The Worthy Adversary

Author: Joelle Casteix

  • Four Myths About SNAP’s ICC Complaint

    In September, victims of sexual abuse “upped the ante,” making a serious move to expose and prevent clergy sex crimes and cover-ups at the global level.

    How? SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (of which I am a member), filed a more than 80-page complaint (with 20,000 pages of documentation) with the International Criminal Court in The Hague. The goal? Prevent future sexual violence and to hold Vatican officials responsible for the rape of hundreds of thousands of children by Catholic clerics.

    Many applauded. But it didn’t take long before our actions were trashed by critics, who have tossed around four principal objections that lack factual basis.

    Here are four myths about SNAP’s ICC complaint:

    • The crimes are best brought before local courts. Sadly, that’s impossible and cannot achieve our goal. Too many victims are mired in shame and self-blame; too many predator priests are cunning and powerful; too few police have the resources to act; and too few prosecutors have the will or power to act effectively. There are many local prosecutors who have done tremendous work for victims, but they simply do not have the jurisdiction to hold every responsible party accountable for their crimes.
    • Many of the clergy crimes happened before the ICC was created in 2002. That’s true, but that does not mean that the crimes have stopped. Victims’ accounts, grand jury reports, legal documents, history, psychology and common sense convince us that hundreds of priests, bishops, nuns, seminarians and other church workers are sexually assaulting innocent kids and vulnerable adults right now. An ICC investigation, we are convinced, would document these on-going crimes (much like US grand jury probes and Irish government inquires have done with other recent clerical wrongdoing.).  California alone has shown us that the crimes and the cover-up have continued to this day, despite church “reforms.”
    • The church is “decentralized” so the abuse and cover up aren’t really orchestrated by the Vatican. That claim contradicts the obvious, military-like, top-down church structure as well as centuries of church practice. To cite some examples: the Vatican swiftly punishes and excommunicates theologians who deviate from official church teaching or priests who advocate for women’s ordination. Priests and bishops take vows to obey and protect the mother church.  Certain papal edicts are considered infallible. The pope and bishops have the theological right to deny “wrongdoers” access to the sacraments, and therefore, heaven. Only the Vatican can appoint bishops, allow bishops to retire, defrock priests, and approve major financial decisions in dioceses worldwide. The Code of Canon Law is the centralized legal system of the faith that (many in the church believe) trumps civil law. If that’s not centralized power, I don’t know what is.
    • The ICC only deals with overt, brutal killings by rogues during wars. But that’s simply not true. It’s designed to address violence that is “widespread” and “systematic.” Its jurisdiction covers open slaughter by public officials and hidden violence by private employees. It covers those who explicitly order underlings — or quietly but consistently enable them — to rape and torture the powerless. The court can’t pursue only politically safe and unpopular dictators, while ignoring more popular rulers when both contribute to and cause massive suffering.

    Historical, systemic and ground-breaking change can only happen through bold and brave measures. People like Martin Luther, Rosa Parks and the students in Tiananmen Square defied convention, risked their lives and stood up for justice. Our move is not as bold or as risky as theirs, but our drive to protect children and seek justice is just as strong. We don’t see to destroy the Catholic faith – in fact, many of our members are faithful Catholics who are just as disgusted as we are with the abuse and cover-up. Our beef is with the men and women who have twisted the Catholic faith to allow our most precious resource — our children — to be led like lambs to slaughter. I think that even Jesus would be hard pressed to find anything wrong with that.

     

  • Victims respond: Lockeford priest accused of abuse by second child, remains in ministry

    Statement by Joelle Casteix of Newport Beach, SNAP Western Regional Director, 949-322-7434, jcasteix@gmail.com

    We are saddened and disturbed to learn that despite a second allegation of abuse by Fr. Michael Kelly, Stockton Diocese officials still refuse to remove him from active ministry with children and families. Despite years of telling Catholics about child safety “reforms,” Stockton Bishop Blaire still cannot do the one easy and simple thing to keep kids safe.  Our biggest fear is for the children who may have been put at direct risk of abuse after Kelly was reinstated into active ministry in 2008, despite the first credible child sex abuse allegation against him.  We urge law enforcement to vigorously investigate and punish church employees who hurt kids or put them at risk.

