On Oct. 14, Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City-St. Joseph, Mo., was indicted for failure to report suspected child abuse, a charge linked to the arrest in May 2011 of Father Shawn Ratigan, a diocesan priest, for possession of child pornography. The New York Times noted that it was the “first time in the 25-year history of the Church’s sex-abuse scandals that the leader of an American diocese has been held criminally liable for the behavior of a priest he supervised.”
Bishop Finn and the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph have each been charged with one misdemeanor count for failure to report the priest to the authorities. The local prosecutor as well as the Times and The Kansas City Star have underscored the unprecedented nature of the indictment. Public anger has been stirred by news reports like an Oct. 14 Times story, which stressed that Bishop Finn “knew of the photographs last December but did not turn them over to the police until May.”
There are a number of disputed details regarding the diocese’s handling of a troubled priest. Bishop Finn has publicly apologized for failing to place Father Ratigan on administrative leave earlier, and for then placing him in a retreat center, where he continued to have access to children. An independent review of the diocese’s actions commissioned by Bishop Finn concluded that the diocese failed to adhere to its own policies for addressing concerns that might involve abuse. However, the report contested the assertion that Bishop Finn knew the priest possessed any child pornography before his arrest.
Into this firestorm comes Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kan., a close friend of Bishop Finn’s who has worked with him in past years to confront a host of challenges, from legal abortion to pornography addiction. This week, Archbishop Naumann published a column in his archdiocesan paper, The Leaven, “Coverage of Recent Indictment Far From Objective,” raising questions about whether Bishop Finn could get a fair hearing. He spoke Oct. 25 with Register senior editor Joan Frawley Desmond.
Some Catholics are applauding the recent indictment of Bishop Finn as a necessary, if belated, effort to hold Church leaders accountable for failing to protect children. But others assert that the indictment — a rare misdemeanor charge of failure to report a suspicion of abuse — is patently unfair. Is the prosecutor holding a Church leader to a higher standard? Will this indictment set a dangerous precedent?
A story in The Kansas (City) Star on the indictment could find only one other instance of someone convicted under this law, and that person was convicted on a “host of related charges.” There is not a lot of precedent for this.
What gets lost is that it was the diocese that did report the priest. Unfortunately, in hindsight — as Bishop Finn would now agree — they took that action later than they should have.
I am not clear what the threshold of proof is for this charge. People in the legal community say there has to be some evidence of criminal intent. It’s not enough that the accused failed to report a suspicion in a timely fashion — he had to intend harm. From what I know, there is no possibly of that.
No one has ever suggested that we think anyone in the Church should be held above the law, but it’s odd that this statute has never been successfully deployed except as part of an array of charges. We have to keep in mind the issue of criminal intent and not look for a scapegoat.
Since Father Ratigan’s arrest, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests has been very active in the diocese. But you have expressed concerns about SNAP’s role. Other critics have charged that SNAP has a close relationship with trial lawyers. In the past, Forbes magazine has documented this relationship. But when the local media recently asked SNAP to provide a list of donors, the organization said contributors were “victims” and their identity thus could not be divulged.
My take is that they have a hatred toward the Church. Their mission is no longer to assist victims, but is to strike at the Church and wound the Church.
But in the early days of the clergy abuse crisis, SNAP was viewed as a voice crying in the wilderness.
In my experience, they have never acknowledged a false accusation. As far as they are concerned, if you are accused, you are guilty. They don’t take anyone off the list. They don’t serve themselves well by insisting that every accusation is true.
This is the same group taking the Pope before the world court in The Hague. How outlandish is that? It shows the intent of the group.
I have victims who have come to me. They no longer want to go to SNAP because it’s only interested in fostering anger, and building a case against the Church, not serving the victims well.
People are hesitant — and I’m hesitant — to say this. But I am saying what many bishops are thinking. They are afraid to say it because SNAP will set themselves up on their doorstep.
What have you learned from this painful process?
