Tag: Catholic Priests

Posted on

Archdiocese of Agaña enters a new, troubling era

Trials, Lawsuits, and Financial Strains

 

By Neil Pang

With Apuron’s canonical trial underway and a slew of civil lawsuits filed in Guam, the Catholic Church confronts new crises here and at the Vatican

 
With the Archdiocese of Agaña facing 13 lawsuits alleging child sexual abuse – and the real potential for additional suits to follow – the Catholic Church is preparing for what could be a drawn out and highly publicized exposure of alleged abuses and cover ups, as well as court ordered payouts possibly adding up to millions of dollars.

At the center of the current tumult are two interrelated events: the allegations of child sexual abuse leveled against local archdiocesan clergymen and the passage of Bill 326-33 into Public Law 33-187 that eliminated the statute of limitations in cases involving child sexual abuse.

Years of controversy

Contention and controversy were not new to the Archdiocese of Agaña prior to the May 17 statement made by Roy Quintanilla that alleged child sexual abuse against Archbishop Anthony Apuron.

For at least six years prior to Quintanilla’s accusation, Apuron often found himself the subject of news stories that intimately connected him to instances of alleged cover-ups of priests accused of abuse.

In 2010, Apuron was criticized by leaders of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) when it came to light that local priest Rev. Raymond Cepeda had been defrocked over allegations of abuse made against him. That revelation was exacerbated when, shortly thereafter, two other priests who served under the Archdiocese were found to be no longer engaged in public ministry after their ministerial authority had been permanently revoked due to allegations of sexual abuse.

According to Post files, Rev. Randolph “Randy” Nowak and Rev. Andrew “Andy” Mannetta were stripped of their ministerial authorities, in 2004 and 2002 respectively, over allegations of abuse that occurred off-island against individuals who were minors at the time.

SNAP had requested that Apuron follow in the steps of other dioceses and post a list of all priests accused of sexual abuse that had or currently did serve under the Archdiocese of Agaña. Apuron never complied with SNAP’s request.

In 2014, Apuron was again targeted by SNAP. The group, asserted that Apuron engaged in “dangerous” behavior when he knowingly allowed a clergyman, Rev. John Wadeson, accused of sexual abuse in Los Angeles, to minister in the Archdiocese of Agaña. Apuron denied prior knowledge of the accusations against Wadeson. Following the publication of molestation allegations by SNAP, Post files state that Wadeson was removed from the Archdiocese of Agana.

Apuron was also accused of mismanagement of multi-million dollar church assets when, in 2011, he filed a deed restriction on the Redemptoris Mater Seminary that certain legal opinions asserted essentially transferred control of the Yona property from the Archdiocese of Agaña to a nonprofit organization outside the purview of the church.

Then, in a seeming crescendo, Apuron himself was named in a series of child sexual abuse accusations starting with Quintanilla in May of 2016. Quintanilla, a former altar boy from the Agat parish where Apuron ministered in the 1970s, was followed by Doris Concepcion – the mother of Joseph A. Quinata, who admitted to her shortly before his death in 2005 of being sexually abused by Apuron in the late 1970s.

The two were joined by Walter Denton and Roland Sondia in June when they made similar accusations of abuse against Apuron.

Subsequent accusations have been made against other priests who served on Guam at various times in the past decades, including Rev. Louis Brouillard, Rev. Antonio Cruz (deceased), and Rev. David Anderson.

Save for a few videos and selfies published online from Rome in early summer and a prepared statement welcoming the appointment of his successor last month, Apuron has been unusually silent. All that is known is that he remains at the Vatican in Rome, where, according to Guam’s new archbishop, Michael Jude Byrnes, a canonical trial is now underway

According to clergy child sex abuse advocate Patrick J. Wall, Apuron could be the first Archbishop to survive a canonical trial.

