BishopAccountability.org
	Cardinal Egan Replies to Priests' Criticism of His Management with an Angry Letter By Andy Newman New York Times October 26, 2006 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/26/nyregion/26egan.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&o ref=slogin&ref=nyregion&adxnnlx=1161867885-lolTJFoA6Nyu1xchqGd4Ow Just when it seemed to be dying down, the dispute over an anonymous letter criticizing the management style of Cardinal Edward M. Egan has been revived by the cardinal himself in an angry letter he sent to all the priests in the New York Archdiocese. In his letter, sent Friday, Cardinal Egan said his critics were merely doing the bidding of sexually abusive priests who felt the archdiocese had treated them unfairly. In the interest of preventing further attacks on the church leadership, the cardinal decreed in the letter that sexually abusive priests would no longer be allowed to hide behind anonymity. Any priest who is found guilty by a church panel of sexually abusing a minor and is then "reported to be speaking untruthfully" about the church's justice process will be ordered to write a public apology or be tried again before another panel, which will make a public report about the statements. Because he is "confident that all cases of the sexual abuse of minors by priests that have been treated during my tenure have been handled properly," the cardinal wrote, "I have no doubt what the conclusion of the panel will be." Cardinal Egan's letter, first reported on Monday by the Roman Catholic blog Whispers in the Loggia, mentioned by name, twice, the one priest who has publicly stated that there was merit in the critical letter, which called the cardinal vindictive and arrogant with his subordinates and urged a no-confidence vote in him. The cardinal's letter had even some of Cardinal Egan's supporters in the priesthood suggesting yesterday — anonymously, of course, because they said they feared reprisals — that the Cardinal was only proving his critics right. A prominent priest in the archdiocese who said he had had mostly favorable relations with Cardinal Egan over the years, said, "I think he accomplishes nothing but to further rouse the disappointment and, quite frankly, animosity of the great majority of priests in the archdiocese," even those who had found the anonymous letter distasteful. He added, "It's a brittle, confrontational, legalistic reaction on his part." A veteran priest who has often criticized Cardinal Egan was more terse. "This is a disastrous situation," he said. "I don't think he's taking advice from anybody." Several priests said that not only priests judged abusive — there have been nine during Cardinal Egan's tenure — and their supporters have felt alienated. The cardinal's plan, laid out in his letter, to visit all the vicariates in the archdiocese in the coming months to speak on the new disciplinary policy would only make a bad situation worse, the prominent priest said. "By his own design, it's going to be dragged out on and on, and it's going to be very bad for the church in New York." The prominent priest said that a group of senior priests in the archdiocese were working on a face-saving solution that would allow the cardinal to gracefully "back off of what appears to be a disastrous course of action." He would not go into any detail. The original letter, signed by "A Committee of Concerned Clergy for the Archdiocese of New York" and posted on the Loggia blog on Oct. 11, was an attempt to rally priests against the cardinal and pressure the Vatican not to extend his tenure beyond his 75th birthday, next April. At 75, bishops must formally offer to retire, but the Vatican often lets them serve for months or years longer. Cardinal Egan has served since 2000. On Oct. 16, Msgr. Howard Calkins, pastor of Sacred Heart Church in Mount Vernon, was quoted in news reports as saying that most priests agreed with the letter's sentiment and that it originated in their feeling that the cardinal abandoned them after the sex abuse scandal broke in 2002. Also on Oct. 16, the cardinal met with a council of 40 senior priests in the archdiocese, who issued a strong statement of support for him. Yesterday, his spokesman, Joseph Zwilling, said the cardinal had sent the letter because the problem of abusive priests complaining about their treatment "needs to be addressed at this time, in light of the claims made around the letter and in the media that this has been motivated by discontent over the cardinal's not treating priests fairly who were accused." It is not clear, of course, where the majority of priests in the archdiocese really stand on Cardinal Egan. Several interviewed yesterday praised him both for calling out his detractors as abusive priests and for taking action against them. "He just wants to get the record clear from the way he sees it," said Msgr. John Servididio of St. Joseph's Church in Staten Island, "and I think a number of us see it in the same way." The Rev. John Bambrick, a priest in New Jersey who says he was abused as a youth by a priest in the New York Archdiocese and who is now an advocate for victims, said that while he had often felt frustrated by Cardinal Egan's lawyerly approach to the sex abuse scandal, the letter was a "brilliant move." "To use military language," Father Bambrick said, "someone shot a warning shot across his bow, and he's returning the volley — but I think he hit the hull." One parish priest in the Bronx, rather than taking sides in the dispute, pleaded for harmony. "I just wish it would all quiet down so we can go back to being priests," he said. "That's all."
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.