We have to follow our policies and procedures faithfully and conscientiously. Dioceses have good policies in place. If we follow them, we can avoid these problems. It is very damaging when we don’t do that.
It’s good that the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph hired an ombudsman to investigate allegations, which is a difficult process. You are trying to be fair to the priest, and you need a timely investigation. In general, our people are not trained as investigators. They are operating out of goodwill.
In a column in your archdiocesan newspaper, you suggested that hostile political forces played some role in this unprecedented indictment.
The local prosecutor is now being hailed by The New York Times for showing great courage. If you read that paper’s editorial page, you would receive the impression that the prosecutor discovered this on her own.
It seems that there was quite a bit of political pressure on the prosecutor to be tough on anyone committing crimes against children. Coverage of the case in The Kansas (City) Star, victims’ groups and public sentiment created that pressure.
[Regarding The Kansas City Star] there has been a double standard. For example, even though more serious allegations were raised against Planned Parenthood and Dr. [George] Tiller [regarding an alleged underreporting of suspected statutory rape linked to underage patients visiting Tiller’s clinic], The Kansas (City) Star did nothing comparable to investigate.
Instead, the paper saw its role as coming to the defense of Planned Parenthood. The paper received the “Maggie” award for excellence in reporting on reproductive issues.
When a paper has that kind of relationship with an organization like Planned Parenthood, and the Church stands against what that organization represents, we can’t expect to get objective treatment. This crusade against Bishop Finn is, in part, ideological.
Yet, in media coverage, I’ve also noticed that the enemies of the Church are often shocked by the fidelity of Catholics to the Church. They thought 2002 would deal a deathblow.
In the early days of the clergy abuse crisis, many bishops expressed regret that they had listened to the guidance of psychologists and returned clerical predators to ministry. The independent report commissioned by Bishop Finn to review problems with the diocese’s response to reports about Father Ratigan’s behavior raised some questions about the psychological evaluation the priest received.
We have learned that expert testimony and analysis may be helpful in trying to care for the individual priest, but it certainly is not helpful in deciding whether a priest is suitable for active ministry.
For one thing, the therapist is nowhere around when the heat is on. There is a natural bias within the therapeutic community: The goal is to get people well and restore them. Some therapists may take an overly optimistic view of what is possible. In fairness to them, we’ve learned a lot about these deficiencies in people. There isn’t a good record of rehabilitation.
There is a spectrum of behavior, from confirmed “pedophiles” to someone manufacturing child pornography to boundary violations. According to Church policies, regardless of where an individual may be on that spectrum, they are treated the same: You are not able to serve in priestly ministry.
Boundary violations could lead to the removal of a priest? The issue of whether boundary violations should prompt removal surfaced in this case and also in the recent Philadelphia grand jury indictment.
Could is the important word. That is not what the Dallas Charter mandates. You have to place this issue in the larger context of an individual case: what you know and didn’t know about a priest. Without that careful prudential judgment, anyone could say anything about anyone and that person would be sidelined.
Could a priest be removed because of a boundary violation? Absolutely. Should it be standard protocol? I don’t think so. It should be taken seriously and investigated.
My own view is that we have to be overly cautious. If we are presented with troubling issues, the safest course is to engage the proper authorities to evaluate them. We need to get an authoritative opinion.
It’s hard for most people to realize that: the complexity that confronts a bishop — to be fair to priests and also vigilant to protect children. The greater concern is the protection of children, but the rights of (the) priest need to be upheld.
You realize that one misstep in this area can jeopardize everything else you have worked for.
Register senior editor Joan Frawley Desmond writes from Chevy Chase, Maryland.
Jimmy Akin: Pope Francis and lying to save life
Edward Pentin: Pope Pardons Gabriele, Appoints American as Promoter of Justice
Comments
Post a Comment
Archbishop Joseph Naumann makes attempts to deflect responsibility from Bishop Finn and the American bishops.
