Northwest Laity Report - Fall 2002
by Peter W. Miller
It's been an eventful six months for Catholics here in the Northwest. Since April, when the last issue of Catholic Intersect was mailed out, there have been a string of allegations, revelations and legal suits over clerical sexual misconduct.
Fr. John Cornelius
A few days after the mailing of our Spring issue, the Seattle Times revealed that the popular and charismatic minority leader, Fr. John Cornelius, had received the second accusation in six years that he had molested an underage male.1
Throughout his career, Fr. Cornelius made a name for himself as pastor of Immaculate Conception church in Seattle's Central District. A visible figure in the community, he lived in a sizable mansion, drove new cars (reportedly donated) and legally adopted thirteen (!) children (two girls and eleven boys). He was recognized as an activist for African Americans and awarded with multiple community service awards.
In 1997, he was accused by an Idaho man of sexual abuse. The archdiocese's investigation turned out "inconclusive" but nevertheless, he was moved to another parish in Everett (also named Immaculate Conception) as a precaution.2 The Seattle Times recounts other measures taken at the time of the reassignment:
He was allowed to continue saying Mass, giving last rites and performing chaplain duties but was not allowed to associate with altar boys without supervision, [Seattle Archdiocese spokesman Bill] Gallant said. He was also required to undergo counseling and report regularly to a case monitor, both of which are continuing, Gallant said.
Cornelius also had been investigated in 1989 by Seattle police and the state's Child Protective Services. Both cleared him, and he was allowed to continue his ministry, Gallant said. … It was his role as an adoptive parent that prompted the 1989 investigations … after a deacon at the Central Area's Immaculate Conception raised concerns about his relationship with his children, Gallant said.3
The archdiocese also revealed that it had paid Washington State parole office George Uhlman to spy on Fr. Cornelius to ensure his compliance with the terms of the reassignment.4
Although Fr. Cornelius' accuser was sent a letter saying the priest had been relocated to a place where he wouldn't pose a risk and would be under close supervision, the parishioners at Seattle's Immaculate Conception were told he was being moved for "health reasons" and the congregation at Everett's Immaculate Conception was not told anything on the matter. Bill Gallant said to the Seattle Times that the "health reasons" line did not come from the archdiocese and that the pastor in Everett had been informed as to the true reasons for the move.5 However, Fr. Cornelius' supposed supervisor, Fr. Dennis Robb, told a group of around 70 parishioners (according to some in attendance) that the archdiocese only let him know that there were some past problems, but nothing serious had become of it. Fr. Robb went on to say that he was not supervising Fr. Cornelius, was not aware he was in counseling6 and had not been informed that there were any restrictions on Fr. Cornelius' activity. Gallant dismissed the serious discrepancy as a "misunderstanding." 7
Although Fr. Cornelius has officially denied all charges,8 at least twelve individuals have come forward with accusations of sexual abuse against him,9 including Kent bus driver Rick Barquet, who has since left the Church:
"He messed up my life, messed up my respect for God, for people of authority. I want to see that he doesn't do that to anyone else." 10
"I didn't believe in God after that. If Father John was a priest and he did that to me, how could there be a God?" 11
When the accusations first aired, Fr. Cornelius was put on "administrative leave," then, as the complaints stacked up, hired well-known Seattle attorney Anne Bremner to handle the accusations against him.12
Although Archbishop Brunett had previously stated that in 1996, a "state certified treatment provider" as well as Child Protective Services and the Seattle Police Department "determined that Father Cornelius' children and parishioners were not at risk" and the decision to move him was based on a wanting to "err on the side of caution," 13 it was released on May 17th that the treatment provider, psychologist J. Robert Wheeler, did indeed raise specific concerns about Fr. Cornelius, and it was those concerns that prompted his reassignment to Immaculate Conception in Everett. Gallant denies that the archdiocese led anyone to believe there had been no cause for concern:
"If we gave that impression, it's a false one. (Dr. Wheeler) specifically stated his concerns, and as a result of his concerns, Archbishop Murphy took these actions with Father Cornelius." 14
The Archdiocese posted on their Web site a "revised" statement from the Archbishop on the Fr. Cornelius case which omitted the following two paragraphs which were considered misleading by some:
"In 1996, a similar concern was raised in Idaho dating back to 1971, alleging inappropriate behavior with an adolescent male while Father Cornelius was a seminarian. Upon receipt of this complaint, my predecessor, the late Archbishop Thomas Murphy, placed Father Cornelius on administrative leave and referred the contents of this complaint to Child Protective Services and the Seattle Police Department. Thorough inquiries were conducted with a special eye to the safety and wellbeing of his own adopted children as well as to the parish communities in which he ministered. Following these inquiries, Father Cornelius' case was also referred to a state certified treatment provider who specializes in abuse issues. The provider, as well as CPS and the Seattle Police Department, determined that Father Cornelius' children and parishioners were not at risk and there were no grounds for any criminal charges."