    If you have any information about child abuse by Fr. Kelly or any adult, please contact law enforcement and support groups like ours, NOT church officials.

    We also urge Stockton Catholics to demand that Bishop Blaire adhere to his own child safety policies and the policies of his fellow bishops and immediately remove Kelly from active ministry until law enforcement can investigate the latest allegations.

    (SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, is the world’s oldest and largest support group for clergy abuse victims. We’ve been around for 23 years and have more than 10,000 members. Despite the word “priest” in our title, we have members who were molested by religious figures of all denominations, including nuns, rabbis, bishops, and Protestant ministers. Our website is SNAPnetwork.org)

     

    Contact – David Clohessy (314-566-9790 cell, SNAPclohessy@aol.com), Barbara Blaine (312-399-4747, SNAPblaine@ gmail.com), Barbara Dorris (314-862-7688 home, 314-503-0003 cell, SNAPdorris@gmail.com)

     

    http://www.news10.net/news/article/156666/2/New-accusation-arise-against-Lockeford-priest

    SACRAMENTO, CA – New allegations have come to light against a Lockeford priest.

    The accusations against Father Michael Kelly were not specified in a statement release by Bishop Stephen Blaire.

    Kelly was previously accused of molesting a child back in 1984. The accusations came to light in September 2007.

    Stockton police and the dioceses tried to investigate the claim, but the alleged victim did not cooperate. With no evidence, Kelly was reinstated in March 2008.

    Kelly will remain an active priest while the church investigates the claim, Blaire said. The Calaveras County Sheriff’s Department is also investigating the claim.

     

  • Homework in Kindergarten? NO!

    I’m angry.  I’m upset and I’m frustrated.  And I know I am not alone.

    My disgust has a target: the homework packet that came home with my five-year-old kindergartener on Monday.  The six-page albatross includes writing, math, drawing, story problems, coloring, and a nature walk.

    The whole she-bang is due Friday morning.

    The assignments must be completed throughout the week  — after a full-day of school (8:15 am until 2:45 pm).  The long day itself is physically, mentally and emotionally exhausting for a five- or six-year-old.  My son naps at least a half-hour when he gets home just to make it through the rest of the day.

    When giving her rationale for the homework, my son’s teacher (like teachers at schools across the county) said that such assignments help build life-long habits of independent learning and “get him into the habit” of homework.

    I’m sorry, but she’s dead wrong.

    The developmental requirements of the worksheets now sitting on my dining room table are well above a skill-appropriate level for any five-year-old to complete independently. The assignments require step-by-step, hands-on interpretation, guidance and prodding from a parent.  Every aspect of the homework, from reading the instructions to completing the work must be read out loud and explained by an adult. Otherwise, the child has no idea what to do.

    But the problem only starts there.  There are a myriad of other reasons why the homework is inappropriate:

    • Although I have taught my son to read (using an amazing book), he is not yet reading at a level that allows him to understand the detailed directions on the worksheets,
    • He does not know how to spell.  Therefore, any answers he writes must be dictated to him by me or copied from something that I write first,

    And here’s the kicker:

    • If my kindergartner does not complete his homework, it’s not his fault.  It’s mine. So what is that supposed to teach him? If he fails, it’s mom’s fault? What is the lesson there?  I value the fact that I am teaching my son personal responsibility for his actions.  But with this stupid homework, the school is fostering a “blame game” that will take years to undo.

    Where are the study skills?  Where is the independence?  If you can find them, let me know!

    The amount of worksheets has already created conflict with my son, who would much rather use what he learned in math by counting, sorting and grouping Legos than by cutting out bears and gluing them to sheets of paper at 6:30 at night. The busy-work also cuts into the creative time that my son and I would normally devote to other important areas of his learning, including music, swimming, outdoor creative play and conflict problem solving with this friends … or time simply reading with mom.

    Are there other motives?

    Then I have to ask:  Why so much “reinforcement of learning” in the first place? Is this homework making up for poor classroom management?  Are the children in my son’s class unable to accomplish everything necessary to meet grade level standards within the parameters of the school day?

    I know that the answers to these questions are “No.” So why does my kindergartener have homework at all?

    Big Brother?

