Pa. bishops hid sex abuse of hundreds of children, grand jury finds

[phil19034]

Given how egregious the conduct of the bishops was to the charges, the number of charges (including repeat offenders), and the number of priests accused, the problems with insurance companies and the size of some of the verdicts, it was the only choice which dioceses had. The alternative could have completely wiped dioceses out of existence.

I don’t believe I have ever said anything about priests and bishops being sinless. It is one thing to commit a sin, repent, and make amends.** The sexual abuse was epidemic.**

I highly recommend reading American Church

amazon.com/American-Church-Remarkable-Uncertain-Catholicism/dp/1586177575/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1456879694&sr=8-5&keywords=american+catholic+church

I would NOT say that the sexual abuse was epidemic. However, I would say that clericalism was epidemic. Clericalism is the fundamental reason for the “cover-up.” And that clericalism was rampant among both the clergy and the laity.

Bishops who swept it under the rug were wrong, but they were influenced by a culture of clericalism AND by bad psychology & psychiatry. Because of the clericalism, the Bishops may have had a tendency to look out for the best interests of the troubled priest; expecting the laity to take care of the victim. But the clericalism of the laity lead to know one believing the victim and/or them sweeping it under the rugs too.

And frankly, there was a lot of denial too. Lots of priests, bishops & laity simply could not believe that a holy priest would be capable of such horrors. Catholics, especially the laity, placed priests on pedestals, assuming they were not capable of mortal sin.

Also, if a priest who performed sexual abuse confessed his sin, nothing could be done about it.

The whole sex abuse scandal was really clericalism run amuck meeting up with bad psychiatric medicine and honest denial. The bishops and dioceses were 100% unequipped to handle this mess. They had no procedures or idea regarding how to handle, ESPECIALLY if they learned about it during confession.

NOW, is that an excuse for what happened? NO. But it is also not due to some evil conspiracy.

Its important for Catholics to have an honest understanding of what happened so we can learn from it and so we can prevent it from being a misunderstood part of Catholic history, like the Crusades, Inquisition & Galileo.

God Bless

 

[TMC]

My understanding is that in many of these cases, even in the case of potentially innocent priests, to avoid drama and strife and lengthy hearings and trials, out-of-court settlements were agreed upon which ended up making the diocese file for bankruptcy.

Jesus never said his priests or bishops would be sinless. He even explicitly condemns those that were his priests and ministers but otherwise lead sinful lives:

Matthew 7:21-23:

Likewise, Paul acknowledges that the apostolate (which would lead way to bishops) is in fragile “earthen vessels”, " the instruments God uses are human and fragile; some imagine small terracotta lamps in which light is carried.", as the NABRE footnote tells us.

2 Corinthians 4:7:

If you’re suggesting that the sexual abuse problem goes back to before the second half of the 20th century, the burden of proof is on you.

The sexual abuse scandal goes back centuries. St. Damian fought against it in 1000 AD, unsuccessfully obviously. Sweeping abuse under the rug, and pretending it is not happening, will guarantee it continues.

 

[rose_kelly]

I will give you 10 points for the most insulting comment that has ever been made to me.

I’m sorry if you’re reading it as an insult. You obviously care deeply about the victims, but I just feel that some of your comments give the impression that most others are less concerned about them than you are.

 

[otjm]

I highly recommend reading American Church

amazon.com/American-Church-Remarkable-Uncertain-Catholicism/dp/1586177575/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1456879694&sr=8-5&keywords=american+catholic+church

I would NOT say that the sexual abuse was epidemic. However, I would say that clericalism was epidemic. Clericalism is the fundamental reason for the “cover-up.” And that clericalism was rampant among both the clergy and the laity.

Bishops who swept it under the rug were wrong, but they were influenced by a culture of clericalism AND by bad psychology & psychiatry. Because of the clericalism, the Bishops may have had a tendency to look out for the best interests of the troubled priest; expecting the laity to take care of the victim. But the clericalism of the laity lead to know one believing the victim and/or them sweeping it under the rugs too.

