These are extracts from the Office of the Attorney General in Baltimore, detailing the extent of the sexual abuse engaged in on multiple levels by the Catholic Church in Baltimore. Nor is that abuse, as the report shows, the result solely of priests within the Roman Catholic Church. Rather, the RCC was an active facilitator of that abuse not only by refusing to engage in serious investigations but in actively protecting abusers while continually transplanting them from one parish of victims to other parishes of victims to prey upon, with full knowledge that the abuse was happening again and again. The question such a report raises is this: are all those who continue to empower such an institution in anyway complicit in the abuse?
Believers tell themselves that their church and their brand of religion is always as unblemished and innocent as Jesus himself, and therefore it is never the RCC itself but just some of the priests, who should never be confused with the power and authority of the RCC. Ask them why their God murdered an innocent Jesus rather than the guilty devil, and still, they insist it is because their religion and their definition of the word "God" are perfect, even though a justice system that does the same thing is judged to be a failure. And Catholics the world over simply wash their hands by washing their minds of any blame for enabling that Church to turn the pope who didn't do a thing to stop or investigate the abuse, and thereby aided and abetted such abuse, into a saint. That should tell you all you need to know about the true nature of the RCC.
Extracts from that report are as follows:
From the 1940s through 2002, over a hundred priests and other Archdiocese personnel engaged in horrific and repeated abuse of the most vulnerable children in their communities while Archdiocese leadership looked the other way.
The duration and scope of the abuse perpetrated by Catholic clergy was only possible because of the complicity of those charged with leading the Church and protecting its faithful. Leaders of the Archdiocese repeatedly dismissed reports of abuse and exhibited little to no concern for victims. They failed to adequately investigate complaints and made no effort to identify other victims or corroborate alleged abuse. They transferred known abusers to other positions of equal authority and access to children. They focused not on protecting victims or stopping the abuse, but rather on ensuring at all costs that the abuse be kept hidden. The costs and consequences of avoiding scandal were borne by the victimized children.
Time and again, members of the Church’s hierarchy resolutely refused to acknowledge allegations
of child sexual abuse for as long as possible. When denial became impossible, Church leadership
would remove abusers from the parish or school, sometimes with promises that they would have
no further contact with children. Church documents reveal with disturbing clarity that the
Archdiocese was more concerned with avoiding scandal and negative publicity than it was with
protecting children.
The incontrovertible history uncovered by this investigation is one of pervasive and persistent abuse by priests and other Archdiocese personnel. It is also a history of repeated dismissal or cover up of that abuse by the Catholic Church hierarchy. While every victim’s story is unique, together they reveal themes and behaviors typical of adults who sexually abuse children, and of those who enable abuse by concealing it. What was consistent throughout was the absolute authority and power these abusive priests and church leadership held over victims, their families, and their communities.
Abusers often singled out children who were especially isolated or vulnerable because of shyness, lack of confidence, or problems at home, and they presented themselves as protectors and friends of the children and their families. Abusers preyed upon the children most devoted to the church: the altar servers and choir members, those who participated in church youth organizations and the Scout troops, and especially those who worked in the rectories answering telephones in the evening and on the weekends. They groomed the victims with presents and special attention. They told their victims the abuse was “God’s will” and that no one would doubt the word of a priest. Some threatened that the victim or victim’s family would go to hell if they told anyone.
Time and again, bishops and other leaders in the church displayed empathy for the abusers that far outweighed any compassion shown to the children who were abused. These leaders repeatedly accepted the word of abusers over that of victims and their families. They conflated pedophilia with alcoholism and other substance use disorders, and they exhibited a misplaced reliance on “treatment.” When “investigations” were conducted, they were done by clergy who were neither trained as investigators nor independent of the church. These “investigators” typically questioned only the victim and abuser and made little or no attempt to seek corroboration or evidence of additional victims. They afforded the abuser’s denial equal or greater weight than the victim’s allegations. In some cases where even the most inadequate of investigations revealed undeniable abuse, the Archdiocese removed the abuser from the parish, but gave either no reason or a false reason for the removal. In many cases, the abuser was transferred—often multiple times—to another parish without warning to parishioners of the prior abuse.