"Due to the seriousness of the allegations, Archbishop Murphy decided to err on the side of caution and reduced Father Cornelius' status from pastor to assistant priest under the supervision of an independent monitor. He also required Father Cornelius to participate in therapy with the state certified treatment provider in order to ensure the ongoing safety and wellbeing of the community. I received regular reports from both the treatment provider and the independent monitor about Father Cornelius' status that gave us continuous assurance that he posed no threat to his children or his parish community. As recently as March of this year, the report from the state certified provider said he did not have any reservations regarding any assignment in parish ministry for Father Cornelius. The provider went on to say that Father Cornelius has been in parish ministry in Everett for many years now, and he had been seeing him during all of that time with no concerns noted regarding his role in ministry. He stated that he supported Father Cornelius remaining in parish work and was not concerned regarding any potential emotional or safety problems with Father Cornelius in ministry in any parish position at this time." 15
Former archdiocesan priest-personnel director Fr. Jack Walmesley was among those who expressed surprise at the reassignment considering the concerns raised. Walmesley drew a connection to a case with which he was very familiar - that of admitted child-molester Fr. James McGreal who was reassigned to a parish under fellow pederast Fr. Paul Conn:
"That looked really bad when that happened, but we had no idea about (Conn) at the time. … That's why I'm really surprised they placed Father Cornelius in Everett. When I left the personnel office (in 1989), it was my understanding that we were no longer going to do that. We learned from McGreal that it's too hard to monitor people 24 hours a day. And when that person is in a position of trust, like a priest, should you have to monitor them? And so we began to question the advice we were getting from the experts and began saying that it's not very realistic and probably not very wise." 16
On May 24th, Archbishop Brunett accepted the resignation of Fr. John Cornelius, two days after the archbishop informed him of his decision to follow panel recommendations and "remove Father Cornelius from ministry as priest in the Archdiocese of Seattle." 17 In a statement released by the archdiocese, Fr. Cornelius stopped short of admitting to the sexual abuse, but did say:
"I acknowledge my responsibility for my failures and want to express my deep sorrow for what I have done. I ask you for forgiveness." 18
"To all those I have hurt, I express to you my sorrow and ask your forgiveness. … To my Church, God's holy people, I have tried to be a good priest, but it is obvious that I have failed and I accept responsibility." 19
To which one of his accusers responded:
"He was saying he was sorry for his failures, which I think is cheap. He should've said he was sorry for the harm he caused the young men he attacked, for the lives he interrupted. He should apologize to God for using God as a gateway to vent his sexual fantasies or frustrations." 20
Given that the first abuse claim against Fr. Cornelius came back in 1989, a huge question mark arose as to how effective the Archdiocese of Seattle was in handling this case. Although the local sexual-abuse policy is praised (mostly by the archdiocese itself) as a groundbreaking model for the country, well ahead of it's time, it wasn't until another complaint by a Idaho man in 1996 that a number of measures were taken by the archdiocese. Although the Seattle police and Child Protective Services investigated and cleared Fr. Cornelius, the accuser (Rick Barquet) claims he was never even contacted on the matter,21 not by the civil authorities who cleared Cornelius nor by the Church leaders who let him continue his ministry unimpeded.22
Fr. Barry Ashwell
Last September, a lawsuit was filed in Clark County Superior Court accusing Fr. Barry Ashwell of molesting an altar boy while he was pastor at St. Joseph's church in Vancouver. When the charges were brought forward, Fr. Ashwell was placed on administrative leave.23 According to a letter released in April by Archbishop Alexander Brunett, "Father Ashwell vehemently denies the charges." 24
Five years earlier, Ashwell was assigned to St. Augustine church in Oak Harbor when he was accused of similar actions. The Archdiocese of Seattle hired a "forensic psychologist" to investigate the matter, but his findings were also reported as "inconclusive;" even though the forensic psychologist was never able to evaluate the accused priest, as Fr. Ashwell refused to talk to him. When the allegations in Oak Harbor came to light, Fr. Ashwell took the strange measure of refusing to cooperate with the archdiocese when it recommended he undergo an evaluation, asserting his canonical rights.
Even though he refused cooperation with the investigation, Fr. Ashwell was reassigned from St. Augustine to St. Aloysius church in Buckley and neither parish was notified of the accusations.25
Although similar "inconclusive" findings reportedly resulted in Fr. Cornelius receiving counseling, limited duties and supervision, no such actions were taken against Fr. Ashwell. Speaking to the apparent inconsistencies of the archdiocese's highly-touted sex abuse policies, spokesman Bill Gallant responded that "every case is handled a little differently depending on circumstances." 26
The archdiocese ended up settling with the individual whose accusations were "inconclusive" under terms that have not been disclosed.27
Fr. Gregory Schmitt
On April 29th, a King County woman identifying herself as "Jane Doe" filed a lawsuit against Archbishop Brunett, alleging that a priest in the archdiocese, Fr. Gregory Schmitt, had maintained a sexual and physically abusive relationship with her over a six-year span ending in the year 2000.
The lawsuit claims that the abuse started in Kansas City, Missouri at Fr. Schmitt's previous assignment and continued when she followed him to Seattle where he was transferred in 1997.28
The abuse included fits of rage, screaming, choking her, pushing her, and striking her with a door. The suit claims. He even threatened to kill her, Doe claims, all the while ordering her to keep silent about their relationship.29
Fr. Schmitt denied the specific charge of physical abuse,30 but according to the suit, he admitted threatening to kill her at a counseling session in the presence of Jane Doe and state-certified domestic-violence counselor Dr. William Bentley.31
According to the woman, Fr. Schmitt promised to leave the priesthood and marry her, then "begged" her to come with him to Seattle.32
Fr. Schmitt is a member of the Redemptorist religious over which staffs Sacred Heart church in lower Queen Anne. Although serving in the archdiocese, his direct superior is the provincial in Denver, Fr. Richard Thibodeau. The suit alleges that both Archbishop Brunett and Fr. Thibodeau were made aware of the abuse allegations but failed to take appropriate action, even though Bishop George Thomas met with Fr. Schmitt about it and the Redomptorists transferred him to Seattle specifically because of the relationship in question.33 Jane Doe also claims she discussed the abuse personally with the Archbishop and that "Brunett was not surprised by her disclosures and quickly moved on…" to discuss other matters. According to Bill Gallant, Brunett denies the matter was ever discussed.
According to a lawyer representing the Redemptorist province, the order believed the relationship to be "consensual" and broken off due to pressure applied by order superiors:
"The order advised him, as they would any priest in this situation, that any kind of transgression from his vow of chastity and celibacy is a serious thing and would not be tolerated." 34
The Archdiocese of Seattle deferred to the judgment of the order and allowed the priest to remain at Sacred Heart church, distancing itself from responsibility on the issue. According to Gallant:
"He's not a priest of the Archdiocese of Seattle, he's a priest of (Denver's) Redemptorist order. They are a separate order. They belong to the Catholic Church - but it's not like he's an archdiocese priest under the direct supervision of Archbishop Brunett … His provincial in Denver is his ultimate supervisor." 35
Although it may seem strange that a woman who followed a priest halfway across the country could claim to be the victim of abuse, intimate relationships between priests and parishioners (as with therapists and patients or teachers and students) are seldom regarded as "consensual." According to the woman's testimony, when she turned to the priest while in an "emotionally weak state" after the death of a parent, Fr. Schmitt took advantage of the situation and initiated a sexual relationship. According to therapist Dr. Bentley, the priest's behavior "is a violation of his position of trust and a misuse of his position." 36
Fr. Gregory Schmitt was put on leave after the allegations were aired and is no longer assigned to Sacred Heart parish.