“The new Archbishop [Byrnes] reported that the canonical trial of [former] Archbishop Apuron is underway,” Wall said in an email. “This is new ground in the modern world as no Bishop I am aware of who sexually abused children has ever finished a canonical trial. Archbishop Wesolowski died prior to the completion of his trial in Rome.”

Wesolowski was the former Holy See envoy to the Dominican Republic who was accused in 2013 of sexually abusing teenage boys and defrocked in 2014, according to the International Business Times. At the time, Wesolowski was the highest-ranking Vatican official ever to be investigated for sex abuse, and was the first top papal representative to receive a defrocking sentence.

Though Wesolowski was successfully laicized, or had his clerical status revoked, he died before standing trial for accusations of possessing child pornography, for which he faced a possible prison term.

Canonical trial

While survivors of alleged abuse continue to come forward in suits filed against the Archdiocese of Agaña and its clergymen, questions abound as to the current status of Apuron’s canonical trial in Rome.

Wall, who has extensive experience in the field of Catholic clergy abuse and is currently an advocate at Jeff Anderson and Associates, explained that the trial itself will proceed as follows:

First, a complaint is filed by the Promoter of Justice, what the church calls the prosecutor, at the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican office responsible for upholding the integrity of the Catholic Church.

The next step is where Wall says the trial likely is now. According to his explanation, the Vatican court will receive an answer to the complaint written by the Respondant’s canonical advocate.

Referring to statements made by Byrnes on Nov. 28 that the “initial phase” of Apuron’s trial had started, Wall said Byrnes had indicated that Apuron had received the written charge from the Promoter of Justice and that the next stage was discovery.

During the discovery phase, Wall explained that documents, depositions, and all relevant evidence would be exchanged.

Trial and determination by a panel of three Clerical Judges would follow with penalties up to and including dismissal from the clerical state. Additional “lower penalties” are also imposed at this time and, if applicable, the Pope would then need to assign Apuron to a monastery or some other appropriate location, according to Wall.

While it is unclear exactly what charges Apuron received from the Promoter of Justice, it is pertinent to note that, according to “The Norms of the motu proprio ‘Sacramentorum Sanctitatis Tutela’,” the 2001 letter by Pope John Paul II that amended the Code of Canon Law to include sexual abuse of a minor under 18 by a cleric among the new list of canonical crimes or “delicts” reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, canon law stipulates a 10 year statute of limitations on cases involving child sexual abuse that begins from the year the victim turns 18.

Regardless of what charges Apuron is presented with, the Code of Canon Law contains additional provisions under which Apuron could potentially be charged with other “grave delicts” and removed.

However, as indicated by Wall, the procedures outlined for canonical trials move slowly, and that any determination made following the discovery phase could take months to articulate. During that time, the secular courts will also have to move forward with their own proceedings, with or without Apuron’s presence.

Back on Guam

Of the 13 child sex abuse suits currently sitting in Guam’s courts, four name Apuron, six name Brouillard, one names Anderson, and another names Cruz.

While Apuron has maintained his innocence of the accusations made against him, Brouillard has openly admitted in written and video documentation that he abused at least 20 boys during his tenure on Guam in the 1960s and 70s. Anderson, who court documents state resides in the mainland U.S., has not been located, and Cruz is deceased.

Connecting Brouillard to the accusations of abuse is a foregone conclusion, but making the connection to Apuron, Anderson, the Archdiocese, any of the five unnamed insurance companies, or 45 unnamed individuals will be an uphill battle for attorney David Lujan, who must establish a preponderance of evidence in multiple cases for events that allegedly transpired decades prior.

As the plaintiff in the cases, Lujan will be tasked with the burden of proof. As legal sources explain, that burden tends to become increasingly difficult with the passage of time.

Further, there is an additional hurdle that could potentially obstruct proceedings.

Given the contentiousness with which these cases have been publicized and the reach that such publicity has had within Guam’s relatively small community, there is a reasonable chance that establishing an unbiased jury will prove difficult. In fact, a number of Superior Court of Guam judges have already recused themselves from some of the 13 cases filed for reasons of familiar relationship with individuals somehow tied to the cases.

