Verrecchia, Erbacher and Hamilton, the diocese said: The bishop "confronted Father Verrecchia with the information [about his adulterous affair] and eventually ordered him to break all contact with the person with whom he had a questionable relationship. Father Verrecchia is no longer serving as a priest in the diocese."

The diocese accepted the resignation of Father Erbacher after receiving the results of an "independent forensic financial audit and a psychological evaluation." It said the bishop confronted Father Hamilton about the pornography, and he was sent for a "psychological evaluation and is no longer the pastor of St. Mary Catholic Church in Fredericksburg, Va." The bishop did not comment on Father Erbacher's role at St. Stephen the Martyr in Middleburg and declined to comment on the treatment of Father Erbacher and Father Haley. He said the diocese does not discuss personnel matters.

Mr. Murphy says Bishop Loverde's assertion that he had addressed Father Haley's complaints was a "blatant lie." The bishop's "duplicity has no boundaries," Mr. Murphy says. "His response was keep it quiet, move [Father Haley] around, and when he was forced to testify in legal proceedings, he silenced him."

Copyright © 2002 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Return to the article

[ultima ratio]

Writing letters to the bishop or to Rome won't do a damn bit of good. Nothing ever happens unless the media gets involved. In Springfield, IL Bishop Daniel Ryan was sleeping around with male prostitutes, hitting on young priests, and introducing sexually explicit, values-neutral sex education into elementary school classrooms. Parents protested to Rome. They literally deluged Rome with hundreds of letters of protest. Nothing happened. Finally they got some lawyers and went public, bringing in the media. The bishop resigned in humiliation within weeks after the scandal broke. Rome is obviously a great part of the problem. It doesn't seem to care about the laity.

[passive1]

Notwithstanding the U.S. bishops' liturgy committee's edict this summer against genuflecting at receiving the Eucharist, Jorge Arturo Cardinal Medina Estevez, Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments wrote on October 25, 2001 that bishops are to: ". . . protect those faithful who will inevitably be led by their own sensibilities to kneel, from imprudent action by priests, deacons, or lay ministers in particular, or from being refused Holy Communion for such a reason. . ."

Our pastor has indicated that the bishops' liturgy committee's edit prohibits genuflecting even if done just before receiving communion, stating that it could cause people to trip. It's well known that communicants have dropped hosts, left them in pews, stomped on them on the floor, which has yet to cause any alarm to end receipt of the host in the hand. Never have seen any trip or fall as a result of genuflecting.

[passive1]

Sadly, the Vatican is reluctant to use its apostolic authority to put into action what it has put into words. The removal of Seattle Archbishop Raymond Hunthausen in the mid-90's and the media backlash has made an indelible mark on the Roman Curia. The Roman Curia is more likely to see that it has a collegial role with the brother bishops of the bishop of Rome than to view itself as the defender of the deposit of faith. Catholics need to tap into the modern means of communication (i.e., the news media) to get action. In many cases, bishops have failed in their apostolic responsibilities and their episcopal pledges.

[Campion]

Rome is obviously a great part of the problem. It doesn't seem to care about the laity.

Don't forget about plain old administrative incompetence (we're talking Italy, here, not America), overwork, and understaffing. Three hundred letters saying a bishop is disaster don't do much unless they make it to the Holy Father or someone who directly advises him, and those guys aren't opening the mail themselves.

[passive1]

The staffing of the offices of the Roman Curia are weighted more toward Italians. In one Congregation, only about 10% of the staff speaks English, even though 40-50% of the complaints world-wide are written in English. The computing power in a typical office is low-level and outdated. Networking - not very apparent. Their mission is spiritual, and so computer savvyness is not their forte.

They are outgunned by the largest national Episcopal offices on staffing and technology. The position of the Vatican is not much different than that of a homeowner finding his house on fire and having to choose whether to save the kitchen or the living room.

Throw in the unusual work schedule with the breaks during the workday and the extensive feast day holidays (somewhat offset by Saturday work)and it is easy to see that the dissenters have the upperhand.

[Siobhan]

I have my letters translated into Polish and mailed to Msgr. Dziwisz to hand deliver to the Holy Father if he thinks my letters are worthy.

[Siobhan]

Yup. The lady knows her Star Wars trivia.

My children and other little ones in my life have made it so.

;^)

[Palladin]

For whatever reason, Rome has chosen, in order to preserve institutional power, to practice a form of moral inversion - where the powerful and the connected are rewarded for their "service" by a lack of censure for heinous activities.

Two words--Frank Sinatra. Frank got to have a big wedding in the Cathedral, even though he had left his first wife (married in the Church) and his four kids; divorced and married several times in between; and then was granted annulments, etc. to pave the way for his last marriage.

I wonder how much Frankie paid the Cardinal for that deal?

[Antoninus]

I've heard bad things about Loverde in the past. Would someone consult Goodbye, Good Men? and see what it has on him? I loaned my copy out!

[Antoninus]

Remember also that the Diocese of Arlington is routinely held up as an example of one of the most conservative and best run diocese in the US.