    Is this, perhaps, the educational system’s way to force “learning time” in my family in an attempt to tell me how to raise my son?  If that’s the case, then I will immediately return the fundraising materials, the requests for volunteer hours, the pleas to purchase grocery scrip, and all of the other donation envelopes that make their way to my house.  If they think that I am unable to manage my at-home learning time with my five-year-old, then obviously I can’t handle a checkbook or my calendar, either.

    I can’t help but wonder what the next step is in this intrusion. If my son has copious amounts of skill-inappropriate homework and is unable to exercise and play outside, will the school then tell me that my kid is fat and dictate my grocery shopping lists? (It sounds paranoid, but I’ve seen it happen in other schools).

    I’m not the only one who’s mad

    I am by no means bashing my son’s teacher.  She’s a hard-working, vibrant young woman who is effectively teaching a classroom of small children.  I am not bashing the private school where I send my son.  The problem is that both the teacher and the school are following a new trend in homework that has infiltrated public and private education.  With no basis in educational theory or study, and no example of success, schools and teachers are assigning a huge amount of homework because “the other schools are doing it.”  Do a little research on the internet, and you will find scores of parents who are as upset as I am.

    Is that any way to formulate an educational system?

    Homework is not a bad thing – when assigned appropriately

    Do I believe in homework?  You BET I do.   The only reason I survived math and learned spelling words was because of the practice I did at home.  But I was in the third grade and could read the directions on my homework, understand the requirements, and complete the work independently.  If I didn’t do the homework, I understood and suffered the consequences because I was of an appropriate age to comprehend what was required of me.  My son, as a “normal,” healthy, curious five-year-old, cannot do that yet.

    I realize that I will spend my son’s school career helping him with research projects, checking his homework when it is complete, and drilling him on his times tables.  I’ll show him how to use the Internet safely and I’ll be a second set of eyes for his essays.  But not when he’s in kindergarten.  While he is this young, my job is to make sure he plays safely with his friends; is a well-behaved, nice and polite little boy; holds my hand in parking lots; eats lots of fruits and vegetables; and gets at least one story read to him every day (among a million other things).

    Now what?

    I’m in a quandary about all of this.  Do I swallow hard and play along?  Do I cause a stink with a very enthusiastic first-year teacher?  Do I not do the homework with my son and dare the school to fail him?  I will be having a meeting with the teacher and the principal, but I’m waiting for my anger to simmer down.  If you know anything about me, you know that an angry Joelle is a real trouble-maker.

    If anyone has a study that shows that giving me and my five-year-old homework worksheets will make him better at anything, I am open to reading it.

    Perhaps it is time for schools and teachers to look at what is developmentally best for a child.   Forcing me to do my son’s age-inappropriate homework (and then create a situation where he has no responsibility for getting it done) is definitely not that.  Maybe it’s time for parents to stand up and demand age and skill-level appropriate homework — and no homework at all for children before the second grade.  Anyone with me?

    And in case you were wondering: yes, I do have a teaching credential.  It’s expired.  Just like I am.

    In the meantime, my kid will be outside, playing.  Where he should be.

     

  • The California Clergy Sex Abuse Powder Keg, Part 2

    California is inundated with civil and criminal clergy sex abuse cases. I realized it was time for an update:

    Inland Empire

    Last week in Ontario, Fr. Alex Castillo was sentenced to a year in jail for lewd acts on a child. Although he was only prosecuted for his crimes against one victim, the sentencing report outlined the allegations of four other children (including the brother of the victim in the criminal case) who said that Castillo molested them.

    The boy’s parents – as well as the other Castillo victims – were able to give victim impact statements at the sentencing. The scary part? In the sentencing report, Castillo’s probation officer says that the cleric has no understanding of the severity of his crimes.

    Orange County

    In Orange County, the civil trial against Gus Krumm, Alexander Manville and the Franciscans of Santa Barbara is scheduled to start later this week. The Diocese of Orange settled their part of the case in July for $200K (possibly to clean up matters for diocese’s $53 million offer for the Crystal Cathedral). Considering that Krumm was at Saints Simon and Jude Parish for five years after the Franciscans put him on restricted ministry (but didn’t tell anyone), I believe that this trial will expose a whole lot of ugly cover-up.