According to Post files, Judge Anita Sukola went so far as to cite exposure to the case via the church she attends, as well as her personal relationship with Apuron, as grounds for her recusal.

A number of judges have already filed disqualification memoranda in the cases, according to Gloria Lujan Rudolph of the firm Lujan & Wolff, LLP.

Rudolph, an attorney with the firm that represents the 13 existing claimants, told the Sunday Post that, so far, “Judge Pro Tempore Ingles, Judges Perez, Cenzon, Iriarte, Lamorena, and Sukola have recused themselves from at least one of the child sex abuse cases against the Church.”

Rudolph added that her firm had agreed to give the Archdiocese extra time to respond to the complaints that have already been served.

Once the complaints have been answered and the jury trials commence, counsel will have to determine, as stipulated in each of the 13 suits, the sum of the general, special, and other damages, including attorney’s fees, that will comprise the plaintiffs’ request for relief.

While such a sum cannot be easily ascertained, Post files concerning the fate of former Guam priest Rev. Andrew Mannetta state that in January 2007, the Catholic Diocese of Honolulu reached an out-of-court settlement with Elton Killion, who accused Mannetta of sexually abusing him from 1997 to 2001 during a time that Killion was a minor. The church paid out $375,000.

While none of the current 13 suits are related or equivalent to Killion’s 2007 suit, if the $375,000 figure is used as a benchmark, then the Archdiocese of Agaña, as of now, could stand to lose upwards of $4.5 million and be forced to sell some of its more valuable, and contentious, properties to make those payments.

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Acitivists protest Vatican reaffirmation of gay priests ban

Activists for LGBTQ rights clap back at the Vatican’s decision to reaffirm its opposition to gay priests. The decision was made clear in a document on the priesthood by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Clergy, disappointing those who saw in Pope Francis a more inclusive approach to homosexuality.

 
By Josephine McKenna

Pope Francis (second from right) arrives to lead a mass for the Jubilee for Priests at St. Peter’s Square at the Vatican on June 3, 2016.

A Vatican decision to reaffirm its opposition to gay priests has angered activists who thought Pope Francis was changing Rome’s attitudes toward homosexuality.

In a new document on the priesthood, the Vatican’s Congregation for the Clergy reiterated a 2005 statement declaring that men with “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” or those who “support the so-called ‘gay culture’” cannot be priests.

“Pope Francis has a lot of explaining to do by approving the newest Vatican instruction,” said Francis DeBernardo, executive director of New Ways Ministry, which campaigns for LGBT rights in the church.

“Francis’s famous ‘Who am I to judge?’ statement in 2013 was made in response to a question about gay men in the priesthood,” DeBernardo said. “That response indicated very plainly that he did not have a problem with a gay priest’s sexual orientation.

“It’s not too late for the pope to retract this document.”

The new document noted that the church’s policy on gay priests has not changed since the last Vatican pronouncement on the subject in 2005.

Many have been hoping for a new approach from the church toward gay priests because of Francis’s statements and the fact that he has gay friends and has spoken against bias toward gays.

The pope has even used the label “gay” rather than the more clinical term “homosexual” that many church officials view as less likely to appear to approve a gay orientation.

“This document is extremely disappointing in its approach to gay men called to be priests,” said Marianne Duddy-Burke, executive director of DignityUSA, an organization of Catholics committed to equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.

“These guidelines are a tremendous insult to the thousands of gay men who have served and continue to serve the church with honor and dedication,” she said. “They undermine decades of commitment by these men, and they fail to acknowledge that God calls a great variety of people to the priesthood.”

The document, titled “The Gift of the Priestly Vocation,” was published on Thursday, December 8, but was posted online earlier. It covers many aspects of the priesthood, only touching on the subject of sexuality on a few pages toward the end of the lengthy report.