Yes, but Bishop Loverde, who took over recently, had nothing to do with that, if I remember correctly.

[Antoninus]

When did this cabal develop? It seemed that under Bishop Keating the diocese was very orthodox,shortly after his ad limina visit with Pope John Paul II,(I think within 24 hours of the meeting) he died in his hotel room of a heart attack.

Did Bishop Keating die in Rome??

[Antoninus]

Blah, blah, blah. Yawn....

[Antoninus]

Unfortunately, it is utterly counter-productive to write/phone the papal pro-nuncio. The papal pro-nuncio collaborates with bishops when the flock complain. Essentially, the papal pro-nuncio uses your message like a bomerang - send him a message and you should expect that an exact copy will be sent to the bishop you are complaining about. Any Catholic who thinks he can send the papal pro-nuncio private information regarding misconduct in his diocese should anticipate that the bishop will know have everything that you gave the pro-nuncio.

Hey, that could be a good way of letting rogue bishops know that we're on to them and not afraid to go over their heads. Maybe we should include in these letters to the Nuncio and indication that we intend to send the information on to Rome or better yet TO GO PUBLIC. That should make the hair stand up on the back of some necks, eh?

[saradippity]

Yes,he did.I recall being upset because I had heard he had a wonderful diocese although I am not sure that he approved the Indult Mass. There was one of my orthodox indicators that he did not pass.Can anyone help?

[ELS]

I'm working on finding him & will let you know via freepmail if I do.

Please FReepmail me as well. The good guys need our moral and financial support.

[Desdemona]

Would someone consult Goodbye, Good Men? and see what it has on him?

Sure, now that I've had enough wine...

Nothing. And only few mentions of Arlington, all before his time.

[ninenot]

WE'll see. I am not defending Loverde, nor Haley. Sounds like Arlington is a bit messy despite Keating's seemingly outstanding work.

[ultima ratio]

The laity has not complained with hundred of letters. That was only one incident in a single year. The letters have been sent by the tens of thousands for decades. The Catholic Press has been full of the scandals. The Wanderer, The Remnant, Latin Mass, Catholic World Report, Catholic Family News--all reported these kinds of incidents. Year after year, for decades, they wrote about corrupt bishops and lavanderized dioceses. So did the secular press. Newsweek and Time both reported the growing problem of sexual corruption in the American Church. Rome did absolutely nothing.

Do you think the seminaries became sexual playgrounds overnight? In 1992, long after the gay subculture had become entrenched, the Chicago Symposium assembled to support the sexually active gay lifestyle, openly encouraging this behavior among seminarians and priests. It was sponsored by 91 diocesan offices and religious communities. About 39% of its participants held leadership posts in the American Church. Rome had to have known about this major event, but it said and did nothing. It is well known that whole religious orders are homosexual, not just the seminaries. Rome has got to know about this as well. In 1985 a scandal broke out in Louisiana where a priest confessed to sexually abusing and actually raping 37 boys. A few years later the United States Catholic Conference assembled in Baltimore. One topic for its discussion was the pedophilia "of some priests and bishops." At that time 300 cases of priestly pedophilia had already been brought before authorities, costing dioceses scores of millions of dollars. You mean to tell me by this time Rome didn't know the American Church had a gay sex problem?

It is a typical defense by loyal Catholics to argue that Rome didn't know. But there is too much evidence it did. Besides, if Rome didn't know--it should have, that is its job. But the idea it didn't have a clue is ludicrous. What's worse is that the problem is just as bad elsewhere--in Ireland, France, Britain, Austria, Australia, you name it. What has Rome done in these countries to institute reform? Nothing.

Nor is the old saw that Rome moves slowly applicable. When it wants to it can turn on a dime. When some traditionalist priests of FSSP were refused permission to concelebrate the Novus Ordo with local bishops, the Vatican fired the Superior General along with several theologians at their seminary--in a matter of weeks after learning of the problem. When Archbishop Weakland turned 75, the age for mandatory submission of episcopal resignations, Rome refused the submission. But when the media got wind of his love affair with a young priest and published accounts of his payoff of half a million dollars in hush money, Rome asked for his resignation within hours. Rome can make your head spin with the speed of its reaction when it wants to, especially if its traditionalists who get out of line or if its the media that makes a big deal about something. So I say again, Rome is part of the problem. It should have fixed things long ago, instituting major reforms in the seminaries and religious orders. Bishops should have been fired. That they were not speaks volumes.

[ultima ratio]

I don't buy the collegiality argument. When it wants to act, Rome can be punitive and swift. A few years ago it fired the Superior General of FSSP for refusing to allow some of its fraternity to concelebrate the NO Mass with their local bishops. It also fired some theologians at their very orthodox American seminary. But last year it gave Kasper, who is openly heretical, the red hat. Go figure.

[Zviadist]

Indeed. When are the conservatives going to stop deluding themselves? They believe that if they only can inform Rome, all will be taken care of. The evil ones in the Church profit greatly from the naivetee of the conservatives.