1. No bishop has ever criticized another bishop for covering up sexual child abuse by clergy.
2. No bishop has been criticized another bishop for sexually abusing children (see http://www.bishopaccountability i.e.,, Bishops Soens, Dupre, Hart, O’Connell, Sanchez, Symons, Williams, Ziemann, etc.)
3. Cardinal Law of Boston evaded legal action for his complicity in covering up multiple sexual abuse cases of children by clergy. He skipped out of the country and ended in Rome where he was rewarded by the Vatican.
4. The civil grand jury in Philadelphia documented the coverup by high diocesan officials of dozens of cases of child sexual abuse by priests. Yet again, the bishops fail to criticize or take sanction against these leaders of church hierarchy.
I am an active member of SNAP. The mission of SNAP is clear: protect children, reach out and support survivors, expose the truth of clergy abuse. Our actions are not “strikes” as the Archbishop states. Rather the “wounds” suffered by the church is the result of their failure to protect children, their “circling the wagons” in protecting abuser priests, their secrecy and their arrogance that church hierarchy and clergy members are more important than the safety of children.
If the church hierarchy wants to heal from the injury caused by the historical pattern and practice of dismissing accusations, moving abuser priests around, complicity in covering up abuse and general stonewalling, then it needs to take positive action.
—Open the books. Acknowledge and publicly report all accusations. List credible accusations, those convicted, those admitted guilt and those who settled in court. Transparency will help the church hierarchy to a healthier future.
—Reach out to survivors. For every survivor who comes forward many, many more remain hidden.
—Sexual abuse of children cause crippling injury. The church hierarchy needs to commit to their healing through support, such as therapy, drug rehabilitation, job training and the like.
—Eliminate any statue of limitations for sexual abuse of children. Many, if not most, victims of sexual abuse as children take decades to come forward with acknowledging their abuse.
Is it anyi wonder that last week’s survey results indicated that bishops are almost as low as congress in their ratings with their people.
We’re all so weary, we are awakening, and an example to far more errant bishops is actually arriving late. A higher standard? I’d hope so.
It is sad that most can/will not test at the standard we expect holy men to meet.
It occurs to me, that no matter which Bishop writes the apology, it is always about ‘us’—the Bishops. It is never about the victims (except for the intervention of SNAP). It makes me wonder if the good Bishops (plural) slept through the moral theology unit on pride, or the viscious difficulty called presumption. The writings thinly argue for ‘no change’—in celibacy, in women’s issues, in liturgy, in theology, esp when they concern ‘the Bishop’.
Faithful Catholics all over are finding the hierarchy’s cries of persecution by various groups (liberals, the media, haters of the Church, SNAP, etc, etc)less and less compelling and more and more embarrassing.
Enough already. Read the indictment and forget what the media or SNAP or other imaginary “enemies” have to say about the Finn story. And see if you don’t arrive at the conclusion that Bishop Finn not only acted criminally but also was most derelict in protecting the children of his flock.
Claiming that nobody else has actually been convicted of this crime doesn’t make it any less a crime.
Note to Archbishop Naumann: the faithful Catholic parents in the pews are angry and want accountability and justice not because we hate the Church but precisely because we love it. Those children Ratigan took genital shots of could have been OUR little girls. For Finn to refuse to hand over Ratigan as soon as the child porn was discovered and to refuse to follow the Dallas Charter in 2011, after all that the last decade has taught us, is shameful. The hierarchy have nobody to thank but themselves for the media coverage: had the Church policed herself and protected our innocent babies in the first place, there never would have been a story to report on.
Trust once lost is very difficult to earn again. And egregious behavior by members of the hierarchy like Bishop Finn erode the trust of faithful Catholics more and more.
To Tim Lennon:
1. You are completely wrong that Cardinal Law “evaded legal action.” If prosecutors had a crime with which to charge the cardinal, they would have done so! But they didn’t have one!