It includes several quotes from Pope Francis and excerpts from the writings of St. Pope John Paul II and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.

The document says that “the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called ‘gay culture.’”

It says such people are “in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women.

“One must in no way overlook the negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies.”

In an interview with L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican daily newspaper, Cardinal Beniamino Stella, head of the Congregation for the Clergy, said the guidelines for training priests needed to be “revamped” to take into account developments in society and the pope’s concerns about the priesthood.

He said special attention was given to Francis’s concerns about “temptations tied to money, to the authoritarian exercise of power, to rigid legalism and to vainglory” among clerics.

The document also emphasizes the need for dioceses and religious orders to guard against admitting potential sex abusers to the priesthood.

“The greatest attention must be given to the theme of the protection of minors and vulnerable adults,” the document says, “being vigilant lest those who seek admission to a seminary or a house of formation, or who are already petitioning to receive Holy Orders, have not been involved in any way with any crime or problematic behavior in this area.”

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Vatican reiterates that homosexuals shouldn’t be priests

File Under:  The Cow Has Already Left The Barn!

 

A Church that refuses to accept women as priests will also negate gay priests. Misogyny is a sin.

 
By Inés San Martín

Priests wait for the start of a mass celebrated by Pope Francis on the occasion of the homeless jubilee in St. Peter’s Basilica, at the Vatican, Sunday, Nov. 13, 2016.
In a new document on the priesthood, the Vatican’s Congregation for Clergy has reiterated that men with “deeply rooted homosexual tendencies” shouldn’t be admitted to Catholic seminaries and, therefore, shouldn’t become Catholic priests. Much more is also found in the new document.

 
ROME- In a new document on the priesthood, the Vatican’s Congregation for Clergy has reiterated that men with “deeply rooted homosexual tendencies” shouldn’t be admitted into Catholic seminaries and, therefore, shouldn’t become Catholic priests.

That position was initially stated by the Congregation for Catholic Education in 2005, but it was re-stated in a document released on Wednesday.

The new document, however, is hardly restricted to the question of gay priests. It deals with much more, from the value of indigenous and immigrant vocations to the importance of inoculating future priests against infection by “clericalism.”

The new text, titled The Gift of the Priestly Vocation, was dated Thursday, December 8, feast of the Immaculate Conception, and a public holiday in Italy. The full text can be found here.

The section regarding accepting men who experience same-sex attraction draws most of its content from an Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders, released by the Congregation for Catholic Education in 2005 shortly after the election of emeritus Pope Benedict XVI.

“If a candidate practices homosexuality or presents deep-seated homosexual tendencies, his spiritual director as well as his confessor have the duty to dissuade him in conscience from proceeding towards ordination,” the document released this week says, in a direct quote from the text of eleven years ago.

Just like the previous document was approved by Benedict XVI, the one released this week was approved by Pope Francis. However, in neither case were the documents signed by the pontiff, but by the heads of the Vatican department behind it.

In this case, that means Italian Cardinal Benamino Stella, prefect of the congregation, Archbishop Joel Mercier, Archbishop Jorge Carlos Patron Wong, and Monsignor Antonio Neri.

The document says when it comes to gay men who want to enter the seminary, or discover they have “homosexual tendencies” during the formation years, the Church, “while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called ‘gay culture.’”

It also says that the Church can’t overlook the “negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies.”

The document, again, taking much of its content from the one issued in 2005, makes an exception for the cases in which the “homosexual tendencies” are only “the expression of a transitory problem – for example, that of an adolescence not yet superseded.”

In any case, however, the norms indicate that such tendencies have to be overcome at least three years before the ordination to the diaconate.

Since the 2005 document stipulating that men with ‘deep-seated homosexual tendencies’ are ineligible for the priesthood, many seminaries and programs of formation in religious orders have interpreted its language to exclude only candidates incapable of celibacy or deeply committed to gay-rights activism, as opposed to a blanket ban on all gay candidates.