    Orange County may also have the rare honor of hosting simultaneous criminal and civil clergy sex abuse trials. Former cleric Denis Lyons, who was arrested in 2009 on four felony counts of lewd acts upon a child under 14, should be sitting in the defendant’s chair within the next couple of weeks. Lyons is no stranger to trouble: he was arrested in 2003 for sex abuse (the charges were dropped as a result of the Stogner Decision). According to Bishop-Accountability.org, the Diocese of Orange has paid out at least $4 million in settlements to Lyons’ victims.

    Los Angeles

    In LA, the state of California is trying to classify former priest Michael Baker as a sexually violent predator. If they succeed, Baker, one of Los Angeles’ most prolific predator priests, can be incarcerated in a state hospital indefinitely. Additional civil cases against Baker are pending.

    A civil case against former Los Angeles (via Italy and Columbia) priest Fernando Lopez-Lopez is heating up. A scathing investigation by Dan Rather Reports, All is Not Forgiven (scroll down to “Featured Stories”), showed that the Archdiocese of Los Angeles does no background checks on its priests. So, even though Lopez-Lopez had been convicted in Italy of sexual violence on a child, the only job reference that LA Archdiocese officials needed was a nice letter from Lopez-Lopez’s bishop (who, of course, knew about the conviction, but didn’t say anything).

    LA Archdiocese officials had a chance to redeem themselves. But they didn’t. Even after church officials in Los Angeles learned about Lopez-Lopez’s past, they sat on the information for six months while Lopez-Lopez continued to abuse. Lopez-Lopez was deported to his home country of Columbia Colombia in 2008. He is reportedly still there.

    Monterey

    In the Diocese of Monterey, a new case has been filed against the diocese and William Allison, a priest who worked in the diocese in the 1960s and ’70s. Allison, who is deceased, was no stranger to trouble. The Diocese of Monterey, however, is playing coy. A diocese spokesman claimed that “it’s difficult” to find, investigate and search old clergy files, but a simple internet search will show that: 1) the Diocese of Fresno had no problem releasing Allison’s file as a part of a sex abuse civil case there, 2) There is an extensive amount of press on Allison’s time in New Mexico, and 3) The church’s own rules (Canon Law 489) require every diocese to keep permanent files on every abusive cleric, and that those files be ANNUALLY review by the bishop. But this is only the beginning of Monterey’s problems.

    Monterey is also the home of accused cleric Edward Fitz-Henry, who has been sued for child sexual abuse by one boy (and accused by at least two). The Fitz-Henry case is disturbing on many levels. After the latest victim came forward, we discovered that there was at least one other accusation of abuse that was deemed “credible,” Fitz-Henry has spent time at a church-run facility that treats child-molesting clerics, and a visiting priest was removed for not reporting the victim’s allegations. Despite all of this, some parishioners at Fitz-Henry’s parish put up a disturbing website that maligns the victim and alienates whistleblowers. Yuck. Fortunately, a police investigation is continuing.

    Bay Area – Fresno

    The newest member of the California Clergy Sex Abuse Powder Keg is Fr. Don Flickinger. Flickinger worked in the Dioceses of Fresno and San Jose and the Archdiocese of San Francisco during his 40-year career as a priest. The sex abuse lawsuit, filed in San Francisco Superior Court, cites more than 15 witnesses who corroborate claims of Flickinger’s predatory behavior (including pulling freshman boys out of class and asking them about masturbation). When the lawsuit was filed, Flickinger was exposed living at an Archdiocese of San Francisco parish with a school. According to press reports, Flickinger is back in Fresno. Oddly, the Archdiocese of San Francisco and the Diocese of San Jose have put out statements denying all responsibility for Flickinger (note, Flickinger was listed in the 2011 Official Catholic Directory at St. Paul’s Parish in San Francisco and was listed on the website until the lawsuit was filed).

    I am sure there are cases that I have overlooked. But I am always open to a Part 3.

     

     

     

     

  • A Rigali in Chaput’s Clothing

    We must demand more from Archbishop Chaput – more transparency, more support for legislative change, and more accountability.

