Orthodox Reform
August 27, 2007
http://orthodoxreform.org/cases/fr-nicholas-katinas/abuse-survivor-interviewed/
 |
Interview with 'DZ', whose reports of abuse by Fr. Nicholas Katinas led to Fr. Katinas' eventual suspension.
DZ: The reason I have decided to give an interview at this time is to attempt to clarify many of the misconceptions and misinformation that have been said or omitted by the GOAA, Metropolitan Isaiah and the media.
Question: Can you give us a timeline of the events after you reported the abuse?
DZ: First of all, I cannot refer to Nicholas Katinas as Father because in my eyes he is no longer a priest, regardless of what the GOAA and others may say. In the remainder of this interview, I will refer to him as NK.
In October, 2005, I filed an official complaint through the GOAA Hotline for Clergy Sexual Misconduct.
In March 2006, Fr. Michael Kontogiorgis visited me where I lived, and met with my therapist and me.
In March or April 2006, Fr. Kontogiorgis met with NK. Fr. Kontogiorgis told me that NK admitted to molesting me and a "small number of others."
In May, 2006, the GOAA sent NK to a week-long evaluative clinic in the Northeast with a comprehensive staff of clergy, psychiatrists and medical doctors. That's all I know about the clinic — Fr. Kontogiorgis wouldn't tell me anything else. The clinic made some recommendations that the GOAA concurred with and NK refused to follow any of them, according to Fr. Kontogiorgis.
In July 2006, the GOAA suspended NK.
After the suspension I asked Fr. Kontogiorgis when the GOAA was going to follow their Clergy Sexual Misconduct policy and disclose this information to the Dallas and Olympia Fields parishes. At this time (around October 2006), Fr. Kontogiorgis' response was that they were still investigating NK. However he never told me of what the investigation consisted. In Nov 2006, Fr. Kontogiorgis did tell me that another man had made some allegations about NK and Fr. Kontogiorgis was waiting to hear back from him.
Fr. Kontogiorgis told me the GOAA wanted to finish their investigation before making a Dallas announcement. Fr. Kontogiorgis said the GOAA was not planning on making an announcement at Olympia Fields, IL. I protested many times about this, to no avail. In Feb, 2007, I again asked Fr. Kontogiorgis about disclosing this info to the Olympia Fields church and this time Fr. Kontogiorgis stated there was some discussion on this topic with the higher authorities. But I have not heard anything else on this topic since then.
Question: Did the archdiocese offer you payment for counseling?
DZ: Not initially. They said they needed to perform a preliminary investigation before making a tentative offer.
My initial purpose for contacting the GOAA had been twofold:
- Inform the GOAA of the molestation and have GOAA hold NK accountable for his actions through some disciplinary actions, as well as following their clergy sexual misconduct policy to inform the local communities.
- Have the GOAA reimburse me for past and some estimated future therapy costs.
Question: So they would only reimburse you for counseling if you signed a release form so you wouldn't sue?
DZ: Yes, Father Michael said I had to sign a release form releasing the church from future liability. He also recommended I obtain a legal review of the release form before signing it. Finally he said "concurrently we will continue investigating NK so the therapy reimbursement is not dependent on the completion of the investigation."
Before Fr. Michael came out to visit me I had provided the GOAA with the names of two high school friends who knew about the abuse. I believe Fr. Michael had spoken to them both before his visit so by the time we met he was convinced that what I was saying was true. Then a month later he confronted NK and NK admitted to abusing me and "some others".
Question: How long did it take the GOAA to make you a concrete offer for counseling?
DZ: Ten months because I had retained a lawyer to negotiate the settlement and review the release form. The negotiations stalled, so my lawyer and I both decided it would be better for me to negotiate with the church directly. The direct negotiations concluded in January, 2007 with me signing a release form and receiving some reimbursement for therapy.
Question: Did the GOAA notify you when the suspension was made public in the Orthodox Observer several months later?
DZ: No, because at the time, I had legal representation and I was not communicating directly to the GOAA. The only communications were between my lawyer and the GOAA's lawyer. However, the GOAA lawyer never communicated the suspension to my lawyer. I read about the suspension on the GOAA website where it was listed in the Chancellor's Memorandum of August, 2006. In that memo, it only stated NK was suspended. No reason was given.
Question: I know you've seen the sermon Metropolitan Isaiah gave on May 27, 2007 to Holy Trinity in Dallas. He questioned whether Fr. Katinas was guilty of abuse. What are your thoughts on this?
DZ: There were two parts of Met. Isaiah's sermon that were very disturbing to me.