And frankly, there was a lot of denial too. Lots of priests, bishops & laity simply could not believe that a holy priest would be capable of such horrors. Catholics, especially the laity, placed priests on pedestals, assuming they were not capable of mortal sin.

Also, if a priest who performed sexual abuse confessed his sin, nothing could be done about it.

The whole sex abuse scandal was really clericalism run amuck meeting up with bad psychiatric medicine and honest denial. The bishops and dioceses were 100% unequipped to handle this mess. They had no procedures or idea regarding how to handle, ESPECIALLY if they learned about it during confession.

NOW, is that an excuse for what happened? NO. But it is also not due to some evil conspiracy.

Its important for Catholics to have an honest understanding of what happened so we can learn from it and so we can prevent it from being a misunderstood part of Catholic history, like the Crusades, Inquisition & Galileo.

God Bless

Epidemic: wide spread, wide ranging, extensive… While I agree that 3% of clergy during those times is a low number, they were prolific in their victims and in the number of times they abused any one of the victims. I could have chosen to phrase it differently. Part of what I was getting at was that this was not Father X sinning once, confessing it, and not doing that again.

And you are dead right on about clericalism. However, contrary to another poster, it was criminal in jurisdictions. There may have been some states which did not criminalize sexual conduct between an adult and a child - including teenagers, but I am not aware of them.

And yes, bishops were given wrong advice, and were trying to avoid scandal. That they did not discuss this amongst themselves I find to be incredulous, but that is a side issue. The bottom line is that they were our shepherds, and they treated the sheep at best as minorly inconvenienced; and at worst as wolves.

And confession seems to be the least issue.

Some bishops have appeared more culpable than others. Some of them have made me sick to my stomach. But all were among the best and the brightest, and I am not one to let them off.

 

[otjm]

I’m sorry if you’re reading it as an insult. You obviously care deeply about the victims, but I just feel that some of your comments give the impression that most others are less concerned about them than you are.

Your comment, after I read it 3 times, came across that I could care less about the victims. If that was not what you were trying to say, I withdraw my comment.

I am really not trying to say that people don’t care; rather, that it is human nature to want to resolve matters quickly and move on. And this is a matter that needs not only to be resolved, but stay resolved. That won’t happen if people do not understand the depths of the horror this has wrought on victims and their families.

Some time ago, an article I read indicated that Sean Patrick Cardinal O’Malley and his group were meeting some resistance in Rome. I truly do not know what it is going to take to get our shepherds - and I mean world wide, not just US - to get totally on board.

 

[on_the_hill]

Not to make too fine a point of it, but the materials are there to make sure we don’t do it.

You are frustrated? Oh dear.

How frustrated to you think someone will be for the rest of their life after they are abused?

We are our brother’s and our sister’s keepers. The vast majority of people in parishes who deal with children are not abusers and are not going to become abusers.

It only takes one, and each of us has a responsibility to each and every child to be aware of the potential, and to make absolutely sure that those children are not going to be in a situation where abuse can happen.

Perhaps, if you ever have the opportunity to try and help someone who has been abused, you will find out how damaging that abuse was; your frustration seems to say “Hey, I am not abusing, so it is not my problem”.

You missed my point entirely. So I do not accept your criticism.

I’m frustrated because the underlying sentiment implies that any and all of us are just as likely to be abusers, and the materials mention teachers, parents, janitors, principals…when in fact it is the priests who are to blame.

I will do what I can to prevent it from happening, but I share none of the blame. That rests fully on Church hierarchy, not the laity:

 

[otjm]

You missed my point entirely. So I do not accept your criticism.

I’m frustrated because the underlying sentiment implies that any and all of us are just as likely to be abusers, and the materials mention teachers, parents, janitors, principals…when in fact it is the priests who are to blame.

I will do what I can to prevent it from happening, but I share none of the blame. That rests fully on Church hierarchy, not the laity:

Oh. I get it. Only priests are abusers.

The largest source of abusers are parents and step parents, followed fairly closely by adult relatives and friends of parents.

And frankly, if my child was to be exposed to adults whom I did not know very well, I would want to know they had passed a background check.