The staggering pervasiveness of the abuse itself underscores the culpability of the Church hierarchy. The sheer number of abusers and victims, the depravity of the abusers’ conduct, and the frequency with which known abusers were given the opportunity to continue preying upon children are astonishing. Over 600 children are known to have been abused by the 156 people included in this Report, but the number is likely far higher. According to the Criminal Victimization Bulletin issued annually by the U.S. Department of Justice, only 33.9% of all rapes and sexual assaults were reported in 2019. That number fell to 22.9% in 2020.29 The numbers are even grimmer when limited to children. One study found that only 11.9% of women who were raped before the age of 18 reported it to the police or any other authority and were less likely to report if the rapist was known to them.
The ways in which abusers preyed upon their victims varied widely, but all took advantage of the position of authority and respect afforded priests and other clergy in Catholic communities. Parents often gave priests unfettered access to their children because they trusted clergy as spiritual leaders and men of virtue. A victim of Henry O’Toole described what an honor it was to be selected to work in the rectory on Sundays and how proud her family was. When she was alone with him in the rectory, he opened her shirt and fondled her.
In the aftermath of her divorce, a victim’s mother turned to Jerome Toohey to provide support and counsel to her son. Toohey proceeded to sexually abuse the boy for three years. John Wielebski was another priest who sexually abused children who came to him for counseling. Chillingly, one of his victims was sent to Wielebski because of earlier sexual abuse. Robert Hopkins preyed upon an altar boy who volunteered to open the rectory in the mornings and assist with the mass. Hopkins was so trusted by the family that the victim’s parents let their son sleep overnight at the rectory. Hopkins raped him for five years.
One of the most distressing aspects of the abuse is the frequency with which abusers continued their behavior even after victims came forward or concerns were raised. Lawrence Brett admitted in 1964 to the Bridgeport Diocese that he sexually abused and assaulted a boy when he was in Connecticut. He was sent to “treatment” in New Mexico where he continued to abuse children and then came to the Archdiocese of Baltimore. He was placed at Calvert Hall, a boys’ school. He abused over 20 boys in Maryland after 1964.
Joseph Maskell was moved from two parishes in the 1960s because of reports of troubling behavior with children, including a fascination with the sexual fantasies and behavior of boy scouts and “having young girls in the rectory under suspicious circumstances.” Not only were the reports by multiple parents not investigated, reported to authorities, or publicized, he was assigned to be Chaplain at Archbishop Keough High School, an all-girls’ school. Maskell sexually abused at least 39 victims. Walter Emala is another priest who continued to abuse children after victims came forward. He was banished from what became the Diocese of Memphis in 1968 after multiple reports of child abuse were made. He came to the Archdiocese of Baltimore and abused at least six boys in Maryland, as well as others in Pennsylvania.
Even in some of the rare instances when sexual abuse was prosecuted, the judicial system and the press colluded with the Church to avoid transparency and accountability. In 1958, Father Gerald Tragesser was prosecuted for sexually abusing a 13-year-old girl. In letters to fellow priests, Archbishop Keough pointedly referred to one of the victim’s parents as a “non-Catholic” and criticized them for “violently pressing charges and demanding a public trial.” Archbishop Keough reported that, with the help of “some excellent Catholic laymen,” the case was resolved privately in the chambers of the Chief Judge of the Circuit Court for Baltimore County. When the victim’s mother tried to expose the abuse through the press, Archbishop Keough wrote that “prolonged and extremely careful negotiations” and the “happy influence of a highly placed newspaper man” prevented the story from being printed.
Archbishop Keough wrote to the judge and promised that Tragesser would attend a treatment center and would not return to Maryland. If he were allowed to return to the priesthood, the archbishop said, it would be “in some ecclesiastical jurisdiction in or near New Mexico.” The judge agreed that “the interests of society and of justice” would be best served by this disposition and described his relationship with Catholic clergy as “extremely cordial.” Tragesser was reassigned to the Diocese of Salt Lake City less than a year later. The letter reassigning Tragesser described him as having “girl trouble,” and said the reassignment was to give him “a fresh start.” Tragesser remained a priest for another 17 years.
Comments
Post a Comment