2. The full story of Philadelphia has yet to be told. Don’t believe everything you read.
http://www.themediareport.com/topic-philadelphia-clergy-cases/index.htm
3. The time has come for the public to learn the truth about your organization, SNAP.
http://www.themediareport.com/topic-SNAP/index.htm
DPierre
TheMediaReport.com
-
The behavior of the bishops is at best inadequate. Spiritually deficit people.
Having been a victim of sexual abuse but by—what is FAR more common—a family “friend” I fail to see what satisfaction SNAP members find in piling onto the Catholic Church, ignoring all the other abusers, and not bringing themselves to a state of forgiveness for their abuser. I have found that in forgiveness, there is healing and peace and a loving heart—even for the sick people who are abusers. I pray that all who have been victims and their loved ones will find and hold fast to this way of healing. Scripture says “Vengeance is mine; I will repay, says the Lord.” I would like to receive mercy just as I can grant it. Money would not heal my wounds—and since the money in church cases comes not from the abuser or even his supervisors but from the church menhaden why would I want to make THEM pay for something not their fault? It will not destroy the Catholic Church if that is the hope SNAP and similar groups cherish. Be a force for something positive: help to educate childre, especially young men, in how to prevent their abuse; help to ferret out false abusers from real ones. Educate psychologists! Work to eliminate pornography of all kinds. Be a light in the world, not just a whiner or victim. Your soul is more than your body and God can heal your spirit if you turn to Him and not attorneys. God bless and help you!
My brother was sexually abused by a priest many years ago. I suggested he look into SNAP and he has since become a member of the organization. He is a broken, bitter and depressed man. Being involved in SNAP has not helped him in anyway progress in his healing and on the contrary seems to be only increasing his pain. They have been using his rage, emotion and vulnerability to further their own agenda. Forgiveness, healing and reuniting with the sacraments is replaced with a “lets take ‘em all down” attitude. I am rightly angered by the behavior of the priest abuser, and all clergy and hierarchy who let this happen to my brother, but SNAP adds insult to injury.
As I read this article I remembered my own pain from sexual abuse, not by the clergy but by the person that was put in charge (by my parents) to care for my brothers and I. As a Catholic convert and as a woman who has suffered for many years from that abuse (I was 6 years old at the time it began), I didn’t file a complaint against my parents (they hired this person)and I am finding it difficult to understand why we feel it is necessary to prosecute those that were in charge (like my parents). They did what the so called “professionals” told them. They were told as all of us where, that these pedophiles where curable. Which they aren’t! So if you want to point a finger at someone…someone who is responsible…take a good hard look at the psychology field, they seem to hold all the answers. For me, I will trust the Church and her Hierarchy…they lead to God and as for me and my family…that is exactly what we will do. We will continue to pray for all those victims of abuse. I do have a big big question though: why doesn’t SNAP go after those teachers, police officers and the millions of other abusers who are not “church” and yet they have done despicable things to children as well?
Thank You Archbishop Naumann for not standing by on the side lines while a decent, hard working, God fearing man, who without a doubt has 60 to 80 hrs. of work in his in-box every week, dropped a plate as he juggled with all his duties and who also just also happens to be a Bishop gets destroyed by a “mainstream media” that by it’s actions demonstrates more and more every day that it is at best simply incompetent and slothful; “parroting” misrepresentations, lies and half-truths or at worst a conniving bigoted gang united only in it’s ceaseless attacks on all Christianity in general and Catholics in particular. You are spot on in your assessment that Bishop Finn can not get a fair hearing given the orchestrated attacks coming from a far from impartial media in cahoots with “SNAP”.
Do the lame media outlets bother to let John Q Public know that the National Director of SNAP, comes directly from ACORN where he learned first hand from the best and brightest how to use manipulative, in-your-face, win at any price, the ends justifies the means tactics to advance ill conceived ideas. The irony of the situation is that the USCCB got snookered into giving ACORN some $7 millions and in a strange twist the nearly 20,000 hours of prior experience in Saul Alinsky style “community organizing” that the Director of SNAP received is now being directed at the Church in the person of Bishop Finn.