The Church knows quite well why adults who are working with children should be checked.

Sorry that you are offended.

Oh - and there is a fair amount of information on a fairly regular basis of school teachers abusing children, just to name one set, although the ones making the news are public school teachers.

 

[on_the_hill]

Oh. I get it. Only priests are abusers.

The largest source of abusers are parents and step parents, followed fairly closely by adult relatives and friends of parents.

And frankly, if my child was to be exposed to adults whom I did not know very well, I would want to know they had passed a background check.

The Church knows quite well why adults who are working with children should be checked.

Sorry that you are offended.

Oh - and there is a fair amount of information on a fairly regular basis of school teachers abusing children, just to name one set, although the ones making the news are public school teachers.

In the context of the sexual abuse that has rocked the Church, yes, priests have been the abusers. Have bishops been hiding the crimes committed by CCD teachers for the past several decades?

1. I’m not against background checks.
2. I’m not comparing my frustration with the pain suffered by victims.
3. I’m not denying that abusers come from all backgrounds, sexes, and sexual orientations.

 

[Micosil]

The sexual abuse scandal goes back centuries. St. Damian fought against it in 1000 AD, unsuccessfully obviously. Sweeping abuse under the rug, and pretending it is not happening, will guarantee it continues.

Interesting, I did not know about St. Damian and his previous issues. I’ve done a little digging around and I’d like to point out two things.

1. 
   *] The scandal during Cardinal Damian’s times involved not just pedophilia/hebephilia, but also problems with sexual harassment among higher clergy. Many clerics were also apparently keeping concubines.
   *] I was actually looking for a continuous, uninterrupted trend between a previous time, and when the scandal started in the 50s/60s. How do we know that this abusive period from Cardinal Damian’s time wasn’t eventually solved, atleast up until it resurfaced last century?
   
   I’m not trying to sweep it under the rug. If you look at my first intervention, you’ll note I’m very much for bringing perpetrators to justice, be they the abusive priest or the dismissive bishop. But regardless of that, we always do need to get our facts straight.

 

[phil19034]

In the context of the sexual abuse that has rocked the Church, yes, priests have been the abusers. Have bishops been hiding the crimes committed by CCD teachers for the past several decades?

1. I’m not against background checks.
2. I’m not comparing my frustration with the pain suffered by victims.
3. I’m not denying that abusers come from all backgrounds, sexes, and sexual orientations.

Yes, there have been sexual crimes committed by laity in the parishes. Those were not swept under by the Bishops, but were swept under by the parishenors themselves and even by the parents. Many lay people in those days never wanted non-Catholics to learn such things.

That was an era of clericalism and when many people believed in the idea of “don’t air your dirty laundry.” Since most Catholics (especially in the Catholic ghettos) felt that their parish was an extended part of their family, they would tend to secrecy. Perhaps a sexual predator might show up one day to mass with an unexplained black eye or broken arm, but it was never spoken of again.

That’s how stuff was taken care of back then, people didn’t involve the police.

Today - very different.

When studying history it’s important to look at events using a prism from that time, meaning we interpret the events like someone from that time would look. We can’t use our current frame of reference.

God Bless

 

[Jimbo]

I’ll skip all the comments I could make about the atrociousness of it and say this instead:

I am increasingly frustrated when hearing phrases like, “Everyone is responsible for putting a stop to it,” or “We all share the responsibility,” etc,. which seems to be a theme in the child protection materials that CCD teachers and others have to watch.

We didn’t do it.

No. But We are a part of the mystical body of Christ. Its our responsibility to make sure it doesn’t happen again, and to do what we can to heal those who have been abused.

 

[Lormar]

What we are continuing to see - and what many don’t want to really deal with - is that this seems to have occurred in so many dioceses that it looks like a massive conspiracy to obfuscate and hide multiple crimes. Christ spoke very succinctly about how those who harm children should be treated.

And? During the reign of Pope Benedict, there were those in Rome who were reported murmuring pretty much the same. They flat out didn’t get it. It isn’t like a bshop or two “made a mistake”. They covered up a multitude of crimes, and some treated the victims as if they were the criminals. This rot went right to the core; and those who just want it to go away are like the bishops who just wanted it to go away.