    While many Philadelphia Catholic pundits are cheering the recent appointment of Denver Archbishop Chaput to replace Cardinal Rigali, victims remain rightfully wary.  We’ve seen first hand how easy it is for church officials replace a priest, vicar general, or bishop and then claim that a local abuse crisis is “over.”

    But as we all know, Philadelphia’s crisis is far from over.

    No one can predict the future. But after a careful examination of Archbishop Charles Chaput’s career in Denver, we implore Catholics to be wary, law enforcement to remain vigilant, and law makers to never lose sight of the recommendations that the most recent grand jury report made earlier this year – especially since Chaput has acknowledged he hasn’t read the 2005 report, and refuses to comment on whether he has even glanced at the 2011 document (more on that below).

    During this tenure in Denver, Chaput was cheered by many for what a “progressive” view on dealing with abuse in the church.  The truth was far different. Far, far different.

    In 2006, when Colorado legislators tried to expand archaic statutes of limitations for victims of child sexual abuse, including a civil window for older victims, Chaput spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and used the pulpit to kill the legislation.  In 2008 when another bill was proposed in the legislature, his (paid) spokespeople called the laws “inherently unfair,” even though an integral part of the law completely removed the civil statute of limitations for all children who were sexually abused from 2008 onward.  What about that is unfair?

    While fighting the legislation, Chaput played a game well known in politics: “I’m bad, but so are they.” To do this, his lawyers did a simple search of Colorado public school teachers who has been arrested for sexual abuse. Then they put the names in a list, publicized it, and then claimed that Chaput had unearthed a scandal of molestation in the public education system.  The PR stunt was a slap in the face of clergy sex abuse survivors.  Why? Because the teachers on Chaput’s list were already exposed and  arrested, unlike the vast majority of the predator clerics in the Catholic church.  The teachers on Chaput’s list were not carefully hidden by their superiors, shuttled from parish to parish, covered-up by church officials, and allowed to molest more kids.

    In fact, according to Bishop-Accountability.org, the leading database of documents chronicling the sex abuse crisis in the US Catholic Church, Chaput has been less than forthcoming in naming accused clergy.  In 2004, when the first national John Jay study on abusive priests was released, Chaput fudged the math. He only reported diocesan priests, and didn’t submit any information on religious order priests who – like himself – make up more than half of the priests in the diocese. (Remember, Chaput is a religious order priest, a Capuchin OFM).  Then, he only submitted the names of priests that the diocese had “confirmed” had abused kids, not the number of total accusations.   That sounds oddly similar to the problem in Philadelphia, when Cardinal Rigali said that no molesting priests were in ministry, just months before the grand jury found 37 accused priests working in parishes.

    In 2009, when Katia Birge, an adult victim of rape, came forward to tell diocese officials how she was abused by a diocese volunteer, Juan Carlos Hernandez, she was vilified in the press.  Blaming the victim is an old and tired game.  Fortunately in this case, it did not work.  In the process of her battle, the media discovered that the Archdiocese of Denver did no background checks on volunteers who take adults and children on trips.  Chaput also refused to confirm if he did background checks on domestic priests.

    Child victims of abusive priests such as Leonard Abercrombie (who molested numbers of children, including three brothers) and Harold White (who abused his own godson) have had to endure far worse.  It hasn’t been a picnic in the Archdiocese of Denver.

    Finally, and probably most disturbing, Chaput has admitted that he has not read the 2005 Philadelphia Grand Jury report.  There has been no confirmation as to whether he has read the 2011 report.  How can anyone lead an Archdiocese if crisis if they refuse to acknowledge and study the key documents that exposed at least 37 perpetrators in ministry?

    Philadelphia is at a crossroads.  The latest grand jury report was a tipping point – handing down indictments, vindicating victims, and pushing for serious legislative change.  Catholics are rightfully outraged.  But we urge them to not become complacent.  Instead, they must demand more from Archbishop Chaput – more transparency, more support for legislative change, more accountability – than has ever been asked from any other Philly cleric.

    The only way that children will be protected now and in the future and the only way that victims will heal is if everyone – law enforcement, Catholics and legislators – remain vigilant, demand change and enforce transparency.   We – victims, children and the larger community – cannot afford a Rigali in Chaput’s clothing.