It remains to be seen how the recently issued guidelines will be applied.

According to the text’s introduction, the more than 90-page document was prompted by several facts, including the teachings of the last three popes- Francis and his immediate predecessors- who have written extensively on seminarians and priestly formation.

The first draft of the document was written in the spring of 2014, and since then modified with the feedback received from several bishops conferences around the world, that read and reviewed it, along with that of Vatican departments such as the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic life, and so on.

Although there are a handful of exceptions, the new guidelines have a global scope, meaning, they’re to be implemented not only by bishops’ conferences but also by religious orders and personal prelatures. However, each country is also expected to produce their own national guidelines grounded in The Gift of the Priestly Vocation.

Here are some of the other highlights from the Dec. 8 document.

First, the text stresses the importance of nurturing indigenous vocations to the priesthood, meaning priests who come from the various local cultures where the Church is present.

“The very presence of such vocations is an important element of the inculturation of the Gospel in these regions,” it says, “and the richness of their culture must be adequately respected.”

“Vocational assistance can be provided in the native language whenever necessary, placing this in the context of the local culture,” the document says.

Second, the document emphasizes the value of vocations arising from within immigrant communities.

“Vocations to the priesthood can arise from within these families,” it says, referring to migrant families, “which must be accompanied, keeping in mind the need for a gradual cultural integration.”

It adds that formation of migrant priests must be done “without underestimating the challenge of cultural differences, which can, at times, make vocational discernment rather complex.”

Third, the document emphasizes that the ultimate aim of any program of priestly formation must be configuration of the candidate to the example of Jesus Christ.

“Priestly ordination requires, in the one who receives it, a complete giving of himself for the service of the People of God, as an image of Christ the spouse,” it says. “The priest therefore is called to form himself so that his heart and life are conformed to the Lord Jesus.”

Fourth, the document calls for a “propadeutic stage” of formation, meaning an introduction to the calling to the priesthood, in part a reflection of the fact that many cultures no longer automatically transmit a sense of the meaning and role of a priest, suggesting that this introductory phase should be at least one or two years.

It specifies that this introductory period should include the sacramental life, learning the Liturgy of the Hours, familiarity with Scripture, mental prayer, spiritual reading, and also study of Church teaching through the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Fifth, on the other end of the spectrum, the document also calls for more attention to ongoing formation, meaning the formation of priests after ordination.

“One must constantly feed the fire that gives light and warmth to the exercise of ministry,” it says, “remembering that the ‘heart and form of the priest’s ongoing formation is pastoral charity,’” quoting St. Pope John Paul II’s 1992 document Pastores Vobis.

Sixth, the document calls on local bishops to play a direct role in both soliciting and shaping vocations to the priesthood.

“The bishop should know how to establish a trustful dialogue with seminarians, so as to enable them to be sincere and open,” it says, recalling that “it is the bishop who is primarily responsible for admission to the seminary and formation to the priesthood.”

Seventh, the document says that dioceses and religious orders must be on guard not to admit potential sexual abusers to the priesthood.

“The greatest attention must be given to the theme of the protection of minors and vulnerable adults,” it says, “being vigilant lest those who seek admission to a seminary or a house of formation, or who are already petitioning to receive Holy Orders, have not been involved in any way with any crime or problematic behavior in this area.

Eighth and finally, in a vintage Pope Francis touch, the document also insists that future priests be inoculated against infection by “clericalism.”

“Future priests should be educated so that they do not become prey to ‘clericalism,’ nor yield to the temptation of modeling their lives on the search for popular consensus,” it says.

“This would inevitably lead them to fall short in exercising their ministry as leaders of the community, leading them to think about the Church as a merely human institution.”

