The Worthy Adversary

Category: AB 218

  • Diocese of Fresno promised us a list of accused priests. Where is it?

    Diocese of Fresno promised us a list of accused priests. Where is it?

    Fresno Bishop Joseph V. Brennan promised a list. Did he think we forgot?

    Now that my white paper on the sexual abuse of women in the Catholic Church is complete—and getting a great response—I am beginning work on a complete analysis of California’s Catholic dioceses, sexual abuse, and cover-up.

    I thought I would start with the low-hanging fruit: looking at each diocese and determining who published a list of credibly accused clergy.

    San Francisco has never published a list. That is not terribly surprising: with a long history of abuse and cover-up, its sheer size, numerous spin-off dioceses (such as Oakland and San Jose), and the fact that it is the home of numerous religious orders, missing names are not shocking. Most likely, church officials want to keep a lid on that mess of a list. (But my guess is it would be HUGE.)

    What is interesting, however, is a promised list that never appeared from the Diocese of Fresno.

    According to a press release published on its website in June 2019:

    The Diocese of Fresno takes very seriously the responsibility of maintaining a safe environment for its children. Currently, Dr. Kathleen McChesney, former FBI official and her associates are reviewing all clergy files dating back nearly 100 years. The review will assist the Diocese with creating a list of clergy who have been credibly accused of improper conduct with minors.

    You may recognize McChesney. She is a former FBI agent who was the first person to head up the USCCB Office of Child and Youth Protection.

    Here is the problem: It’s now October 2020, and we have yet to see a list.

    Why the delay?

    We can’t blame COVID for the foot dragging. Attorney Jeff Anderson released a comprehensive list of Fresno’s accused clergy (according to public record). In addition, the diocese is participating in the Independent Compensation Plan (the California multi-diocese compensation program).

    In fact, AB 218, the California Child Victims’ Act, which gives victims of child sexual abuse in California new rights in the civil courts to expose abuse and cover-up, was signed by Governor Gavin Newsom just a few months after Brennan promised a list.

    But, Brennan probably thought, why alert victims by coming clean?

    They have the names. They just refuse to release them. So much for “responsibility.”

    What else is Bishop Brennan refusing to disclose?

  • What if women comprised 50% of sex abuse victims in the Catholic Church?

    What if women comprised 50% of sex abuse victims in the Catholic Church?

    What if the cornerstone of our conventional wisdom about the victims of the Catholic Church and clergy sex abuse crisis was wrong?

    What if, in a statistically viable sample of survivors of abuse in the Catholic Church, 50% of respondents were female? What if you also knew that this result is almost statically impossible to achieve with the conventional wisdom, which says that boys outnumber girls four to one?

    Would that change how you, the church, advocacy groups, and the general public respond to the crisis?

    The results of my Survivors Insight Survey are in. You can read the white paper here.

    According to the survey:

    51% of respondents were female.

    40% of clergy predators were not on any diocese “list.”

    90% of survivors were abused by priests, brothers and nuns. Approximately 10% were abused by lay (non-clergy) employees and volunteers.

    Respondents said women are disenfranchised in the entire “system”

    According to the church’s reported numbers on abuse—such as the 2004 John Jay Study on Abuse—male victims outnumber female victims of clergy sex abuse four-to-one. This fits a preferred church narrative: that the sex abuse crisis is the fault of “homosexual priests.” This is the exact opposite of male to female ratio of victims of child sex abuse in the general population.

    The survey showed that female survivors don’t come forward due to victim-shaming, and lack of gender equity in church/civil litigation.

    Many women respondents stated that their abuse “wasn’t as important or awful as the abuse of boys … or women thought that what happened to them didn’t qualify as abuse, because they did something to invite and condone it.”

    Other factors keeping women coming forward, according to the survey results, include female victim-shaming within the Catholic Church (with clergy engaging in victim-blaming and propagation of rape myths), lack of gender equity and transparency in personal injury sex abuse settlements, and the lack of women attorneys representing victims of clergy sex abuse.

    Many women respondents said that they believed that attorneys for victims only represented boys who had been abused.

    Church leaders are not disclosing names of abusers

    Approximately 40% of respondents said that the person who abused them was not on any list published by a diocese or religious order. Who are these alleged predators? Are they still working with children?

    What are church leaders not telling the public? What is the risk that still exists?

    Church leaders are pointing prevention programs in the wrong direction

    If 90% of accused abusers are members of the clergy, the current focus of prevention, screening and reporting (which focuses on employees and volunteers) is not effective. The results show that we are in the midst of a clergy sex abuse crisis, not a ‘volunteer sex abuse crisis.’