The real reason the New York Times and it’s ilk are targeting the Church is because they know that it distracts the attention of Everyone away from horror of Abortion, Planned Parenthood funding, Pornography, and the now full frontal attack on Marriage and the Family. Bishop Finn was and is one of the Gandalf’s on the Bridge trying to stop the advance of evil while the mouth of Sauron Media ... well you get the idea. Pray for everyone involved in this Vale of tears; the ground after all is cursed ever since that father of lies first visited the garden.
Just another set of comments that validates and verifies the arrogance and pomposity of these self glorifying “Princes” of the Church. Archbishop, what Bishop Finn did was WRONG—do you really get that?—He broke the promise of the Dallas Norms that were set. There is absolutely no excuse for his actions—- arrogance, stupidity, indifference, disorganized, incompetent—take your pick—he broke a sacred trust that he has with the people of God—WE the people in the pews—the people who pray, pay, and obey—- he broke that trust. The question we ask you Bishop is will you or will you not advise your “friend” to resign? Where do you stand? We don’t need you casting doubt or commentating on how you believe our system of law should work—just answer the question for all the people in your flock—will you or will you not advise Bishop Finn to step down? Because he violated the sacred trust of the People of God——-
Everybody has a right to hate on SNAP and liberal media all they want. Far be it from me to take that from anybody. But SNAP, liberal media, and other “enemies of the Church” are red herrings in this discussion.
Read the Graves report and judge this case on its own merits. Don’t let liberals, conservatives, “church-haters”, “church-lovers”, SNAP or Archbishop Naumann tell you what to think or not to think.
http://www.diocese-kcsj.org/_docs/8-31-11_Report_of_Independent_Investigation.pdf
And one more thing—-imagine that those girls are your two and three-year-old daughters while you are reading it.
And then come back and tell us how much the various “enemies” are blowing Bishop Finn’s “dropping of a plate” out of proportion.
I’m really sorry that Finn works too many hours… my heart grieves for him - such a hard working man. But my heart just aches for all of the victims of clergy sex abuse. Perhaps if Finn weren’t such a micro manager he could take his head out of his ... books and looka t the victims, be pastoral and realize that this is his highest priority - protect the children. there is no other job more important. If he can’t do that much, then he is incompetent and should be fired. As for the parents who hired the abuser - once they found out about the abuse, did they then recommend the abuser to other parents? The bishops did just that.
I agree with David Pierre in his remarks about Cardinal Law. It is nothing but wishful thinking for SNAP to suggest that Cardinal Law evaded legal action. There is no evidence that he personally broke any law of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and it is irresponsible to say other. I admire Archbishop Naumann for having the integrity and courage to tell the truth about SNAP even when it means he may become a target. Father Gordon MacRaw who writes at These Stone Walls also had some courageous things to say about SNAP in an article he called “SNAP’s Last Gasp: The Pope’s Crimes Against Humanity.” He too has been a target of SNAP, but even in prison he will not be bullied. Here is the link: http://www.thesestonewalls.com/gordon-macrae/snaps-last-gasp-the-popes-crimes-against-humanity/
I have not been a practicing Catholic since High School. My point is simple. A person accused of a criminal act should be held responsible in the system which prevails in this country, the justice system, he/she should go to trial, the facts be given, and judgement made. if my brother committed a crime and I determined that I did not believe he committed a crime and therefor took no action, I would be liable for a number of criminal charges including harboring a criminal. it is time that the church conducts the church’s business to protect the sheep and not a wayward shepard. let justice prevail!! thank you
Tim Lennon writes: “Eliminate any statue of limitations for sexual abuse of children. Many, if not most, victims of sexual abuse as children take decades to come forward with acknowledging their abuse.”
This is an extraordinarily bad idea. I get that it can take time for some victims to come forward. But we have Statutes of Limitations for a *reason.* Evidence can be hard to come by decades later; memories will be fuzzy if not nonexistent on the part of witnesses. Is it fair to defendants? Yes, even accused priests have rights, and false accusations *are* made. And wrongful accusations are *more* likely when you permit then to be filed thirty, forty years after the fact.