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Priest in child porn case had been vetted by Rome on prior sex abuse claim

The Rev. Kevin Gugliotta, seen at left in a police mugshot and at right in a portrait for the Archdiocese of Newark, was arrested on child pornography charges in October. He is being held in lieu of $1 million cash bail.
The Rev. Kevin Gugliotta, seen at left in a police mugshot and at right in a portrait for the Archdiocese of Newark, was arrested on child pornography charges in October. He is being held in lieu of $1 million cash bail.

By Mark Mueller

Thirteen years ago, amid allegations he molested a 16-year-old boy, the Rev. Kevin Gugliotta was suspended from ministry in New Jersey, his case referred to the Vatican for guidance because of an unusual circumstance.

When the alleged sex assaults occurred in the mid-1980s, Gugliotta wasn’t yet an ordained Catholic priest. He was a private-sector engineer and Boy Scout leader.

In the eyes of the Vatican, the distinction appeared to be a critical one, regardless of the case’s merit.

A spokesman for the Archdiocese of Newark told NJ Advance Media last week the Vatican ruled that church law, known as canon law, prevented Gugliotta from being punished for something he might have done as a layman. In December 2004, he was quietly reinstated, free of restrictions on his ministry, and served for years in various parishes, including a long stint as chaplain to a youth group.

That decision, which was not widely disclosed, is now being questioned by his accuser and others in the wake of Gugliotta’s arrest in October on 40 counts of possessing and disseminating child pornography.

Gugliotta, 54, remains jailed in Pennsylvania in lieu of $1 million bail, a spokeswoman for the Wayne County District Attorney’s Office said. He is accused of using a computer at his vacation home in Lehigh Township, Pa., to download and share images and videos of children involved in sex acts.

The man who accused him of sexual abuse in 2003 said he was unaware of the Vatican’s ruling on Gugliotta, calling it “mind-blowing” that the decision appeared to be based on a technicality.

The accuser, who did not file a lawsuit or seek money from the archdiocese, questioned how the church could allow a potential threat into its parishes, particularly so soon after the clergy sexual abuse crisis exploded into national view two years earlier, in 2002.

Greg Gianforcaro, a lawyer who facilitated the accuser’s testimony before a board of church investigators in 2003, put the onus on the archdiocese. Even if Archbishop John J. Myers could not bar Gugliotta from serving as a priest under canon law, Gianforcaro argued, Myers could have at least placed him in a position away from children.

“When does common sense take over, and what about the concern for children?” Gianforcaro asked. “That’s crazy.”

Myers’ spokesman, Jim Goodness, said the archdiocese forwarded the case to Rome after it had “looked into the matter seriously.”

“Since the allegations dealt with a time frame before he was a priest, there was nothing canonically the church could do,” Goodness said, adding that he was unaware of any additional abuse claims against Gugliotta. “All I can say is the direction that was given to us by Rome is that no penal action could be taken.”

Such decisions are made by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, then headed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who would become Pope Benedict XVI in 2005.

The Rev. James Connell, a canon lawyer in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee and a prominent advocate for victims of clergy sexual abuse, said the Vatican appeared to act appropriately under canon law in determining Gugliotta could not be punished for alleged wrongdoing that occurred before he was an ordained priest.

At the same time, Connell said, Vatican officials should consider amending church laws to eliminate what he characterized as a loophole that could allow potential abusers to remain in the priesthood.

“That’s worth looking at,” he said.

Connell was more forceful in suggesting Myers could have taken action to restrict Gugliotta’s ministry. Under canon law, he said, bishops have a free hand to assign priests where they see fit.

“The bishop of the diocese has a responsibility to be watching out for the care of all the people,” Connell said. “If he knows technically nothing can be done, morally something should be done, so he is not in a spot where someone could be hurt.”

One of Gugliotta’s former pastors — the Rev. John Paladino of St. Bartholomew the Apostle Parish in Scotch Plains, where Gugliotta worked with the youth group for eight years — stopped short of criticizing the archdiocese, but he said he believed he should have been told about the man’s past.