#1 Metropolitan Isaiah said he was very troubled "because of what happened here in regard to my friend and I always call on my friend, the fallen who has fallen away. If he did it, I don't know, I have no information. And all of us fall in other ways."
The phrase, "If he did, I don't know, I have no information." shocked me. To me that means either that the Archbishop and the Chancellor's Office have not communicated the reasons for NK's suspension to the Metropolitans or else Met. Isaiah forgot the facts that Fr. Michael presented in his February, 2007 visit to Holy Trinity. Otherwise, I have no idea how Met. Isaiah could make such a statement.
Fr. Michael came out in February, 2007 and said NK was suspended because of clergy sexual misconduct. For Metropolitan Isaiah to come out three months later and say "IF he did it," is totally humiliating and invalidates the pain that I and the other victims have endured over the years of hiding this dark secret; no wonder some victims are reluctant to come forward.
# 2 Met. Isaiah said, "Who are these victims? IF there are victims, they are 40 years old or older. You know who the victims are? Your children and your grandchildren who saw the news on television or read the newspapers."
What does the age of the victim have to do with the abuse? I was infuriated when I read this. How can Met. Isaiah say that Orthodoxy cares about victims and then make an unconscionable statement like this. Children who are abused as minors are victims for the REST OF THEIR LIVES, whether they have the courage to come forward when they're 20, 40, 60 or 80! Met. Isaiah has no idea how difficult it is for victims to come forward with their abuse in the public eye and face the judgment and wrath of those who don't believe it and won't believe it because the church hierarchy virtually tells them not to.
Intellectually I can understand why Met. Isaiah is feeling angry about this situation. I believe it's difficult for humans to believe that a person, especially a priest, who has done so much good for the community and has been a wonderful priest for the majority of the parish, the majority of the time, can also be the same person who has done horrible things to a minority of the parish – the victims. We humans like to put our leaders, especially our spiritual leaders, on pedestals so it's very difficult for most people to accept the fact that a seemingly good priest can also be a pedophile. That's why it takes victims sometimes decades to go public with the abuse, especially when the perpetrator is respected in the community as NK was. These events are difficult for an adult to grasp and even much harder for a child who has been abused.
With the truth coming out in public, everyone has been victimized to a certain extent – everyone has been betrayed. However, there is no reason why Met. Isaiah should invalidate the victims who did come forward. That is very hurtful and only divides the parish instead of trying to unite it in healing.
Metropolitan Isaiah's statements sabotage the healing in the community because it creates doubt about NK's guilt. Here is the Dallas parish — they see their priest that they love suspended. They don't know why he has been suspended, but many rumors spread from July, 2006 to Feb, 2007. Finally the assistant chancellor comes out and tells the parish why NK is suspended. Even after this announcement, there is a part of the parish that doesn't agree or believe it. Then a few months later, the Metropolitan visits and just throws more doubt on the state of affairs. It's just a horrible situation. I also am angry with the GOAA and Chancellor's office for NOT making a public statement correcting Met. Isaiah's comments. For me, the GOAA's silence results in their complicity in this matter. This just prolongs the healing and creates an adversarial environment.
Question: Do you think Fr. Katinas should be defrocked, and if so, why?
DZ: To me the priesthood is not like baseball where you have three strikes and you are out. There should be zero tolerance. You abuse one person and you should be removed from the priesthood – you should be defrocked. Sure, theoretically if the Patriarch defrocks a priest, he could reinstate him. But that's theoretical. I believe the church needs to be pragmatic.
Metropolitan Isaiah's comment was, "defrocking doesn't mean anything."
I respectfully disagree. Defrocking is a symbolic action that states the church no longer has trust in this individual to carry out the sacraments of God and Christ. For me, if the church defrocks NK, they are saying "you lost your privilege and your right to be a priest." If I and the other victims had the courage to come forward at the time when the abuse occurred when we were minors, there would have been criminal charges against NK. Unfortunately, the statute of limitations of Illinois and Texas protects NK against criminal prosecution today. Just as there is no statute of limitations on murder, there should be no statute of limitations for victims of child sexual abuse where men like NK "murder" their victims' souls.
Question: In your opinion, why did Fr. Katinas molest you and the other victims but not the other children with whom he worked?
DZ: I'm sure many people are wondering about this. All I can comment on is my situation. I was an altar boy in my early teens at the Assumption church in Olympia Fields, IL and personally met NK at that time. During my teens I was going through some difficult emotional times and didn't feel comfortable discussing them with my parents. So I turned to NK for help and counseling. At the beginning, NK was professional and provided pastoral counseling, but at one point, he crossed the line and molested me.