Fr. Dennis Champagne
On May 30th, a week after Fr. Cornelius' resignation, a second local priest was removed as Fr. Dennis Champagne stepped down amidst abuse allegations. Fr. Champagne, who was serving as "co-pastor" at St. John Bosco in Lakewood and Immaculate Conception in Steilacoom, was accused by a man expanding on his 1986 allegation that Fr. Champagne had molested him in 1979 while he was pastor at St. Michael's in Snohomish.37 After the 1986 allegation, Fr. Champagne underwent psychiatric counseling but was allowed to remain in active ministry. When the accuser recently contacted the archdiocese, Fr. Champagne was put on administrative leave and resigned the next day, saying:
"In light of the accusations that have been brought against me to the Archdiocese in recent days I think it is in the best interest of all concerned if at this time I offer you my resignation from active ministry." 38
The initial 1986 accusation was received in the form of a letter written by Fr. Pat Conroy to Archbishop Hunthausen. The victim approached Conroy about the matter, unsure how to proceed and the priest agreed to contact the archdiocese for him. To his recollection, Fr. Conroy was never contacted by Hunthausen or the archdiocese to follow up on the matter.39
Past Troubles and Current Lawsuits
Although Fr. James McGreal and Fr. Paul Conn are already known to be child molesters and are no longer priests in this archdiocese, their antics would result in new information being released and new lawsuits being filed.
On May 29th, six former altar boys filed a lawsuit against the archdiocese claiming they were abused by Fr. McGreal at St. Catherine's in Seattle from 1971 to 1977 (their ages ranged from 9-13), after being plyed by the priest with sacramental wine. The suit contends that the abuse continued even after Archbishop Hunthausen received complaints, which he chose to ignore.
Three more lawsuits by six plaintiffs were filed on July 11th claiming abuse at the hands of Frs. John Cornelius, James McGreal, Jack Marsh and former archdiocesan employee James Walsh.
Fr. Jack Marsh was the priest previously unnamed who created a mystery as the third "confirmed" archdiocesan priest known by the chancery to have molested children. Jack Walsh worked as a parish employee under Fr. Marsh at St. Anthony's in Renton. According to the suit, one of three brothers abused by Fr. Marsh turned to Walsh for assistance. Rather than assist, Walsh molested the boy as well.40 Fr. Marsh became well-known in the late 70's and early 80's after writing two books on alcoholism based on personal experience. He would later ask the mother of the brothers he abused if she could blame the aberrant behavior on his alcoholism. Marsh resigned in 1988 and now lives in Seattle.41
On July 24th, eight more men filed a lawsuit against the Archdiocese of Seattle for failing to protect them against Fr. McGreal. Attorney Mike Pfau commented:
"I'm amazed at just the sheer number of victims, and the number of complaints the archdiocese has received about McGreal, without removing him from active ministry." 42
And on August 9th, a fourth lawsuit was filed against the archdiocese and Fr. McGreal by an Oregon man, bringing the total number of plaintiffs against McGreal to 16 since May of this year.43
And finally, on September 1st, the Seattle Times reported that an unnamed Island County priest had been placed on administrative leave while a sex abuse allegation is investigated.44
Archbishop Brunett's Response
Responding to the increasing publicity on the matters in the local secular press, the archdiocese called a press conference on April 10, detailing what had been done in the Fr. Cornelius case. A statement issued by Archbishop Brunett included praise for priest's career:
"Father Cornelius is a prominent Catholic priest and community leader who provides a strong pastoral presence in the African American community and beyond since his ordination in 1975. His ministry is distinguished by a strong commitment to civil rights and a commitment to addressing the needs of the African American community. His own life is distinguished by the fact that he has been the adoptive father for 13 children and numerous grandchildren." 45
and an appeal for a moderation
"I want to underscore the fact that these are simply allegations that are over 25 years old but will be rigorously investigated both using our internal process and cooperation with Child Protective Services and the King County Prosecutor's Office." 46
This is also the statement that needed revision as it suggested that earlier investigations resulted in "inconclusive" results that considered Cornelius not to be a risk. This claim was later contradicted by psychologist J. Robert Wheeler who did raise specific concerns at the time.
Several days later, in his Easter homily, His Excellency provided a bizarre response to the clerical sexual abuse crisis. Starting with a statement of general shock that priests "were" sex abusers,
"Perhaps you have somewhat the same feelings that I do when you read stories about priests and bishops who were sex abusers. How could they fail to fulfill their commitments? How could they violate the trust that had been given to them? … How can such violence exist in the church?" 47
he went on to recount the social contributions of the Church and downplay the extent of the problem:
"Isn't it demoralizing when we know how much the Catholic Church has given to this country? Thousands of priests, religious sisters and brothers, as well as a myriad of lay people who have organized and built orphanages, hospitals, homes for the aged, and schools. They have pioneered the work of Catholic charities and reached out to support the causes of justice and peace. When we see all of this impugned by the actions of a few, don't we, too, stand at the tomb and weep?" 48
The consequences of the current crisis are far more serious and extensive than the impugning of charitable contributions. Also, lest it be forgotten, when the Catholic Church isn't too busy with social work, it also still needs to find time for the salvation of souls.
The Archbishop goes on to discuss the root causes of the problems which would make any psychologist proud. Absent is any mention of sin or evil, but cultural and societal factors are discussed, which include violence against women and pornography:
"What about our society as a whole? Do we see there is an underlying cause of violence that pervades our lives? Violence is found everywhere. Pedophiles are violent people. Sexual predators do violence especially to women. … There is also a thriving economy that bases itself on the production, sale and promotion of child pornography and other types of pornography. It pervades our society. … Until we deal with the question of pornography and all of its attendant evils, we are only grabbing for straws in the wind. We need to ask ourselves serious questions about the irreparable harm pornography is doing to the hearts of people and, in many instances, nourishing and furthering the behavior of sexual predators and pedophiles." 49
Although there are certainly cases (as with Fr. Schmitt) of priests abusing women, the vast majority of cases across the United States involve the abuse of teenage boys. To date, the archdiocese has avoided identifying any connection between homosexuality and a crisis of priests involved in homosexual behavior. Especially after the antics of its own "gay activist" and "abstinent homosexual", Fr. David Jaeger (see next couple articles), can this archdiocese really maintain that the root of these problems lies in pornography? Certainly there are priests who are purveyors of homosexual pornography but that is more of a particularly distasteful effect of the problem than any sort of cause.