A limited extension of the Statute might make sense in some jurisdictions. But there has to be a cutoff point.
I worked for Cardinal Law in the Chancery of the Diocese of Springfield-
Cape Girardeau. I know Father Naumann personally and have heard nothing but good about Bishop Finn. These are the Catholic LEADERS that have bee true to the Catholic Church and are now being persecuted. I am now 88 years old but have felt that Catholics would be persecuated because we do not believe in ABORTION, PORNORGRAPY AND THAT MARRIAGE IS BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN. I saw my beatiful United States change after World War II.
Christianity that once held us together fell apart after the “atomic bomb”
was used by our country. Today, we are paying a heavy price for that action. I weep everytime we sing “The Star Spangled Banner” for my beautiful country and for what it used to be.
I find this whole incident completely disgusting. Nobody is being “persecuted”. They are being PROSECUTED! It’s high time the catholic church stopped the practice of hiding the abuse of children, as well as hiding the behind the excuse that they were just following the advice of experts. There is not a single psychologist, psychiatrist, counselor or therapist, in todays day and age, that would tell you to do anything except to turn the person involved over to the authorities. Yes, 40 years ago, they may have told the church to have a priest to seek counseling. But that doesn’t go on today. Incidents like this continue to put a stain on the church. It’s about time the law looked beyond the robes. How many times does something like this have to happen before Priests, Bishops, Arch-Bishops and Cardinals realize that you cannot hide. A crime against a child put in your care is the most hyenas of crimes. The only thing that comes close to this type of crime is covering it up.
I agree with Richard M. about the Statute of Limitations, but it’s more complicated. All the blustering by SNAP about eliminating Statutes of Limitations refers solely to civil statutes. The Supreme Court has already ruled that any changes in criminal statutes of limitations cannot be applied retroactively. All this talk of statutes of limitations is about money - just money. In an article entitled, “When Priests are Falsely Accused” under “SPECIAL REPORTS” at http://www.TheseStoneWalls.com Father Gordon MacRae raised an important issue. There are 4,000 registered sex offenders in his state. Two are Catholic priests. The others are accused parents, grandparents, step parents, foster parents, teachers, scout leaders, etc. And for all of them the length of time between a person being victimized and the victim reporting it was measured in weeks or months, not years, and certainly not decades. Only Catholic priests face claims that are decades old. No one else. It’s about money - just money.
More of the same tone-deaf stuff, this time from Bp Naumann. It’s almost impossible for me, as a father of four children, to understand how a man such as His Excellency can play the victim card in a case such as this. Blame the media and the “enemies of the Church”? Doesn’t he realize that all but a tiny core of rabid “My Church right or wrong” types do not believe this? I am a faithful, Church-going, active Catholic, and I am disgusted by all of this. It just shows the corrosive effects of power and the Old Boys Club that is the Church hierarchy.
We all are affronted and sickened by child abusers.
However, the charge against Bishop Finn sounds a little like hypocrisy.
Why is Obama not charged for supporting legislating in favour of abortion, homosexuality, gay marriage, the denial of religious freedom?
Other than perhaps failing to report an accusation on time, Bishop Finn did not commit any serious crime.
In mitigation against the trivial charge, surely, the bishop is entitled to some reasonable space in order to investigate, to be advised, to consider the accusation. If during this space of time, he fails to inform the police on “time”, is this really such a serious crime?
How many people are late in submitting their tax returns on time? Does the prosecutor react with equal justice? I am sure not!
I am afraid, around the issue of child abuse, there are far too many extremists, people who are “holier than thou”, the self-righteous types who attack innocent bishops while, on the contrary side, they glibly accept pornography shown on movies, TV , newspapers, etc; accepting and encouraging abortion, the murder of the “victim” in the womb….
Hypocrites!
“Hatred stirs up conflict, but love covers over all wrongs.” – Proverbs 10:12 (NIV)
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.