There has been much has been written over the years about the antiseptic and deceptive language that church officials use when discussing abuses and cover-ups their clerics have perpetrated on so many for so long and that some clerics continue to perpetrate even now. The Catholic hierarchy’s goal with such language is clear: to try and obscure or minimize the horrors of what their abusive clerics and complicit supervisors are doing and have done.
Examples are legion:
- “Sin” vs. “crime”
- “Indiscretion“ vs. “assault“
- “Boundary violation“ vs. “abuse”
- “Failure to protect“ vs. “refusal to protect”
We could go on and on. But where such deception is possibly the most harmful is when it’s used in church lists of credibly accused abusive clerics.
A few examples:
- Public Disclosure List in Erie, Pennsylvania
- Clergy Status Report in Toledo, Ohio
- Clergy Misconduct in Springfield, Missouri
- Report Regarding Clergy Abuse in New Orleans, Louisiana
In no diocese anywhere in the US (as best we at Horowitz Law know of) is it called what it SHOULD be called: “A partial list of church employees who are proven, admitted &/or credibly accused abusers.” We don’t understand why it is so difficult for bishops to actually call the lists what they are! A simple question: How do Catholic officials think they can ever make a dent in the ongoing abuse and cover-up scandal IF THEY CAN’T EVEN BRING THEMSELVES TO USE THE RIGHTS WORDS?
Some Catholic officials come closer to accuracy about abuse. But even those officials fall short of real honesty and clarity. For example, in the Baltimore Archdiocese, it’s the “List of Priests and Brothers Accused of Child Sexual Abuse.” Notice what’s missing? The word ‘credible.‘ A Catholic could easily look at this list and say, “Well, Fr. Mike’s been accused. So what? That doesn’t mean anyone believes the accuser, much less that it actually happened.” And that Catholics could then invite Fr. Mike over for dinner or let him take their nine-year-old daughter to see the latest Disney movie or their 14-year-old son go to the rectory to help Fr. Mike move some furniture. That, of course, opens the door to more child sex crimes, crimes that might well have been prevented if only Catholic officials had been truly honest with the public and their flocks.
What else is missing in the description of the Baltimore Archdiocesan ‘accused‘ list? For starters, how about abusive seminarians, monks, nuns, bishops, and other church employees? Undoubtedly, over the decades, there must have been hundreds of these other clerics who hurt kids. We mention allegedly abusive bishops because not one but two Baltimore bishops are accused of abuse:
Bishop Gordon Bennett, S.J.
He was first a Baltimore auxiliary bishop of Baltimore and was later promoted to the bishop of Mandeville, Jamaica. But he worked there just two years and was removed supposedly due to ill health. But in 2019, church officials revealed that Bennett’s removal had been due to “an allegation of sexual harassment of a young adult.“ He is now restricted from ministry in the Baltimore and Wheeling-Charleston WV Dioceses.
Bishop Carl Anthony Fisher Jr.
He started his career as a Baltimore priest, reportedly molested several children in the 1970s, and was later promoted to an auxiliary bishop in Los Angeles. He allegedly abused both boys and girls, the youngest a 7-year-old and the oldest a 16-year-old. Bishop Fisher also worked for Catholic Charities and at a Washington DC parish. For a list of other publicly and credibly accused bishops who have preyed on youngsters, click here.
Let’s look at the five Dioceses of New Jersey:
- In Newark, it’s the “List of Credibly Accused Clergy.“ (Accused of what? It doesn’t say.)
- In Trenton, it’s the “List of Credibly Accused Clergy.“ (Accused of what? It, too, doesn’t say.)
- In Paterson, it’s slightly different. It’s called the “List of Credible Allegations.“ (Accused of what? It, too, doesn’t say.)
- In Metuchen, it’s slightly different again. It’s called the “Credibly Accused Clergy.”
- In Camden, it’s the Diocese of Camden Clergy Disclosure List
Notice what’s missing? No real reference to what exactly is being ‘alleged’ or what these clerics are ‘accused’ of doing as bad or worse; there’s no acknowledgment here that abuse reports involving these clerics have been substantiated.
By whom? By those with the most information about the alleged offenders. By those most likely to be notified of any oftheir potential wrongdoing. By those who hired and supervised and trained and transferred and worked alongside them.And perhaps most tellingly, by those most inclined to disbelieve accusers and most incentivized to believe the accused. By Catholic officials themselves. Again, the problem here is not really just a lack of clarity or honesty. The real problem is danger, and danger to the most vulnerable: children.
Because when child molesters – of any stripe, in any field or occupation, with any title – are allowed to duck and dodge and deny that the accusations against them have officially been deemed to be ‘credible,‘ innocent kids are at risk of more harm. When an abuser can safely tell someone,’ It was just an allegation. Nothing was substantiated. Look it up on my employer’s website,“ that enables him to keep building relationships with parents, keep worming his way into more contact with kids, and keep groping and raping them.
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.