On April 14th, the Sunday after the accusations against Fr. Cornelius came out, Archbishop Brunett paid a visit to Everett's Immaculate Conception Parish for the 9am Mass. Although he received rounds of applause and standing ovations, his message was met with a degree of confusion and controversy. He told the congregation that:
"If there are accusations (against Cornelius), that's all they are, allegations … allegations that were made years and years ago.50 … just because somebody's alleged something doesn't mean the accused is guilty. That's important when I think of Father John. Father John has been faithful in following the process by which these allegations are dealt with. He did all the things that we asked him to do to assure us that he's a man of integrity. He's fully cooperated with everything we asked him to do." 51
How nice that he was so cooperative to the archdiocese's requests. Brunett also said that Fr. Cornelius is "very depressed. He needs your prayers." 52 According to the Archbishop's sermon, not victimizing the accused and the Church is "just as important" as it is to protect the victims.53 What ever happened to "protection of our children" being the archdiocese's "number one priority"? How could the protection of accused priests and the clerical bureaucrats who have protected them and concealed their behavior even approach the level of "just as important" as protecting victims of horrendous sexual abuse?
In reference to an email which suggested the discrepancy between the handling of Fr. Cornelius and Fr. Ashwell had to do with race, the Archbishop stated
"We did not do that. The press did that. It's not this community that has failed. It is the press that has failed." 54
Considering how little disclosure there was from this and other dioceses before pressure was applied by the secular media, it's a convenient, yet misleading tactic to blame "the press."
Upon Cornelius' resignation, Archbishop Brunett revised this "don't victimize the accused" message to:
"It saddens me greatly to know that many persons' lives have been disturbed or damaged by one of our priests." 55
On April 25th, citing a need to get an "unfiltered message" out to Western Washington, Archbishop Brunett took the unprecedented and expensive step of purchasing full-page ads in eight Western Washington newspapers. According to Bill Gallant:
"We've tried to be available and candid, but we're still getting a lot of letters and e-mails showing that people are confused and angry. I think they're getting confused and angry from watching national TV news. It's very difficult for us to get an unfiltered message out, so I think the archbishop felt this subject was serious and important enough that he wanted to get an unfiltered message out to the people." 56
In other words, there are no legitimate reasons to be "angry" at the Archdiocese of Seattle and those who do not realize this are "confused", perhaps as a result of "watching national TV news."
From this writer's perspective, the Archdiocese of Seattle has never had much problem getting an "unfiltered message" out through it's weekly newspaper, it's Web site or through cooperative local media outlets. Indeed, the full text of this message is freely available www.seattlearch.org both in English and Spanish. Nevertheless, millions of newspaper readers received the press release in all its "unfiltered" glory. The piece, ostentatiously entitled "Reconciling the past, creating the future" observed:
"The present crisis has been aggravated by decisions of individual bishops who allegedly transferred known offenders from one parish to the next, placing the safety and welfare of children and youth in jeopardy. Attitudes of denial, arrogance, and secrecy have added to the burden of victims seeking justice, healing, and redress. In the Archdiocese of Seattle, the emerging awareness of accusations of clergy abuse dating back two or three decades demonstrates that the Archdiocese of Seattle is not immune to the difficulties that have been portrayed across the nation and world." 57 (emphasis mine)
Wisely opting not to repeat his "just as important" argument or anti-pornography diatribe, he went on to detail the policies, special panels, blue ribbon committees and special case committees in place and how they have been working and are intended to function.
On May 25th, the local archdiocesan television program, Northwest Catholic aired an interview of Archbishop Brunett (conducted by employee Bill Gallant) which reassured the public that:
"We are committed to doing whatever is necessary to break this cycle of violence and ease your suffering. … Many of our dioceses have put wonderful programs into place and have followed those norms and procedures that we followed and we are doing what people say we should be doing. We have been doing that. We have zero tolerance. If I can borrow the word from the press, we have zero tolerance for child abuse. There's no bishop that I know of, or no cardinal that I know of that wants to have child abuse. It is absurd to think that some how we want to tolerate child abuse. No. It's absolutely not in our vision of life and faith. We think it's a terrible thing and we never in any way support any thing that would be seen to indicate that we would back off when in came to the question of child abuse." 58
And later in the interview:
"I go out every single night and Bishop (George) Thomas goes out every single night, to a different parish. We talk to people. I ask people questions about this issue. I ask the priests when I gathered with them. We talked about it. I've talked to innumerable people. We have had listening sessions in the parts of the diocese. We don't get this idea that we're all falling apart or whatever. … Real people are raising families, having a job, working with their children every day there's a great love for the church, a great growth in the life of the church. It's very stable and the priests are doing a good job and the thousands of lay people we have involved in the life of the church see this as a very important ministry. They are happy with the church." 59
Strangely enough, neither this local Catholic, nor anyone he has contact with, was aware of or invited to any of the nightly parish visits or "listening sessions".
The Panel
In order to deal with issues of clerical sexual abuse, the Archdiocese of Seattle has relied upon a 16-member panel made up of priests, sexual-abuse counselors and law-enforcement representatives. This panel meets privately to examine policies, discuss solutions and make recommendations to Archbishop Alexander Brunett, at whose discretion the implementation of recommendations lies.60
On the newest panel are therapists Tim Smith and J. Robert Wheeler; former U.S. Attorney Mike McKay, attorney and former King County Senior Deputy Prosecutor Rebecca Roe, church-law expert Lynda Robitaille and the Rev. John Madigan, a priest. The panel is split 50-50 between Catholics and non-Catholics, said [Auxiliary Bishop George] Thomas.61
The panel was tasked with evaluating the cases of Frs. Barry Ashwell and John Cornelius and is (or will be) evaluating the case of Fr. David Jaeger.
The idea of utilizing a review board has been called into question by those who claim that such panels suffer from a lack of independence from the bishop, a lack of access to pertinent information and no mechanism to see their decisions adopted or enforced. According to David Clohessy of Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests (SNAP):
"The big question is whether the church should be in the business of investigating at all. Our view of all these reform policies is they're virtually meaningless, they are rarely followed and there is no accountability mechanism. They are basically like having speed limits with no cops." 62
The Bishops' Conference
Following intense pressure from the secular media and recommendations given by Pope John Paul II to American Cardinals in Rome, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) went to their annual meeting in Dallas needing to come up with some sort of solution to the problem
What resulted was a new "one-strike" policy which maintained that priests who engage in a single instance of sexual abuse would be banned from active ministry. The proposal has since been rejected by the Vatican on canonical grounds and is currently undergoing revision. The claim made by some (including Archbishop Brunett in the October 24th edition of the Catholic Northwest Progress) that "nothing was rejected" and the Vatican was only making revisions is misleading. The USCCB asked the Vatican to approve certain changes to the Code of Canon Law; the Vatican declined to give that approval. Regardless of what final agreement is reached, the original proposal by the USCCB was rejected.