My belief is that pedophiles "choose" their victims based on the vulnerability of the child. I know I was emotionally very vulnerable and had developed a deep trust with NK when the abuse occurred. I would guess that the other victims were also in a vulnerable situation when their abuse occurred.
My understanding is that most pedophiles molest dozens of children before they are caught. I'm sure there are many more victims of NK who for whatever reasons are afraid to come forward.
Question: Many people have made statements along the lines that "these things happened more than 20 years ago. Fr. Katinas is an old man and no longer a threat." Do you think that's a safe assumption that because of these happened a long time ago he is no longer a threat?
DZ: I am not an expert on pedophilia and my guess is that most of the parish probably is not either. What I have read is that pedophilia is one of the hardest behaviors to control and to eliminate and so I don't know if NK is still active. However, even if he is no longer active, he should still be held accountable for his past actions.
The reason I came forward 33 years after being abused is because I felt that NK needed to be held accountable for his actions here on earth and I needed for this to happen before I die. Of course God will be the final judge when we die and go to our maker, but I felt I needed, for my own healing, to see some accountability while we are still alive. I know it's been difficult for his family and for the parishioners and it has been equally as difficult for my family, friends, the other victims' and their families too.
Question: Based on your experience dealing with archdiocese and the misconduct investigation that you had, what would your advice be to someone who has been a victim of clergy sexual misconduct and is thinking of approaching the Greek Orthodox Church?
DZ: I would say before contacting the church, be realistic on what you expect from the church. If you have expectations that the church is going to give you everything you feel you need to heal your wounds, then I believe you are going to be greatly disappointed.
For me, the church did perform a limited investigation, did suspend NK and did reimburse me for some therapy – I am grateful for that. However, my experience has been that the church is still too secretive about the investigative process, too lax in communicating to the parish and too passive in identifying other victims.
I still don't understand why the church did not communicate the reasons for the suspension immediately in July, 2006. They could have told the parish that an investigation was still pending, but there was enough evidence showing NK was guilty of clergy sexual misconduct. To my knowledge the GOAA still has not met with the Assumption parish in Olympia Fields, IL to clearly communicate the reasons for the suspension to them. Even though it has been almost 30 years since NK was a priest there, there are still many middle-aged and elderly parishioners who remember him and who deserve a live explanation.
In my opinion, this lack of timely communication by the GOAA resulted in many negatives. The GOAA took eight months before they told the Dallas parish and NK was still in contact with the parish children during most of that time. In addition, the GOAA did not publicly reach out to the parish, in a serious manner, to try to identify other victims in Dallas or Olympia Fields, IL. NK admitted to molesting "some others".
Question: Recently, news broke regarding Holy Trinity and the Denver Metropolis trying to expose to the public the names of John Doe I, II and III who have filed the lawsuit. What are your thoughts on this?
DZ: I feel very angry about this demand. It's humiliating to the victims to be forced to publicly provide their real names. In my understanding of the legal process the plaintiff's lawyer will divulge that information (the victims' names) to the defendants and their lawyers, but only in private, not publicly for the media to find out.
This demand was basically an attempt to re-victimize and re-traumatize the victims, to intimidate them so others will not come forward. I guess the church is really angry about the victims filing a lawsuit so the defendants have decided to play hardball. To me it seems like a real adversarial approach. It coincides with Metropolitan Isaiah's statement "If you want to fight, we will have a fight". In my opinion, it's the wrong way to deal with this issue. It's very disheartening. The church loses its sanctity and becomes just another corporation protecting its assets and denying its responsibility to those it serves.
Question: I understand you recently wrote an email to Father Michael lamenting about Metropolitan Isaiah's comments at the recent Holy Trinity sermon and that he had never offered to meet with you?
DZ: Yes. Met. Isaiah has minimized and invalidated the victims in his statements and sermons to the parish. However he has never tried to contact me and speak to me about the abuse.
In my email to Father Michael I said "If Metropolitan Isaiah had come to you and said 'Father Michael I would like to make contact with one of the victims' and Father Michael would have said 'Metropolitan Isaiah would like to speak to you — are you open to it' I would have said yes."
I'm sure I would have felt anxious about meeting him, but I would have listened to the man. But instead he just gets on his soapbox and talks about just because the victims are over 40 they aren't really victims because it happened so long ago. Met Isaiah doesn't comprehend that the longer the time that has surpassed from the abuse, the longer the suffering.
That's so un-Christ-like. If you're molested it will be with you for the rest of your life.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.