    When the reporting structure requires people to report to those who comprise the majority of abusers, are reports taken seriously? In other words, human nature shows us a priest, brother or nun is far more likely to discount reports about their peers—or do their best to protect the accused.

    Other results

    The survey also tracked respondents’ opinions on advocacy groups such as the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, the usage of the terms “survivor” and “victim,” and survivors’ views of civil litigation and church-run compensation programs.

    Why a survey?

    During the past 20 years, I felt that the gender demographics of the survivor population did not reflect the numbers that the church, media, and other advocates were reporting. I wanted to find out what the real numbers were. Why weren’t women being counted?

    How was the survey administered?

    The survey, administered in February and March of 2020, asked subjective and objective questions to a statistically viable sample of survivors in the United States. The results were interpreted with the help of an independent statistician.

    But this was not a randomized, scientific sample. Should we take it seriously?

    I have received pushback on my results and conclusions because I was unable to produce a randomized, scientific sample. There are a million ways that people can try to discount my findings. But that doesn’t take away the fact that there are women who are not coming forward and, subsequently, children who are still at risk.

    But think about this for a moment: every statistic we have on sexual abuse in the Catholic Church is self-reported by victims or the church.

    The John Jay Report on Abuse was self-reported by the bishops. Grand Jury Reports rely upon survivors to come forward and documents provided (or seized) from the church. Because of the nature of child sexual abuse, it is virtually impossible to create a randomized study.

    When it comes to ‘coming forward,’ women see a sea of powerful male adversaries. It causes them to question their experience and return to shame.

    What do we do now?

    We can look at this data and change the way we communicate with and aid the survivor community.

    We can talk.

    We can try to think a little differently.

    We can communicate with more compassion.

    We can work to stop the cycle of abuse in the Catholic Church.

    Read the whole white paper here.

  • When your father is Father

    When your father is Father

    In honor of Father’s Day, the LA Times published an essay by author Mimi Bull. The catch? Her father was a practicing Catholic priest.

    No one reading the essay will be satisfied.

    Mimi’s mother was forced into a life of secrecy and shame, unable to acknowledge the daughter she loved until Mimi was well into adulthood. Mimi was deprived of a father—only told that he was a priest well after his death, as well as the death of her mother.

    And the priest? Well, we don’t know how old Mimi’s mother was from the essay (I have yet to read Mimi’s book). But regardless, whether Mimi’s mother was a minor or an adult, a priest is a man of ultimate power who, in the Catholic tradition, holds the keys to heaven. That’s an exploitive relationship. Mimi’s mother didn’t stand a chance.

    The church certainly won’t be satisfied with the publication of this essay. Sure, Mimi’s mother and father kept their secret to the grave. But Mimi is living, breathing evidence of how children are sacrificed to keep up the appearances of the church.

    I wish I could say that Mimi’s is an isolated experience. Unfortunately, I know numerous children of priests. Many of these men and women struggle with identity; are rejected, re-victimized, and marginalized by the church; and, often, are the product of child sexual abuse. Some children go on to discover that their priest father had numerous “families” and multiple children with many women.

    When you very identity is wrapped in shame, how do you find wholeness and healing?

    Bull’s essay is over-edited and simplified for publication. I believe that there was much more that she wanted to say—but this was a Father’s Day piece. There is a lot of love and forgiveness in her text. I am not so forgiving.

    Here is my point: When a priest fathers a child, there are no winners. Everyone—especially the innocent child—is hurt. No one escapes damage.

    There are support groups globally for children of priests. Even the Vatican has “secret guidelines” on how to address the issue.

    If you are the child of a priest, you are not alone. You are not shameful. You are a perfect, beautiful human being. There is help and there are people available who want to listen.

  • What role does Scientology have in covering up sex crimes?

    What role does Scientology have in covering up sex crimes?

    Yesterday, Hollywood actor and Scientologist Danny Masterson was arrested and charged with raping three women.

    Two other women have alleged that Masterson raped them, but because of expired statutes of limitations and/or insufficient evidence, the LA District Attorney’s office declined to press charges.

    The victimization of these women did end at rape.

    From The New York Times:

    Tony Ortega, a former editor of The Village Voice, reported in 2017 that at least three of the women claimed they were pressured to keep quiet by the Church of Scientology, to which they and Masterson belonged. The Church of Scientology denied that it had pressured victims.