Well put, but for a different reason - we need to prosecute this until the last vestige has been dug out, and until it is so thoroughly burned into the memories of future bishops for centuries that we can say “No more! Never again!”

If you think there are still not priests abusing, then you need to pay more attention. We will never have a fool proof process of weeding out every last potential priest who might abuse children. That does not mean that we think we “have it handled, thank you very much, and the press needs to butt out now”.

Christ spoke about those who would hate Him; so people hating the Church is not exactly news after 2,000 years or so. But the evil which has been perpetrated on victims and their families by both the abusers and the bishops and those who worked for them has run so deep that it is those very “haters of the Church” who are the means of the Church being cleansed. Just because there have been exposures does not mean the cleansing process is completed.

With you all the way, OT.

This is still a rabid problem in the Church. Why? Because when the Globe broke the story in 2002 and certain dioceses filed for bankruptcy, pewsitters refinanced their homes to bail their diocese out. When that happened, I knew nothing would change. And nothing has.

As an aside, I was a postulant in the eighties in a religious community that have their motherhouse in the Altoona/Johnstown Diocese. One Christmas, the then Mother Superior invited the bishop and all of the priests to a Christmas festivity. Sad thing is, if you had told me this (about the rampant abuse) back then, I would not have believed you and thought you a good candidate for a mental institution for even thinking, let alone saying, such a thing.

Wasn’t there just a seminarian in the San Diego diocese arrested for trying to have sex with an infant?

Apparently, the psychological testing done doesn’t weed out the mentally ill ones. And I make no apologies for calling a man who wants to have sex with an infant - mentally ill - because that’s what he is and he should spend the rest of his days behind bars. There is no cure for people like this.

 

[pristine2]

Now, I’m not at all saying that these cases should have been ignored, but if the statutes of limitations has run out, why call a grand jury at all? … Methinks I smell something bad, all right, but it isn’t in the current Church.

Wow.

There’s a wonderful old saying … “Sunshine is the best disinfectant”. I’m in the Altoona-Johnstown diocese and, as painful and damaging as this whole affair has been, I’m very much in favor of full disclosure, which would never have happened had it not been for one very devout Catholic in particular.

Please note:

• Sexual abuse is a grave crime against children. Covering up sexual abuse is almost as abhorrent as the abuse itself.
• One of the two bishops who acted so capriciously and negligently against our children, Joseph Adamec, retired in 2011. That was only five years ago. We in the diocese were lied to during his whole tenure, in promises that pedophile priests were being aggressively rooted out and handed over to the secular authorities. That wasn’t happening, and that’s why the statute of limitations has expired.
• The only reason you are hearing about any of this due to the extraordinary efforts of the traditionalist Catholic George Foster. After many parents seeking justice were rebuffed by the diocese, he started investigating the matter himself. This was in the early 2000s, not 100 years ago. His motivation was solely to clean house, purge the diocese of evil in the priesthood and protect our children. I’m so thankful for this, and so thankful he is the godfather of our children.
• The statute of limitations is an anachronistic absurdity that will soon be changed.

Mind you, it is still entirely possible that the diocese will not survive this, even though our independent parishes will. Knowing that this report was coming out, the diocese (quite illeglaly under canon law) hastily tried to close five elementary schools, probably to help obscure diocesan assets, and set up a consolidated elementary school and a middle school

One of the K-8 elementaries – in my parish – is fighting the diocese in Rome. It is staying open, raising money on its own. I support them entirely. I don;t trust the diocese. I trust my parish.

Had it not been for the efforts of George Foster, and the independence and integrity of our parish priest, I doubt my family would remain in the Catholic Church at all.

R

 

[unafraid]

With you all the way, OT.

This is still a rabid problem in the Church. Why? Because when the Globe broke the story in 2002 and certain dioceses filed for bankruptcy, pewsitters refinanced their homes to bail their diocese out. When that happened, I knew nothing would change. And nothing has.