Some critics have speculated that the policy was intentionally created to be unrealistically tough, with little or no chance of receiving Vatican approval. This would allow bishops to further skirt responsibility and give the impression that the Vatican has tied their hands in the matter. According to some commentators, the most disturbing part of the Dallas resolution was not the portion handled but that which, for obvious reasons, was left out:
"But the real failing is not what is in the proposal, but what is not. There is not the slightest mention of any intention to investigate or punish the high church officials - bishops, archbishops and assorted superiors and ecclesiastical bureaucrats - who, it has been redundantly shown, have systematically aided, protected, hidden and promoted known predator-priests. They are the missing guilty, still."
"This pretends, as is the institutional position, that the problem with the church is merely a plague of predator priests. Of course, this is not true. There are about 47,000 Catholic priests in America; the number accused of sexual abuse over the past four decades runs, by the most liberal estimates, only to a few thousand. The church's real problem is that its superior officers quite deliberately allowed these relatively few priests to remain - in the face of powerful and mounting evidence of criminal wrongdoing - in positions where they could exploit their priestly privileges and continue to prey on the young and the vulnerable."
"We are speaking of men such as Boston's Cardinal Bernard F. Law, who stands, naked before God, for his years of protecting and hiding and promoting priests believed to be guilty of chronic, monstrous crimes of sexual depravity against children entrusted to the church's care. And of men such as Law's former top deputy, John B. McCormack, now bishop of Manchester, N.H., who reportedly admitted, under civil oath Monday, to years of effort in covering up credible allegations of clergy sexual crimes, in order to avoid 'a scandal.' And many more."
"Certainly, the men who raped boys need to be defrocked, not to mention tried, convicted and jailed. But what about the men who let the men rape boys? Why do they still hold high office? Why indeed do they still wear clerical collars? If two rapes are enough to get a priest defrocked, shouldn't looking the other way from a few decades' worth of rapes be enough to defrock a bishop?" 63
Also missing was any mention of the term "homosexual", perpetuating the myth that the widespread sexual abuse of teenage boys (homosexual behavior) has nothing to do with homosexuality.
This omission could be expected considering materials elsewhere on the USCCB Web site refer to "homosexuality" as a "major sexual preference" somehow distinct from other sexual disorders. The 1961 directive from the Vatican states that "those affected by the perverse inclination to homosexuality or pederasty should be excluded from religious vows and ordination." Recent months and events have shown the consequences of disregarding those directives.
"[Nebraska] Bishop [Fabian] Bruskewitz suggested that a commission formed to explore the roots of child abuse should study, among other things, the possibility that theological dissent leads naturally to sexual immorality. That proposal was quickly rejected." 64
Trouble in Spokane
For the better part of this year, Spokane has managed to avoid much of the controversy sweeping the country. Apart from the 1986 case of Fr. Ronald Lane Fontenot who plead guilty to statutory rape after three boys accused him of sexual molestation, Spokane has not had many priests publicly named as pederasts. Although he acknowledged their existence, Spokane Bishop William Skylstad, vice-president of the USCCB, repeatedly stated his intent to keep other cases off the public record.65 That would not be the case as new information would surface regarding former Spokane-area priest Fr. Patrick G. O'Donnell.
Patrick O'Donnell went from being a Boy Scouts camp counselor to a student at Gonzaga University to a medic in the army to a seminarian at Kenmore's St. Thomas Seminary to a priest in the Archdiocese of Spokane. In 1976, after he was accused of sexually molesting and bathing with young boys, O'Donnell was sent by Bishop Lawrence Welsh to Seattle for a 2˝ year "sexual-deviancy treatment" program. While in Seattle, he was assigned by Archbishop Hunthausen to St. Paul's parish in Rainier Beach and attended the University of Washington to receive a doctorate in counseling psychology.66 He returned to Spokane where he worked as a priest and psychologist until he was forced out in 1985. He then moved to Bellevue and started a private practice,67 the Cascade Behavioral Medicine Clinic, where he treated patients ages twelve and older. After recent accusations aired, the phone lines of the clinic were disconnected and former patients claim he has closed the practice.68
The Washington Board of Psychological Examiners announced on August 26th that it would be looking into six new complaints against Fr. O'Donnell filed this year in the Archdiocese of Spokane.69 Since Fr. O'Donnell received his psychology license in 1980, the State of Washington has been presented on two occasions with accusations against him. In 1984, sanctions were imposed upon O'Donnell after the State found he committed "grossly immoral acts" with two 13-year old boys during an overnight boating trip on Lake Coeur d'Alene in 1980.70 These sanctions which included a prohibition on unsupervised contact with male minors were removed two years later.71 In 1994, the State received another complaint about Fr. O'Donnell's history but decided not to pursue it.72
On August 26th, a couple told the Spokane Archdiocese that their oldest son, who would later commit suicide, was molested by Fr. O'Donnell in the late 1970's.73
On September 26th, ten people (nine alleged victims and the widow of a tenth) filed a suit against the Archdiocese of Spokane and Fr. O'Donnell for repeated cases of sexual abuse, both in the Archdiocese of Spokane and Seattle. The suit charges Fr. O'Donnell and the archdiocese for the August suicide of a man identified as T.C., who left behind a wife and three children and suffered:
"…profound, irreparable and devastating psychological injuries of such severity and causing such intense and prolonged pain that he could no longer endure." 74
The suit also contends that Archbishop Skylstad knew of the molestations that happened before and after Fr. O'Donnell's 1974 transfer to Assumption parish, where Skylstad was serving as pastor (he became bishop in 1990).75 Skylstad would share a rectory with him for 18 months, during which time Fr. O'Donnell would work under the supervision and reside a floor beneath the future high-ranking bishop.76 It was during this time six of the ten men filing lawsuits claim to have been molested. Two of the victims claim that Skylstad issued loud warnings before entering O'Donnell's room. The suit also claims that Skylstad was informed by parents and victims of the abuse happening at his parish but disregarded them. Skylstad does not remember those claims but recalls reporting an instance of "inappropriate bathing behavior" 77 - more specifically, sponge bathing with boys during gym class at the adjoining junior high school.78 This was one of the two incidents that resulted in O'Donnell being sent to Seattle for treatment;79 the other being what the Spokane Diocese's Vicar General, Fr. Steven Dublinski, describes as a "clear case of abuse." 80 Among those upset that Fr. O'Donnell was shipped off to Seattle for "treatment" rather than held accountable for his crimes is former Spokane County Prosecutor Don Brockett, particularly since his own children spent time with O'Donnell when he was at to Assumption parish.81
While assigned to Assumption parish, Fr. O'Donnell was known for his work with young boys and his taking them on skiing and boating trips on Lake Coeur d'Alene. Additionally, he worked as director of the Catholic Youth Ministry, and later as the archdiocesan liaison to the Boy Scouts where he helped procure young boys for a fellow pedophile - prominent businessman and Boy Scout troop leader George Robey. Robey would end up committing suicide in 1982.82
Surprisingly, while Fr. O'Donnell was assigned to Seattle's St. Paul's parish and undergoing "sexual deviancy treatment," he was allowed frequent unsupervised contact with young boys. Renton resident Jim Biteman alleges that O'Donnell molested him during this time.83
Regardless of whatever treatment Fr. O'Donnell was receiving in Seattle, his behavior took a turn for the worse. According to one victim, his psychological studies provided just another means to feed his perverse appetite:
Jim Biteman recalls that he was an eighth-grader at St. Paul's parish school in South Seattle when Father Patrick O'Donnell pulled him out of class and brought him down to the church's basement cafeteria to ask a few questions. According to Biteman, the young priest said he was conducting research for his psychology studies at the University of Washington--research that would be ruined if Biteman disclosed the conversation to classmates, who also were to be questioned.