    The charges of pressure by the church were repeated in a lawsuit filed last year against Masterson and the church by four women who have accused Masterson of rape. A lawyer for the plaintiffs, Robert Thompson, said the criminal charges against Masterson are closely related to the accusations made in the lawsuit by the women who said that after they accused Masterson of sexual assault, people associated with the church had stalked, threatened and surveilled them as they spoke out about their allegations. Three of the women had been personally involved with the church. (emphasis mine)

    There are two things we need to know here. The first is the progression of criminal charges against Masterson. The allegations against him are horrible, and, if true, he must be held accountable.

    The second thing we should keep on our radar screens is the civil litigation against the Church of Scientology. It may be put on hold until Masterson’s criminal case in completed (but I hope not).

    We need to know the extent of the cover-up of abuse, rape, and harassment that goes on when a prominent Scientologist is accused of a crime. How many other victims of Scientologists have been harassed into fear and silence?

    How many other predators have been protected by Dave Miscavige (the self-appointed leader of the Church of Scientology) and his henchmen?

    If you want to report abuse in Scientology, it’s safe to come forward. You can do so anonymously. If you were abused, it is NOT your fault. If you are harassed by the Church of Scientology for speaking out, that’s a crime. The more people who speak up, the safer it will be for Scientology’s children, the vulnerable members of the SeaOrg, and the community at large.

    If you don’t know who to talk to, you can always reach out to me.

  • Colorado: Refusing to settle for a second rate law

    Colorado: Refusing to settle for a second rate law

    Legislative work can be complicated. Take my word for it. And sometimes the hardest decision to make is the best one: if a law protects predators, it’s not a good law.

    That is what happened in Colorado. And Colorado did the right thing.

    Yesterday, the sponsors of a potential law to help future victims of child sexual abuse decided to pull the bill. The move caused confusion and disappointment among advocacy groups, but the sponsors knew they had a solid reason.

    The pulled bill—Colorado HB 1296—only applied to survivors in the future. That’s called a “prospective” bill. What the bill didn’t do—and what sponsor state Senator Julie Gonzales realized was the essential element—was open the courthouse doors for past victims of abuse.

    Why is this so important?

    A damning report on the cover-up of sexual abuse in Colorado showed that for decades, Catholic Church officials knew that predator priests were targeting kids and did nothing, lied to parents and communities, or helped foster the abuse.

    The Special Masters Report was a bombshell, exposing 70 years of child sexual abuse in the state. Twenty-six new predators were exposed, and another 11 were described, but not named.

    In one of the cases, one of the most prolific Colorado predators—Fr. Harold White—wrote to the Denver archbishop while in treatment after abusing his ~25th victim. He told the archbishop he was considering giving up the priesthood. The archbishop, according to the report, “talked him out of it” (Page 133, ix). Instead, the archbishop sent White to Sterling, Colorado, a farming community on the eastern plains. He went on to abuse at least 38 more children throughout his career.

    White’s story is horrific. But what is worse is what we DON’T know. We don’t know who the 11 unidentified predator priests in the report are.

    We don’t know if there are predators still in ministry.

    We don’t know if there were priests, nuns, volunteers, or teachers removed from ministry or jobs for preying on kids, and then sent into YOUR community with a letter of recommendation and a smile.

    The only way we can find out—and protect children who are at risk RIGHT NOW—is to allow the victims from yesterday to use the courts to expose predators and cover-up.

    The vehicle to do that is called a “civil window,” and Gonzales is pulling her bill until she gets it.

    Do civil windows work?

    Yes.

    Right now (even in the midst of COVID and protests against racial injustice), civil windows are working for victims. New York, New Jersey, Arizona and California currently have active windows, and when the courts are open, dozens of predators (and cover-up) are exposed weekly. Hawaii’s recent civil window exposed dozens and dozens of predators across the state, including at the prestigious Punahou School.

    Many of the accused are still priests or religious or teachers or camp counselors or scout leaders, etc., in schools and communities and still active with children. Even if the predator is dead, the system that protected him/her still thrives.

    If you don’t expose those who cover-up and foster the evil, is there truly change? If survivors cannot expose the abusers among us right now, how are we keeping children any safer?

    A bill that ignores yesterday’s survivors is dangerous and gives a false sense of security to parents and community members. Plus, once a weak bill is passed, legislators seldom, if ever, want to go back and “fix things.”

    To expose predators and cover-up, we need to do it right.

    Colorado’s lawmakers did the hard—and correct—thing. And next year, we will get the bill that saves children, exposes predators, and stops the cover-up.