As an aside, I was a postulant in the eighties in a religious community that have their motherhouse in the Altoona/Johnstown Diocese. One Christmas, the then Mother Superior invited the bishop and all of the priests to a Christmas festivity. Sad thing is, if you had told me this (about the rampant abuse) back then, I would not have believed you and thought you a good candidate for a mental institution for even thinking, let alone saying, such a thing.

Wasn’t there just a seminarian in the San Diego diocese arrested for trying to have sex with an infant?

Apparently, the psychological testing done doesn’t weed out the mentally ill ones. And I make no apologies for calling a man who wants to have sex with an infant - mentally ill - because that’s what he is and he should spend the rest of his days behind bars. There is no cure for people like this.

I do not agree with your assertion that clerical sex abuse is “still a rabid problem” inside the church. Much has been done to safeguard young people from these atrocities ever occurring again. From the Pope on down there is a clear message of zero tolerance and and extreme vigilance. It is palpable, and it is earnest.

I have two children, nine and ten years of age, and they have attended Catholic school since kindergarten. They are also active in our parish, which sustains the school. There is a constant message of awareness regarding abuse that is distributed in literature, and preached in educational classes.

It is my firm belief that the steps taken by the Roman Catholic Church, combined to with greater awareness and vigilance on the part of the lay faithful, have greatly reduced the risk of clerical sex abuse occurring, now, and in the future. Will there be diabolical fiends who skip through occasionally? Sadly, the answer is yes. But, what has been implemented to curtail this scourge is working now, and I believe will continue to work in the future.
E

 

[on_the_hill]

Kane is impotent at this point. There’s nothing of any consequence she can do. She doesn’t have a law license, she’s teetering on the brink of impeachment/removal, she doesn’t have the support of her staff, etc.

This investigation is connected to her only insofar as her name is still on the letterhead.

 

[7_Sorrows]

Wow.

There’s a wonderful old saying … “Sunshine is the best disinfectant”. I’m in the Altoona-Johnstown diocese and, as painful and damaging as this whole affair has been, I’m very much in favor of full disclosure, which would never have happened had it not been for one very devout Catholic in particular.

Please note:

• Sexual abuse is a grave crime against children. Covering up sexual abuse is almost as abhorrent as the abuse itself.
• One of the two bishops who acted so capriciously and negligently against our children, Joseph Adamec, retired in 2011. That was only five years ago. We in the diocese were lied to during his whole tenure, in promises that pedophile priests were being aggressively rooted out and handed over to the secular authorities. That wasn’t happening, and that’s why the statute of limitations has expired.
• The only reason you are hearing about any of this due to the extraordinary efforts of the traditionalist Catholic George Foster. After many parents seeking justice were rebuffed by the diocese, he started investigating the matter himself. This was in the early 2000s, not 100 years ago. His motivation was solely to clean house, purge the diocese of evil in the priesthood and protect our children. I’m so thankful for this, and so thankful he is the godfather of our children.
• The statute of limitations is an anachronistic absurdity that will soon be changed.

Mind you, it is still entirely possible that the diocese will not survive this, even though our independent parishes will. Knowing that this report was coming out, the diocese (quite illeglaly under canon law) hastily tried to close five elementary schools, probably to help obscure diocesan assets, and set up a consolidated elementary school and a middle school

One of the K-8 elementaries – in my parish – is fighting the diocese in Rome. It is staying open, raising money on its own. I support them entirely. I don;t trust the diocese. I trust my parish.

Had it not been for the efforts of George Foster, and the independence and integrity of our parish priest, I doubt my family would remain in the Catholic Church at all.

R

thanks for the background info! that is sad and scary!

 

[lax16]

Because although teachers abuse, it’s much less of a deep, long-standing, systemic problem. It isn’t just that priests molest children, it’s the huge cover-up conspiracies that extend up the global hierarchy that’s the problem. I don’t think there is anything comparable to the Catholic abuse scandal. Not because of the abuse itself, but because of the sheer scope of how it was carried out, hidden, and enabled for decades.