Biteman says he faced a bank of windows while the priest sat behind him and proceeded to ask questions. O'Donnell asked him to picture himself naked in a mirror, then touching himself, then touching another boy in class. "This would go on for about 15 minutes," Biteman says. In one of the two or three such sessions he had with O'Donnell, Biteman says, he happened to look back and see that the priest's legs were apart, his hand between them.84
The topic of his 1978 doctorate dissertation, still available at the University of Washington's Allen Library, was "Evoking Trustworthy Behavior between Children and Adults." Others in the mental health field expressed shock that such a person would be allowed to become a psychotherapist, observing that "a person with such training in addition to a history of pedophilia could be particularly dangerous." 85
Fr. O'Donnell was introduced at St. Paul's in Seattle as "just one of the parish priests" rather than a child molester undergoing treatment:
...even Spokane Vicar General Dublinski concedes it odd, to say the least, that during a period of time when O'Donnell was undergoing treatment for some level of sexual transgression, he was given access to a Seattle parish with a school. The Seattle Archdiocese made him an associate pastor there--O'Donnell is pictured in a 1978 jubilee edition of St. Paul's yearbook. O'Donnell's head priest at St. Paul's was Father Gerald Lovett, who has spent the past two decades in charge of Redmond's St. Jude parish. Lovett says O'Donnell's alleged background as a pedophile is "absolutely new to me." He remembers only that the young priest was "very popular with the younger people" and a "very good homilist" who talked at a level children could understand. …
Jim Biteman, a youthful-looking man with a goatee and slightly spiky brown hair, remembers those years. He says O'Donnell got to know him and other boys from the parish school by offering to teach them racquetball at the athletic center at Seattle University. Afterward, the priest would shower with the kids, according to Biteman. "That was part of the deal with him."
Soon, Biteman says, O'Donnell was taking small groups of boys for sunset cruises on Lake Washington in a 35-foot boat that he kept moored at a Rainier Beach yacht club. "He would make a suggestion that it was a nice night for a swim. Of course, nobody had brought their swimsuits. He would tell us to go completely naked. He would sit in the back of the boat and encourage us to jump in and get out, jump in and get out."
O'Donnell became a friend of Biteman's family. Biteman says that one night, when he was in eighth grade, the same year that O'Donnell was pulling him out of classes for "research," the priest came to Biteman's house for dinner. Tired, Biteman says he retired early to his bedroom, only to hear O'Donnell knock on the door sometime later. "He came in and sat on the edge of the bed and asked if he could give me a massage." In the course of the massage, Biteman says, the priest briefly fondled him. Biteman says he was stunned and quickly rolled over.
After the lawsuits were filed, Skylstad spoke with O'Donnell and said the accused priest offered an apology for the "hurt and pain" he had caused the bishop personally, but not the victims. Skylstad went on to say that O'Donnell was deserving of sympathy since he had himself been molested when he was a Boy Scout.86 Through his attorney John Bergmann, Fr. O'Donnell recently released the warm statement that he expresses:
"…remorse for any harm he may have caused because of any conduct he may have engaged in." 87
The man responsible for Fr. O'Donnell and other priests of the Archdiocese of Spokane from 1978 to 1989 was the late Bishop Lawrence Welsh. On October 25th, the Spokesman Review published a police report which had detailed the investigation of Bishop Welsh after a male prostitute in Chicago charged that he had been choked by the bishop while performing oral sex. When questioned by two police detectives, Welsh admitted to most of the allegations:
Upon our arrival Mr. Welsh was advised of the alledged [sic] incident in Chicago and as to our interests in the case. He readly [sic] admitted that he had been in Chicago on the date in question, that he was there for a Knights of Columbus convention and that he stayed at the Chicago Hilton. He admitted to picking up a drug addict and taking him to his room for counseling. Mr. Welsh said that the man had come up to him in a bar and started talking to him about his personal problems. He said that he was not wearing his priest collar and did not tell the man he was a priest. Mr. Welsh was reluctant to tell us the whole truth at first but as the interview went along he would reveal a little more of the truth all the time, until his version of what happened came pretty close as to what the victim had said. The only thing Mr. Welsh took acception [sic] to was the amount of violence used. He did admit to putting his hands on the victim. When asked if he put his hands on the victims throat he said that he had put his hands all over the victims body. He said that he would NEVER deliberately do anything to hurt anybody and that he did not think he did anything to hurt this individual.88
The prostitute did not know Welsh was a priest or bishop. When the matter was first reported, it was sent to Seattle for possible links to the Green River serial killer.89
When it was determined the perpretrator was a Catholic bishop, the investigation was conducted in a "hush-hush" matter, according to one of the detectives:
"We turned the report into the brass and were told not to talk about it. … I worked there 25 years -- I was in homocide for 10 -- and I never knew we had secret files." 90
Upon Welsh's suggestion, the matter was brought to his superior, Archbishop Raymond Hunthausen.
