I was struck by the tepid press release from VOTF. VOTF could not find the voice to say that Fr. Gillespie allegedly offered to pay a 12-year-old girl and her mother for oral sex. Is a priest soliciting a 12-year-old girl for oral sex too much of a gritty reality for VOTF? Are they afraid that people will object to certain language?

On the other hand, leaders from SNAP and Bishopaccountability.org showed no such reticence as the Globe story below indicates.

As usual I have used yellow highlighting to emphasize parts of the Globe story and bold red to add my editorial comments.

The VOTF press release is followed by the Globe story.

For Immediate release

Voice of the Faithful Questions Churchs Appointments Process

It is unfortunate that the current process for assignments of pastors and priests to parishes continues to hamper efforts to ensure transparency and accountability in the Catholic Church. Reports this week in The Boston Globe illustrate how such practices may not be in the best interests of parishioners.

The Globe reported that Fr. Jerome Gillespie, who was alleged to have propositioned a mother and daughter at a restaurant while drunk, is now assisting in parishes on an interim basis. Like most such assignments, this one did not include prior notification to parishioners. As a result, parishioners do not know the results of the court-ordered evaluations of Fr. Gillespie or whether he was required to obtain treatment for his problems before the case was completed.

Such questions are serious ones the Archdiocese must be willing to address in order for community trust to be restored. Once again the situation raises the issue of how clerical appointments continue to be made without lay consultation and transparency. Without transparency and lay involvement, situations like this will continue to happen, said Robert Ott, President of the Boston Area Council of Voice of the Faithful.

Priests return to parish work angers advocates

Charges of alleged proposition dropped

The Rev. Jerome Gillespie was evaluated for alcohol and sexual problems.

By Michael Paulson

Globe Staff / April 26, 2008

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston is allowing the Rev. Jerome F. Gillespie to return to parish work, after a court dismissed charges that he drunkenly propositioned a 12-year-old girl and her mother in a Chelsea restaurant three years ago.

It seems that church officials have delegated difficult personnel evaluations to the courts. It seems that these same officials just dont have the stomach to police their own.

Victim advocates are irate, saying the archdiocese should have announced the decision before allowing Gillespie to return to work in parishes, and saying that Cardinal Sean P. OMalley should not allow someone accused of sexually propositioning a minor to serve in ministry.

They should be irate. God bless them for their holy anger. On the other hand, VOTF press releases are as passionless as an economic report from Soviet Russia.

But the archdiocese noted that not only were the charges dismissed, but that the priest submitted to court-ordered evaluations for alcohol, psychiatric, and sexual problems. Gillespie allegedly offered to pay the girl and her mother for oral sex; he was not accused of physical contact with either person.

At this time, Father Gillespie has satisfied all obligations to the court and has been determined fit to return to ministry, the archdiocese said in a statement. Father Gillespie is currently assisting parishes on an interim basis. It is expected that he soon will receive a formal assignment within the Archdiocese of Boston.

So, the archdiocese, using the passive voice, the only one they seem to have, says they are returning a priest accused of soliciting oral sex from a 12-year-old girl to serve in ministry. What about the bishops Charter? What about child safety? What about risk to other children? Keep the altar wine and your daughters and wives away from this guy.

In its statement yesterday, the archdiocese cited alcohol in describing the incident as inappropriate remarks he made while intoxicated.

Inappropriate!!! Dont you just love the euphemism? Soliciting a blow job from a 12-year old girl is inappropriate. Mama mia!

The archdiocese issued the statement in response to an inquiry from the Globe, which asked about Gillespies status after receiving a call from a victim advocate who reported receiving complaints from worshipers at a Lynnfield parish. They said that Gillespie had appeared, without announcement, to help at the church.

The advocate, David Clohessy, called the decision to restore Gillespie to ministry outrageous. Clohessy is the national director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests.

Thank God theres someone out there to tell it like it is. Go, David, go. Im not holding my breath for VOTFs national spokespeople to use such direct language.

Im saddened but not surprised that there was no announcement of this until prodded, Clohessy said. And the bottom line is, why take the risk? Many of the priests, nuns, bishops, and seminarians who molested us also blamed liquor. The words of John Paul II are ringing in my ear - theres no place in ministry for somebody who would harm the young - and there were no caveats about meeting the requirements of the criminal justice system.

Another advocate, Anne Barrett Doyle of Waltham-based Bishopaccountability.org, called the decision to allow Gillespie to go back to work as a priest shocking.

Cardinal OMalley is being dishonest to not inform parishioners, and hes potentially putting other children in harms way, she said. He is also mocking the popes message of healing and reconciliation.

Thank you, Anne Barrett Doyle.

The archdiocese responded by defending the cardinals commitment to protecting children.

As he reiterated as recently as last week, Cardinal Sean remains committed to doing everything possible to maintain safe environments in our parishes and our schools, said a spokeswoman for the archdiocese.

I guess it wasnt possible for the Cardinal to keep Fr. Gillespie out of ministry. What a church! Saints preserve us.

Gillespie, 58, was initially charged with offering to pay for sex, enticing a child under 16, assault, and accosting or annoying a person of the opposite sex after an incident on Jan. 25, 2005, at Floramos Fifth Avenue Restaurant & Lounge in Chelsea. At the time, Gillespie was the pastor of St. John the Evangelist Church in Swampscott; he resigned that post after the incident.

In 2005, most of the charges were dismissed, but Gillespie admitted sufficient facts, which is not the same as pleading guilty, to a charge of annoying or accosting a person of the opposite sex. A judge continued the case, without a finding, for two years, and said the case would be dismissed if Gillespie completed a substance abuse evaluation, underwent a comprehensive mental health evaluation and a sex offender evaluation, and completed any treatment recommended as a result of those evaluations, according to Jake Wark, a spokesman for Suffolk District Attorney Daniel F. Conley. Gillespie was also prohibited during this period from having contact with anyone under 18 without disclosing his case to a parent or guardian, Wark said.

The charge was dismissed in 2007, Wark said.

Gillespies attorney, Timothy P. ONeill of Hanify & King, said yesterday that Gillespie had admitted to having been under the influence at the time and that the police overcharged him in the first instance - the facts didnt warrant it. He said Gillespie was then cleared of any alcohol, mental health, or sexual abuse problems, and that, he deserves to be reestablished in ministry.

So attorney ONeill believes Gillespie deserves to be reestablished in ministry. Would ONeill want Gillespie to minister to ONeills wife or daughter?