“I had no idea,” Paladino said. “As a pastor, I would want to know something like that.”

Critics of the archbishop say his handling of Gugliotta represents another misstep for Myers, who has previously been criticized for the manner in which he has managed priests accused of sexual abuse. Myers, whose retirement has been accepted by Pope Francis, is due to be replaced by Cardinal Joseph W. Tobin of Indianapolis in January.

“To me, it’s unconscionable that they allowed him to remain a priest without restrictions,” said Mark Crawford, the New Jersey director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, an advocacy and support group. “And then to allow him to be a youth minister? How reckless was that?”

Gugliotta, a nationally ranked poker player who has regularly competed in tournaments around the country, was arrested at a Toms River home Oct. 21. He was extradited to Pennsylvania last month.

The priest’s criminal defense lawyer, James Swetz, did not return a call seeking comment.

Ordained in 1996, Gugliotta has worked at St. Rose of Lima parish in Short Hills, St. Elizabeth of Hungary Church in Wyckoff, St. Joseph’s Church in West Orange, St. Bartholomew in Scotch Plains and Immaculate Conception Church in Mahwah, where he served as pastor for little more than a year before requesting a transfer in the summer of 2016.

Goodness said the request was not in response to controversy of any kind.

“He expressed that he no longer felt he wanted to be a pastor, but he still wanted to remain in ministry,” the spokesman said.

The priest had been at his latest assignment, Holy Spirit Church in Union Township, for about a week when he was charged in the child pornography case.

Gugliotta was never charged in connection with the abuse allegations that date to the mid-1980s. The accuser, whose name is being withheld by NJ Advance Media because he is an alleged victim of sexual assault, said he reported it to the Essex County Prosecutor’s Office in March of 2003, the same month he first reached out to the archdiocese.

The man, now a 46-year-old married father of two in Union County, said he was told the case could not be prosecuted because it was beyond the statute of limitations.

In a detailed letter given to the Archdiocesan Review Board — a panel that investigates sex abuse claims — and in testimony before the board in October 2003, the man said Gugliotta was a close family friend who lived near him in Newark and and who served as his troop leader in the Boy Scouts.

Beginning in 1986, he said, Gugliotta repeatedly fondled him against his will at Scout events, at his home and on family vacations. He said Gugliotta also once spied on him through his bedroom window as he masturbated.

On another occasion, the man said, Gugliotta hid in his room quietly, apparently hoping to catch him masturbating.

The accuser said Gugliotta eventually confessed to him that he was gay and that he loved him. When the man tried to avoid contact, Gugliotta continued to stalk him into his late teens, he said, at one point showing up unannounced at his college in Pennsylvania.

The man said he felt compelled to come forward in 2003 because he realized he was keeping a secret for the wrong reason and because he wanted to protect others.

“I was not asking for or looking for any reward from the archdiocese,” he said. “I just wanted solely to keep him out of a position of power where he could abuse others.”

He said he was speaking up again now because the archdiocese, despite the child pornography charges, had remained silent about the previous abuse claims until questioned by NJ Advance Media.

Crawford, of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, echoed that criticism.

“They have said, in their words, they have a responsibility to be open and honest and transparent with the faithful and to put kids before the institution,” he said. “Clearly they failed at all levels here.”

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Jury finds priest guilty in molestation case

By

After a two-day trial and two hours of deliberations, a Meade County jury found Louisville Catholic priest Joseph Hemmerle guilty Tuesday of one count related to sexually molesting a young boy in a summer camp in the 1970s.

Hemmerle, 74, a former Trinity High School teacher, was convicted on one of two counts of immoral or indecent practices with a child following his 2014 indictment on charges of sex abuse and sodomy.

Rev. Joseph Hemmerle
Rev. Joseph Hemmerle

His accuser, Michael Norris, 53, of Texas, had testified that at Camp Tall Trees near Otter Creek Park in 1973, Hemmerle told him to report to his cabin one night to treat poison ivy. Hemmerle told him to strip and stand on a stool before touching him sexually with his hands and mouth, he said.