Mr. Welsh was advised that we would like a member of his Family to know of the incident and since the Church was his family we would like to discuss the incident with a person the same rank as him in the church or a Supervisor. Mr. Welsh was agreeable to this and said he would make an appointment with his Supervisor Archbishop Raymond Hunthausen. ... On 9-29-86 Det. Graves and Det. Webb met with bishop Welsh and Archbishop Hunthausen at Mr. Welsh's residenct. At this time Mr. Welsh advised that he had informed Mr. Huntausen of the situation and it was explained to Mr. Huntausen what we would like his role to be. This is to see that Mr. Welsh is evaluated by a psychiatrist who specializes in sexual abuse cases Mr. Welsh agreeded that Mr. Welsh would see a psychiatrist for an evaluation. Mr. Welsh again expressed that he did not feel he did anything violent in the course of the sex act and that if he had it would have been as an outlet for frustrations that had built up within him.91
But detective Graves was not confident that Hunthausen had any interest in following up:
"My guess is all that talk about counseling ended when we walked out the door. My sense of Hunthausen was that this was going nowhere. This was no big deal. That we were being paid lip service." 92
Three years after the investigation, Welsh resigned after a drunk driving arrest in Spokane. He passed away in 1999.93 The incident has fueled speculation that the handling of sex abusers in the diocese was not all it seemed, since the bishop had his own dark secrets to protect.
Remaining Obligations
On the aforementioned archdiocesan television program, Archbishop Brunett said:
"We are committed to doing whatever is necessary to break this cycle of violence and ease your suffering." 94
But "whatever is necessary" seems to have a pretty big asterisk next to it in both Seattle and Spokane, as neither Brunett nor Skystad have been willing to discuss cases or priests not already brought to light. Setting aside the risk of false accusation and unnecessary incrimination, the Seattle Archdiocese refuses to even reveal how many priests have been removed or dollars paid out over sexual abuse cases.95
The repeated accusations against Fr. Cornelius and the concerns they raised were not made public until a Chicago man contacted the Seattle Times in April. In the case of Barry Ashwell, the archdiocese was aware of more than one abuse allegation and even had him transferred, but didn't place him on administrative leave until after a lawsuit was filed last year. Similarly, Fr. Schmitt was not placed on leave until after a lawsuit was filed, even though the archdiocese had previously known of the affair and the allegations surrounding it.96 The Chicago man who alerted the media as to Fr. Cornelius' behavior wondered:
"If I hadn't made the call [to the press] in early April, would this have ever happened? Would he have stepped out on his own and said: 'I'd like to make the archdiocese aware of something I did in the 1970's'?'" 97
The Spokane Archdiocese has received allegations that other priests besides Fr. O'Donnell sexually molested young boys but has refused to identify who those priests are.98 Bishop Skylstad said that since the mid 1970's, 12 of the sexual abuse reports include five priests besides O'Donnell no longer in active ministry.99 Despite Skylstad's statement that:
"I'll be honest with you. I was appalled at the number of victims." 100
he announced that naming those priests would not serve the "common good" and only serve to "heap shame upon shame."
"We will not make the names public. Come abusers feel tremendous guilt and shame." 101
[UPDATE: As this issue was going to print, Spokane Bishop William Skylstad, after receiving much public criticism for his statements and continued secrecy, decided to announce the names of the previously unknown priests accused of sexual abuse. On October 24, Nicholas K. Geranios of the Associated Press reported that the priests were James O'Malley, Chewelah - removed from ministry in 1989; Theodore Bradley, Spokane Valley - removed this year; Art Mertens, Walla Walla - removed in 1989; Reinard Beaver, Spokane & Colbert - removed in 1983; and Bernard Oosterman - resigned from ministry in 1980.]
Although dioceses have repeatedly pointed out that in cases where the statute of limitations has passed, the legal responsibilities are pretty-much left up to the Church authorities, the question of moral responsibility remains. A recent Boston Globe editorial asks
Without a conviction, those priests are entitled to a presumption of innocence. But their quiet presence in our midst raises two nettlesome questions: What is the church's obligation to monitor the behavior of these priests - men still in its employ and still pledged to obey their superiors? And does the public have a right to know the identity and whereabouts of priests who have been banished from ministry but are unlikely ever to face criminal charges? 102
Baltimore's Cardinal William Keeler felt the obligation was to error on the side of caution as he took the step of working with a local prosecutor to create then publicize a list of 57 priests who had faced credible allegations that they molested children in the Archdiocese of Baltimore over the past 70 years, even though none of the priests remained in active ministry. In a letter sent to 180,000 Catholic households, Keeler noted that:
"At times, we have let our fears of scandal override the need for the kind of openness that helps prevent abuse." 103
District Attorney Paul F. Walsh Jr., who recently released the names of 20 priests accused of sexual abuse in the Diocese of Fall River, agrees with Keeler's attitude and tactics:
"There's a public awareness issue. I appreciate all the substantive law of constitutional rights and due process, but when you step back from all the legalities, our job is to protect the public from perverts and rapists. Many of these men are ... walking around sanctimoniously as retired priests. We want to let people know, 'Wait a minute, be careful here. Don't let your kids around him.'" 104
These sentiments are echoed by New Hampshire prosecutor Robert Gainor who maintains Church officials have "a moral obligation and possibly even a civil, legal obligation" to inform the public when an abusive priest is living freely in the community, and that not providing public notification is "as negligent as just transferring a priest to another parish." 105
Although there are a number of complaints from priests and civil libertarians that such measures violate the rights of the accused, David Clohessy of SNAP shrugs off such concerns:
"Hundreds and hundreds of lawsuits have been filed because bishops have been conservative and cautious and erred on the side of protecting the rights of priests. I think Catholics in the pews would applaud any bishop who went beyond the bare minimum and did the morally correct thing, even if it means taking a legal risk." 106
So far, the Seattle Archbishop's commitment to "doing whatever is necessary" has not involved taking such risks, or even considerably lesser ones. Whether or not this decision shows reasonable prudence in avoiding unnecessary and potential harmful consequences, or merely continues the tactics of secrecy and damage control remains to be seen.
FOOTNOTES:
1 R. Rivera & J. Tu "Noted local priest on leave after second claim of sex abuse" The Seattle Times (4/10/2002)
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid.
