We at Horowitz Law aren’t fond of bishops cloaking themselves in secrecy about abuse. But we HATE when they do it under the guise of protecting others. Even worse, they sometimes take it further, saying they hide things to safeguard their flock’s feelings. We’re specifically referring to at least two Catholic officials who refuse to disclose where dozens of their predator priests are or were but do so purportedly for different but equally patronizing and insulting reasons.
- One Catholic official in Missouri tries to justify his secrecy – specifically, his unwillingness to provide ‘any details’ about any credibly accused abusers – citing “the interest of protecting victims’ privacy. . .”
- The other, in Louisiana, insists that his parishioners shouldn’t be re-traumatized by sad events from their history and that he doesn’t want to re-victimize any victims.
These aren’t quotes from long ago, by the way. Each prelate used his self-serving rationale using his ‘spokesman’ just five years ago, in 2019. Using this flimsy excuse—concern for both victims’ privacy and parishioners’ feelings—these bishops won’t disclose the work histories or assignment records of proven, admitted, or credibly accused child molesters. We suspect many other bishops across the US have made similar claims, often privately, without these absurd excuses ever going public. It’s nonsense, or baloney, or b—shit if you prefer. Let us explain.
Let’s address Bishop David Talley’s alleged worry. Talley once headed the Alexandria, Louisiana, Diocese but has since been promoted to head the Memphis Diocese. Talley claimed he doesn’t want to ‘re-traumatize’ believers by telling them which predators worked at which parish, school, or other church institution. Do officials in the South re-traumatize people when they admit that slavery was rampant years ago? “That’s a faulty comparison,” one might say. “Southerners know their region had slaves years ago.” But most Alexandria Catholics don’t know if their church once had a predator priest. Bishop Talley is right to be sensitive to the feelings of his flock.
Recall the US bishops national abuse policy, adopted in 2002. At that time, and over and over ever since, Catholic officials have said they’d start being ‘open and transparent’ about clergy sex crimes. There was no caveat. There were no exceptions made. There was no ‘but’ clause, as in “but NOT if being open upsets our parishioners.” And let’s look at the verb Talley’s statement uses: “re-traumatize.” It’s way over the top. Does Talley really think adults in his diocese are so frail that they’ll be “re-traumatized” if they see on Talley’s website that Fr. Don Smith allegedly molested a child at their parish 20 or 25 years ago?
Talley’s priorities? He’s essentially saying that whatever obligation he may have to help victims heal from heinous crimes is secondary and that his obligation to help make his flock feel good about their denomination comes first. Shouldn’t this bishop—and every bishop—be focused on doing all he can to safeguard those who may be hurt by predatory clerics in the future and bring comfort and solace to those who predatory clerics have hurt in the past?
Next is Archbishop Robert Carlson, who is now retired but then head of the St. Louis Archdiocese. He hides behind ‘victims’ privacy’ as an excuse for secrecy by saying, ‘I want to protect the privacy of victims.’ Finally, over the past two decades, we at Horowitz Law have listened to, advised, or represented hundreds of adults who were sexually victimized as kids by Catholic clerics. We can confidently say that we don’t believe we’ve EVER encountered one who wanted the public to know less about their perpetrator rather than more.
Forgive us if the idea that shielding victims & Catholics from the truth to “protect” them feels dishonest to us. Nobody’s asking for horrifying tales of past abuse, which are exploitative and voyeuristic. We – and thousands of others – are pushing for the release of simple, factual information: Where are or were these devious and dangerous abusers?”
Most bishop’s ‘credibly accused’ abusers lists offer other simple facts about the offenders: When and where they were born, where they attended seminary, what year they were ordained when they died or were moved elsewhere. No one has ever suggested that giving out these facts has violated victims’ privacy or ‘re-traumatized’ rank-and-file Catholics. Some bishops even prove the photographs and the last known whereabouts of predator priests. And many also include the work histories of the predators. Have you seen or heard of any victims hollering, “Give out less information about abusers!” Or any church-goers yelling, “Posting that information re-traumatizes me.”
Keep in mind that no one’s asking any church official for an unprecedented – or unreasonable – level of detail about child molesting clerics. Still, some bishops follow the lead of Talley and Carlson and provide the absolute bare minimum of information about child molesting clerics. And, of course, as we’ve noted time and again on this blog, there’s an even more dangerous form of secrecy that most bishops continue to practice: hiding not just the workplaces but the actual names of proven, admitted, and credibly accused child molesters.
Here are just a few examples:
• https://www.adamhorowitzlaw.com/blog/2024/01/troubling-trends-continue-in-louisiana/
Thankfully, they don’t cite ‘victims’ privacy’ as their motivation for this secrecy. In fact, most bishops are so arrogant that they don’t even bother to try and explain why they continue hiding so many predators. In fairness, Catholic officials aren’t alone in exploiting ‘victims’ privacy’ to hide wrongdoing like this story from Massachusetts:
In fairness, we should acknowledge that Catholic officials aren’t the only ones who exploit ‘victims’ privacy’ as an excuse to hide their own wrongdoing. Consider this recent story from Massachusetts:
“An investigation found that this state’s uniquely broad privacy law, intended to protect the privacy and safety of victims of domestic and sexual violence, has instead protected perpetrators and police. The Massachusetts law requires police to keep all reports and arrests related to sexual and domestic violence secret, something no other state does. In fact, 16 police departments turned down WBUR’s request for records detailing their actions leading up to domestic murders, all citing the same statute. It has also harmed victims by making it difficult — even impossible — to obtain records they need for custody battles and restraining orders.”
Still, the fact that ‘others are secretive and disingenuous too!’ is hardly a legitimate defense or convincing reassurance, especially from institutional officials claiming to be moral arbiters.
Horowitz Law is a law firm representing victims and survivors of sexual abuse by religious authority figures and other clergy. If you need a lawyer because a member of a religious organization sexually abused you, contact us today at 888-283-9922 or [email protected] to discuss your options today. Our lawyers have decades of experience representing survivors of clergy sexual abuse nationwide. We can help.