News & Features

Philadelphia grand jury report sharply criticized
archived from: 2005-09-29
by: Pittsburgh Catholic Staff

PHILADELPHIA — In a 76-page response, Philadelphia archdiocesan attorneys described a grand jury report on local clergy sexual abuse of children as “a vile, mean-spirited diatribe against the church” and “a sensationalized, lurid and tabloid-like presentation of events that transpired years ago, which is neither fair nor accurate.”

After a three-year investigation, the grand jury issued a 423-page report Sept. 21 that said retired Philadelphia Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua, former bishop of Pittsburgh, and his predecessor, the late Cardinal John Krol, along with their top aides, “all abdicated their duty to protect children. They concealed priests’ sexual abuses instead of exposing them. ... There is no doubt that these officials engaged in a continuous, concerted campaign of cover-up over the priests’ sexual offenses.”

The archdiocesan response, however, said the content of the grand jury report “is nothing more than an attempt to convict in the court of public opinion those whom it does not indict in a court of law.”

After its investigation, the grand jury announced that no criminal actions would be filed as too many years had passed and applicable statutes of limitations had expired.

Cardinal Krol headed the Archdiocese of Philadelphia from 1967 to 1988. Cardinal Bevilacqua succeeded him in 1988 and retired in 2003. Cardinal Bevilacqua served as bishop of Pittsburgh from 1983 to 1988.

Philadelphia’s current archbishop, Cardinal Justin Rigali, said at a news conference the day the grand jury report was released that the church has “deep regrets and sorrow” over the abuse of children by priests, but that the grand jury report failed to note that the archdiocese under Cardinals Krol and Bevilacqua had tried “to do what was thought to be most effective at the time.”

In a later interview with the Philadelphia Inquirer, Cardinal Rigali stated that the archdiocese “acknowledges and repents” mistakes made in the handling of some cases in the past but, “what we cannot accept is the inference that there was any intentional, unlawful or criminal behavior on the part of officials of the archdiocese.”

Outlining “extraordinary steps” taken by the archdiocese since 2002 to protect children, assist victims and remove abusive priests from ministry, Cardinal Rigali said on the day the grand jury report was released that, “In the end, the grand jury affirms the actions already taken by the archdiocese to report any instances of abuse to the proper legal authorities and to safeguard young people.”

In a letter to his people, the cardinal emphasized the tragedy of sexual abuse of children and the need for healing, but he commented, “The report is unjustifiably critical of Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua, Cardinal John Krol and others who worked in the administration of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.

“In every single case of abuse reported to archdiocesan officials, action was taken based on the best medical information available at that time,” he said.

“Our reporting policies have changed considerably since 2002,” he added. “We now report every single credible abuse charge to law enforcement.”

The grand jury report, written and released by Philadelphia District Attorney Lynne Abraham, listed 62 priests who were accused of abusing children in the archdiocese. The bulk of the report consisted of detailed case studies of 28 of the priests accused of abuse.

Among the cases reported on was Father John P. Connor, a priest of the Diocese of Camden, N.J., who had been accused of sexual abuse of a minor in the early 1980s. As part of a plea agreement, Father Connor was placed in a treatment facility for a year and his record expunged after that year.

According to records from the Diocese of Pittsburgh concerning Father Connor, a request was made in September 1985 from Bishop George Guilfoyle of Camden, N.J., to Bishop Bevilacqua that Father Connor be accepted for assignment in the Diocese of Pittsburgh.

Concerns were raised over that request, as the nature of Father Connor’s difficulties was not spelled out. However, he was given an assignment in the diocese.

Cardinal Bevilacqua told the grand jury he was unaware that the accusations against Father Connor involved a minor and that he had been cleared for limited ministry by the treatment facility to which he had been sent.

In October 1985, Father Connor was assigned as a hospital chaplain at Sewickley Valley Hospital with residence at St. James Parish in Sewickley. The following year, Father Connor was assigned to St. Alphonsus Parish in Wexford as a parochial vicar.

On Feb. 12, 1988, Bishop Donald Wuerl was appointed bishop of Pittsburgh. Concern about Father Connor’s appointment in the diocese was raised to Bishop Wuerl by then-Father Nicholas Dattilo, general secretary, in the spring of 1988.

Father Connor’s assignment was withdrawn from the Diocese of Pittsburgh in July 1988.

There is no record of allegations of any kind concerning Father Connor during his three years in Pittsburgh.

When, in 2002, the grand jury requested documents relating to Father Connor’s presence in Pittsburgh, the diocese cooperated fully and turned over all files.

The Archdiocese of Philadelphia’s response, written by the Stradley Ronon Stevens and Young law firm and posted on the archdiocesan Web site, said the archdiocese would have welcomed constructive criticism, but the report is one-sided and “unfairly judges policies and practices in place decades ago through the lenses of today’s advanced knowledge.”

It said the report launched a “gratuitous attack” on Cardinal Krol, reading “between the lines” of archdiocesan documents and speculating on the cardinal’s underlying motives, “undeterred by the fact that Cardinal Krol is no longer alive to defend himself.”

“Perhaps the report’s cruelest treatment of any archdiocesan witness is reserved for Cardinal Bevilacqua,” it said. “The report takes excessive liberties with the facts, places unwarranted interpretations on the written documents, tortures Cardinal Bevilacqua’s live testimony and ignores much of what he said to cast him in the role of a leader insensitive to children and preoccupied with issues of legal liability. ... The view of Cardinal Bevilacqua is so distorted and so unfair that those who know him or were influenced by his ministry cannot help but be offended.

“In cases where an allegation of clerical sexual abuse of a minor was made, the archdiocese took action,” the response said. “The priests were removed from their current assignments and required to undergo psychological treatment and evaluation before decisions were rendered regarding their further treatment or future ministry. The goal was always to ensure the protection of children by addressing the problems and disorders thoroughly.

“This is not to say that no mistakes were made,” the archdiocesan response added. “The mistakes that were made over the past decades, however, were the result of human error — not criminal intent — and a society-wide misunderstanding of the nature of these disorders. Yet the district attorney has chosen to scrutinize and judge conduct that took place 20, 30 and 40 years ago only through the lens of today’s knowledge.”

Catholic News Service contributed to this report.

 

 

 

E-mail this story

 

	Web www.pittsburghcatholic.org