4 V. Ho, "Close watch kept on priest accused of sex abuse" (4/13/2002)
5 See footnote 1.
6 V. Ho, "Monitoring of priest questioned after 3rd abuse charge" The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (4/12/2002)
7 R. Rivera & J. Tu "2 more accusations against priest" The Seattle Times (4/12/2002)
8 See footnote 1.
9 R. Rivera, "Evaluation of priest did raise concerns; at least 12 men say Cornelius abused them" The Seattle Times (5/18/2002)
10 R. Rivera & J. Tu "Another man files complaint accusing priest of sexual abuse" The Seattle Times (4/11/2002)
11 See footnote 6.
12 R. Rivera, "Priest hires attorney as complaints stack up" The Seattle Times (4/20/2002)
13 Archbishop A. Brunett, "Full text of Archbishop's statement" The Seattle Times (4/11/2002)
14 See footnote 9.
15 "This statement was issued by the Most Reverend Alex Brunett, Archbishop of Seattle" http://www.seattlearch.org/cornelius.htm (4/10/2002)
16 See footnote 1.
17 "Archbishop Brunett's statement" The Seattle Times (5/25/2002)
18 V. Ho & M. Roarke, "Archdiocese ousts priest after a dozen sex allegations", The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (5/25/2002)
19 "Rev. Cornelius' Statement", The Seattle Times (5/25/2002)
20 R. Rivera & J. Tu, "Rev. Cornelius: 'I have failed'", The Seattle Times (5/25/2002)
21 R. Rivera & J. Tu, "Sex-abuse cases show gaps in church response" The Seattle Times (5/26/2002)
22 Ibid.
23 R. Rivera "Priest cited in suit refused evaluation after '96 complaint" (4/12/2002)
24 "This letter was issued by the Most Reverend Alex Brunett" www.seattlearch.org/ashwell.htm (4/5/2002)
25 L. Ashton, "Church misconduct allegations: 'Sins coming home to roost'" The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (4/8/2002)
26 R. Rivera, "Priest cited in suit refused evaluation after '96 complaint" (4/12/2002)
27 Ibid.
28 V. Ho, "Archbishop Brunett sued by woman alleging affair with priest" The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (5/2/2002)
29 R. Rivera, "Woman sues priest, alleges abuse during 6-year affair" The Seattle Times (5/2/2002)
30 See footnote 28.
31 See footnote 29.
32 See footnote 28.
33 See footnote 29.
34 See footnote 28.
35 C. McGann, "Church sought inquiry into report of affair with priest" The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (5/3/2002)
36 R. Rivera, "Priest sued by woman is put on leave; officials believed affair consensual" The Seattle Times (5/3/2002)
37 AP "Second priest in week resigns amid molestation accusations" Seattle Times (5/31/2002)
38 "Press Release on Fr. Dennis Champagne" Archdiocese of Seattle (5/31/2002)
39 R. Rivera & J. Tu, "Pierce county priest quits ministry" Seattle Times (6/1/2002)
40 R. Rivera, "3 sex-abuse suits filed against Seattle archdiocese" Seattle Times (7/12/2002)
41 V. Ho, "6 plaintiffs allege sexual offenses by priests " Seattle Post-Intelligencer (7/12/2002)
42 V. Ho, "Eight more men file suit against Seattle archdiocese" Seattle Post-Intelligencer (7/25/2002)
43 R. Rivera, "Oregon man files fourth suit against Seattle clergyman" Seattle Times (8/10/2002)
44 "Other current cases" Seattle Times (9/1/2002)
45 "This statement was issued by the Most Reverend Alex Brunett, Archbishop of Seattle" http://www.seattlearch.org/cornelius.htm (4/10/2002)
46 Ibid.
47 "The Easter Equation" The Catholic Northwest Progress (4/13/2002)
48 Ibid.
49 Ibid.
50 N. Modie & D. Fisher, "Achbishop asks for prayers, support" The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (4/15/2002)
51 J. Tu & E. Rhodes, "Archbishop's sermon focuses on abuse claims against priest" The Seattle Times (4/15/2002)
52 Ibid.
53 See footnote 50.
54 See footnote 51.
55 R. Jamieson, "Church should have connected the 'dots'" Seattle Post-Intelligencer (5/27/2002)
56 V. Ho, "Archbishop apologizes to abuse victims in full-page ad" The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (4/25/2002)
57 Archbishop A. Brunett, "Reconciling the past, creating the future" (4/25/2002)
58 Archbishop A. Brunett, "Archbishop: 'We are committed to doing whatever is necessary'" Catholic Northwest Progress
59 Ibid.
60 R. Rivera, "Panel to examine how to treat cases of long-ago abuse" (4/10/2002)
61 R. Rivera, "High-profile panelists hearing priest case" The Seattle Times (5/17/2002)
62 See footnote 21.
63 M. Kelly "Church's latest effort spares the missing guilty" The Washington Post (6/5/2002)
64 Catholic World News (June, 2002)
65 See footnote 25.
66 N. Shapiro, "'A Real Charmer' How a priest accused of pedophilia became a Bellevue psychotherapist" Seattle Weekly (October 16-22, 2002)
67 R. Rivera, "Psychologist faces new allegations he molested boys" Seattle Times (8/27/2002)
68 J. Tu, "Diocese, priest sued in sex cases" Seattle Times (9/27/2002)
69 See footnote 67.
70 See footnote 67.
71 See footnote 71.
72 See footnote 66.
73 See footnote 67.
74 See footnote 68.
75 See footnote 68.
76 J. Martin, "Parish members vent grief" The Spokesman Review (9/27/2002)
77 Ibid.
78 See footnote 66.
79 See footnote 68.
80 See footnote 66.
81 AP, "Prosecutor feels misled by allegations about priest" The Seattle Times (10/15/2002)
82 See footnote 76.
83 See footnote 67.
84 See footnote 66.
85 See footnote 66.
86 See footnote 76.
87 See footnote 66.
88 "1986 Spokane Police report" The Spokesman Review (10/25/2002)
89 C. Johnson & K. Taylor, "Late bishop had secret" The Spokesman Review (10/25/2002)
90 See footnote 89.
91 See footnote 88.
92 See footnote 89.
93 See footnote 89.
94 See footnote 58.
95 See footnote 21.
96 See footnote 21.
97 See footnote 21.
98 J. Martin, "Diocese hears new reports of child abuse" The Spokesman Review (10/3/2002)
99 "Crisis in Spokane Catholic Diocese" KXLY, Spokane (10/9/2002)
100 AP "Spokane bishop won't name abusive priests" The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (10/9/2002)
101 Ibid.
102 S. Pfeiffer "Accused priests pose dilemma for church and public" The Boston Globe (10/15/2002)
103 Ibid.
104 Ibid.
105 Ibid.
106 Ibid.