 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Two Shanley case depositions, released on court order, date from June 5 and June 7. The pretrial testimony reveals a cardinal who had seemed to have trouble giving straight answers to simple questions, and at pains to blame anyone but himself for permitting alleged molester priests serve in parishes.
As with earlier official archdiocesan statements, Law continued to fault poor record-keeping for the fact that priests like Shanley, whose personnel file contained a long string of complaints for sexual misconduct, continued to serve in active ministry. Attorney Roderick MacLeish, who represents some of Shanley's alleged victims, repeatedly suggested that if Law had really wanted to know about the records of questionable priests, he could have examined their files. But the cardinal repeatedly said he trusted top aides and medical experts to handle these situations appropriately. In his testimony, Law also had a startling amount of difficulty remembering basic facts related to his personal history in dealing with the sex-abuse scandal. One striking example of Law's evasiveness came when MacLeish asked the cardinal if in the early 1970s, when he was vicar general to a Mississippi bishop, he had approved the assignment of a pederast priest to a parish. Law, who was the bishop's top aide, said he did not make that decision. "That would not have been my responsibility," he said. "That would have been the bishop's responsibility." However, when asked about his own culpability in making these bad decisions when he himself was archbishop of Boston, Law shifted the blame to his aides. Bishop Thomas V. Daily of Brooklyn, who was chancellor (chief administrator) of the Boston archdiocese under both Law and his predecessor Cardinal Humberto Medeiros, apparently shared the buck-passing mentality in the chancery. In the session with Law, MacLeish produced a letter Daily had written to a laywoman who complained in writing to Medeiros about Shanley's public remarks approving adult sex with children, and declaring that no "psychic damage" resulted from sex with animals. Daily's response to the woman was as follows: "I am grateful to you for your letter and for the information which is enclosed. The position of the Archdiocese of Boston is that, while Father Shanley enjoys the faculties of the Archdiocese of Boston, he alone must be held responsible for any statements regarding homosexuality." On other occasions, Law waffled over whether or not he had seen letters complaining about Shanley, even though internal archdiocesan communications indicated that he had. In a Clintonesque touch, the cardinal's testimony hinged on the meaning of the words "believe" and "note." In another exchange, Law said he did not recall what William Levada, the current archbishop of San Francisco, was doing in 1985. Levada was, in fact, a key member of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops' committee on sexual abuse in the clergy — which Law chaired. According to Fr. Thomas Doyle, the well-known abuse victims' advocate, in May of 1985 Law personally deputed Levada, then auxiliary bishop of Los Angeles, to meet with him and his co-authors of a secret report on the burgeoning sex-abuse scandal. The purpose was to discuss a "crisis intervention team" Doyle and his colleagues were planning to propose to the American bishops to help them deal wisely and compassionately with the storm of sex-abuse allegations brewing across the country. Law also professed no memory of when he got to know Doyle, who in 1985 co-authored a secret report for the bishops, which outlined the scope of the problem, advised on appropriate medical, legal, and pastoral responses, and warned them that they had better deal with the crisis forthrightly or face ruinous consequences. Law also claimed in his deposition that he does "not have a recollection of having studied it." Doyle, however, tells a different story. In an interview with NRO, the priest says he has been friends with the cardinal since 1981, when Law was a bishop in Missouri and Doyle was a top official in the Vatican Embassy in Washington. He says they met often, and had a "good relationship, and that's why I sought him out when I needed help." In early 1985, with the sex-abuse scandal mushrooming out of Louisiana, asked for advice and guidance from a handful of bishops he knew and trusted, including Law. Doyle says today that he personally briefed Law on detailed aspects of the crisis, including warning him that it was going to "explode" if something was not done. He says he gave Law an early draft of the secret report. The Levada meeting was encouraging, Doyle says, but shortly thereafter the bishops' conference cut the legs out from under Doyle and his two colleagues. Dejected, Doyle and his cohorts published the final draft of their blockbuster report anyway, and sent one to each American bishop. Doyle says he asked Law for some money to pay the final cost of the report's publication, and that the cardinal responded with a check for $1,000. That would be a thousand dollars for a report Law was personally briefed on while it was in progress, and now claims he can't remember if he ever read. "I don't know what happened to him in Boston." Doyle says now. "I feel sad for the man that I knew, that his career and service are ending way that it is. But at the same time, when I talk to victims up there, I feel that he deserves it." The cardinal has been giving fresh depositions this week. They are expected to be made public in 30 days. |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
<% dim printurl
printurl = Request.ServerVariables("URL")%>
f
the two days of Cardinal Bernard Law's videotaped depositions in the Fr.
Paul Shanley civil lawsuits released this week are any indication of what
Boston Catholics have to look forward to when these sex-abuse cases go
to trial, the future holds little promise for those who still look to
the embattled cardinal for moral leadership.
