BishopAccountability.org
	Full Disclosure Still Needed in Priest Scandal By Michael King Milwaukee Journal Sentinel May 14, 2007 http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=605112 The old black and white photo has been hanging forgotten in my home office for years. It shows my first communion class, posing in front of the ornate alter in our parish church. There are 36 third-graders in the photo, a typical class size in those baby boom days. We boys are dressed in crisp white shirts and bow ties, the girls in poufy white dresses and lace veils. We all have our hands folded piously in front of us. Standing near me in the back row is the parish's young associate pastor. In 2004, a priest with his name as I remembered it from my childhood appeared on the list of 29 living priests that the Milwaukee archdiocese had restricted from all priestly ministries because of at least one substantiated instance of sexual abuse of a child. When I first read the name on the archdiocese's Catholic Herald Web site, I assumed that it was the priest I knew. The list contained no further information on what year he was ordained, what parishes he had served and certainly no information on the crimes he had committed. After few weeks of Google searches and talking to long-time parishioners, I came across a copy of a parish directory from my church about the time I made my first communion. To my great relief, it showed that the name of the young priest I remembered was slightly different from the one that appeared on the Catholic Herald Web site. Two priests: one, a sexual predator, the other, an innocent parish priest. The entire episode brought into focus for me how, more than five years after the clergy abuse scandal came to light, the Milwaukee archdiocese has still not made a good faith effort to inform its parishioners and the public of the full extent of the crimes committed by its priests. Under Archbishop Timothy Dolan, the archdiocese has apologized repeatedly and profusely for its sins and has implemented a mediation and therapy program to address the needs of the innocent victims of clergy sexual abuse. However, it seems that the archdiocese's main effort has been to control the information available on criminal priests in order to limit its legal and financial exposure. While this may be a sound legal and public relations strategy, it is not the complete and full accounting that I believe it owes the average parishioner. The recent court-ordered release of more than 3,000 documents in the high-profile California case of former priest Siegfried Widera offered a rare glimpse into the decadeslong effort by past bishops and other diocesan officials to cover up crimes against children and to protect criminal priests. But information on the dozens of other cases is non-existent. While I certainly agree that the need to protect the identities of victims is the top priority in these cases, the archdiocese shouldn't use that as an excuse to continue to hide the facts and its own culpability in those other cases. As the scandal winds down, the archdiocese should make a final, full disclosure of each substantiated case of priest child abuse public. This would serve to bring this sad episode to full closure for the parishioners who will bear the financial and emotional burden of this scandal for years to come. It would also clear up any confusion that might cloud the reputations of the archdiocese's vast majority of innocent, honorable priests, like the young associate pastor I knew, who may have suffered guilt by association with the few criminals in their ranks. The third-graders in that old photo had faith in their priests and in their church. A full disclosure by the archdiocese could help restore that faith. Michael King lives in Greendale. His e-mail address in Kingwrites@aol.com
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.