After the jury foreman read the verdict after 5 p.m. Tuesday, Norris broke out in tears and sobs as he hugged family members who came out to support him, including his mother and wife. Hemmerle just stared straight ahead.

“I feel vindicated,” Norris said, noting it had been 15 years since he first reported it to the church and police. “That jury had the same evidence that the Catholic church had in 2001.”

Norris alerted the archdiocese and Kentucky State Police in 2001 of the incident, but no charges were brought until another accuser from the camp came forward in 2014. His name hasn’t been made public but that trial is set for next April.

In closing arguments in a case that largely boiled down to Norris’ word against Hemmerle’s, defense attorney David Lambertus tried to paint Norris as an attention-seeker who had concocted the story. He said adult oversight at the camp made his story unlikely.

“He was starved for attention,” he said. “He’s gotten plenty out of this.”

But prosecutors noted that Hemmerle admitted to applying poison ivy lotion to some boys genitals, and said Norris had no motivation other than justice for coming forward after “years of suffering.”

“What does he have to gain from telling his story other than getting to the truth?” said Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Jeremy Logsdon.

Camp Tall Trees in Otter Creek Park, run by the Archdiocese of Louisville until 2002. Hemmerle was a director at the camp from 1970 to 2001.

Earlier Tuesday, Lambertus called a half dozen witnesses including former counselors who said children were closely monitored. They weren’t allowed to walk around unaccompanied in the evening except to go to the latrine or an activity. But none had direct knowledge or supervision of Norris.

Those testifying included former Kentucky Lt. Gov. Steve Pence, now an attorney who worked as a counselor at Camp Tall Trees in 1973, the year Norris said the abuse took place.

“Kids were not simply allowed to roam in the evenings,” he said.

Hemmerle, wearing a sweater and eyeglasses, took the stand after 11 a.m.  He told the jury that he didn’t have his own cabin, as Norris had contended, but rather had a room in an administration building. He said he sometimes treated boys with poison ivy, including putting medical lotion on their genitals, but in the infirmary and always asking permission first.

“Do you want to put the Calamine lotion on or do you want me to do it,” he said he’d ask them.

He said he didn’t remember Norris. Asked if he did anything improper with Norris, he said, “No. Absolutely not. There is no doubt in my mind at all.”

Logsdon said Norris’ recollection “isn’t stuff you make up,” and said that “even in the 1970s, you’re not going to touch someone else’s kid’s genitals. It’s not appropriate whatsoever.”

Norris did not join the slew of plaintiffs who sued the archdiocese in the early 2000s, alleging sexual abuse by dozens of priests. The archdiocese settled a class action lawsuit with 243 plaintiffs in 2003 for more than $25 million.

David Clohessy, director of SNAP, a support group for victims of clergy abuse, issued a statement praising the men for coming forward and for prosecutors taking on the cases. His groups urged others with information about such abuse to come forward, acknowledging it takes “real courage.”

“Child sex abuse cases are very hard. They’re even harder when defendants are well-educated priests backed by powerful church officials,” he said.

Hemmerle, a native of the California neighborhood who attended the old St. Benedict Catholic Elementary School, taught religion at Trinity after his ordination in 1967, the Courier-Journal reported in 2002. He also coached wrestling and track teams, and directed the now-closed boys’ camp from 1971 until about 2001.

Since 2003, after being allowed to return to the ministry following the first accusation, Hemmerle has served as pastor of Holy Cross and St. Francis of Assisi, both near Loretto, Ky., archdiocese officials said. He was put on leave but said in court he had retired.

In the sentencing phase that came after the verdict, the jury recommended seven years, though prosecutors said a single count could carry as many as 10 years in prison. Hemmerle was released on bond pending a final sentencing hearing on Feb. 9.

Complete Article HERE!