No, that is not true.

themediareport.com/fast-facts/

FACT: The incidence of sexual abuse by teachers in public schools today has been estimated to be “more than 100 times” that by Catholic priests, and there is alarming evidence of school officials covering up abuse and failing to report suspected cases to authorities. Yet the mainstream media has largely ignored this shocking story while still rehashing decades-old allegations of abuse by Catholic priests.
Read more
A 2004 U.S. Department of Education report reported that “the most accurate data available” reveals that “nearly 9.6 percent of [public school] students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career.”
This result prompted Hofstra University’s Dr. Charol Shakeshaft, the author of the study, to opine in 2006, “[T]hink the Catholic Church has a problem? The physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests.”
A Meanwhile, that same 2004 report cited an important study from the mid-1990s:
“In an early [1994] study of 225 cases of educator sexual abuse in New York, all of the accused had admitted to sexual abuse of a student but none of the abusers was reported to authorities.”
That is an important and alarming fact:
Number of abusive educators: 225
Number reported by school officials to police: 0
So, in other words, as recently as just 1994, it was the universal practice in New York among school administrators not to call police to report abusers.
The 1994 study also reported that only 1 percent of those abusive educators lost their license. In addition, most alarmingly, “25 percent received no consequence or were reprimanded informally and off-the-record. Nearly 39 percent chose to leave the district, most with positive recommendations or even retirement packages intact.”

And I am NOT excusing the behavior of abusive priests!!!

 

[pnewton]

The correct tense would be there was a problem. The past tense is more accurate. This is not a minor point. It is key to understanding the extremes the Catholic Church has gone to in addressing the problem. It fails to recognize the tremendous success story. that is the reduction of these instances to the occasional aberration. Today we hear stories of child sexual abuse, not statistics, and those stories are becoming fewer and of less significance.

 

[otjm]

• The statute of limitations is an anachronistic absurdity that will soon be changed.

R

The statute of limitations has an extremely valid and important role to play in adjudication of any and all issues. There is a veritable library of information, particularly by psychologists but not limited to them, of people’s memories, and how inaccurate they are; and how inaccuracies compound over time.

It is not that people are dishonest. It is more that people are not at all adept in remembering information, particularly when they have not done something within an extremely short time after an event - and that is, write down what happened.

The laws concerning various statutes of limitations have been put in place not just on the basis of psychological research, but also because of the experiences of a vast number of trial attorneys, who have had ample experience with failed memories.

It has been said that the US has a terrible system of justice; but it is better than any other out there.

We have seen statutes of limitations removed; and we have had individuals come forward making claims against dead priests. And then we have victims’ advocates, stating that we cannot effectively and deeply cross examine the victims, “because they have already been traumatized, and this will traumatize them further.”

I am all for rooting out sexual abuse. I also know personally 2 priests in our diocese who were accused of sexual abuse. One was exonerated, but the process was so long, loud and public that his reputation was shredded beyond recognition, not to mention the hell he was put through.

The second priest was accused by an individual who had been in the state juvenile incarceration system (so the State was a party to the lawsuit); the priest had been the chaplain to the detention facility. The individual - now an adult criminal - concocted a story of being abused by the priest when being taken to see his parent (I don’t recall the specific - it may have been a funeral).

The only problem with the criminal’s story was that the accused priest was no longer the chaplain and it was a different priest who transported him.

The case was settled because the State was not willing to go to trial, so the priest ended up being hung out to dry - and removed from active ministry. While neither of these cases are related to the statute of limitations, it is a presumption that “justice will out”.

It is not for no reason that trial lawyers tend toward cynicism.

 

[Modern_Revert]

I just spoke to my mother and she is heartsick about this, worrying that her church could collapse. It’s such a betrayal to those faithful immigrant people who built these Catholic communities. Most of the young people have left to join the non-denom church run by a female pastor in town.

I also just read that Fr. Maurizio was sentenced to 17 years for sex tourism disguised as missionary work in the Honduras.

Bishop Adamec closed a bunch of churches a decade ago, probably to pay off victims, and gutted the Catholic community in Cambria county. I really don’t know how they will survive this.