BishopAccountability.org
	Archbishop Faced Controversy before Sex Abuse Case By Tim Klass Tri-City Herald May 18, 2009 http://www.tri-cityherald.com/1154/story/582368.html SEATTLE As Roman Catholic archbishop of Seattle from 1975 to his retirement in 1991, Raymond G. Hunthausen was no stranger to controversy, but sex abuse by priests was not one of the reasons. He withheld part of his income taxes in opposition to the stockpiling of nuclear weapons, and his wages were garnisheed by the Internal Revenue Service. Critics accused him of being lax on issues involving homosexuality, and of allowing Catholic hospitals to perform surgery for contraceptive sterilization in contradiction to church teachings. A Vatican investigation led to the appointment in 1985 of an auxiliary bishop, Donald W. Wuerl, who was made responsible for some administrative functions. Hunthausen protested. Wuerl, now cardinal of Washington, D.C., was reassigned to Pittsburgh two years later and Hunthausen's full authority was restored. None of that was mentioned Monday in King County Superior Court when Hunthausen became one of the highest ranking members of the Catholic hierarchy to testify in a lawsuit over sex abuse. The case, the first abuse lawsuit against the archdiocese to go to trial after more than 200 settlements, centers on Patrick G. O'Donnell, a former priest who was sent to Seattle in 1976-78 for deviancy treatment after molesting adolescent boys in Spokane. O'Donnell apologized during his testimony last week. He told the court he couldn't remember how many boys he abused - "I'm pretty sure it was 30, maybe more." Now 87 with thinning white hair, slightly hunched and relying on a cane as he was aided partway to the witness box by archdiocese lawyer Michael A. Patterson, Hunthausen testified in a clear voice that he never was told O'Donnell was an abuser and that he had little recollection of other priests he learned were molesting adolescent boys over the same period. Abuser priests typically were sent for counseling and other treatment, often by specially trained priests, and the church relied on the recommendations of those experts before reassigning the abusers back to the ministry, although a number went on to molest more boys in parish after parish. General understanding of the nature of child sex abuse as a crime and a predilection has advanced substantially since the 1970s, Hunthausen testified. "I'm not somewhat sure the general public was as aware of that as they are today," he said. "It's not that I didn't think it was a crime," he said. "That wasn't in the forefront of my consciousness in dealing with it." Of about 3,000 sex abuse claims against the U.S. Catholic church since the early 1980s, only about 30 have gone to trial, and "to have an archbishop testify at a trial is extremely rare," said Anne Barrett Doyle, clerk of BishopAccountability.org. One high-ranking prelate who has taken the witness stand to answer questions before jurors in cases tied to the clergy sex abuse scandal is Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles. The late Archbishop John R. Roach of St. Paul and Minneapolis testified in similar cases while he was archbishop in 1990 and 1994. Patterson has insisted that no one in authority in the Seattle archdiocese was told or had reason to believe that O'Donnell molested boys before he came to Seattle, nor did anyone report suspicions or accusations of abuse until long after he returned to Spokane. Hunthausen testified that his close friend of about 50 years and former college teacher and mentor, the late Spokane Bishop Bernard J. Topel, never told him O'Donnell was a serial child abuser. Nor could the retired archbishop explain why he granted O'Donnell full powers of ministry in the archdiocese without the usual documentation required of priests who temporarily move to another diocese - apparently the only time that happened while he was archbishop. "It was a breach on my part," Hunthausen said. "It's hard to acknowledge that now. It hurts me." Based on a telephone conversation between Topel and Msgr. John Doogan, the archdiocese chancellor at the time, Hunthausen said he believed O'Donnell was in Seattle to attend the University of Washington. O'Donnell earned a doctorate in education during his time in Seattle. Hunthausen said he saw no need for a background check, interview or other investigation of O'Donnell. "The assumption was that he was a priest in good standing because of my relationship with Bishop Topel," he said. "Your best friend sent a pedophile to your diocese without telling you anything?" asked Michael T. Pfau, a lawyer for the plaintiff. "That's what it amounts to," the archbishop said. Even though O'Donnell was "one of Spokane's most dangerous sex offenders?" the lawyer continued. "Yes, that's why it hurts so much," Hunthausen said. "I definitely feel that he should have told me," he said in response to a question from Patterson. "I have struggled with why." Judge Paris K. Kallas read a question from a juror asking whether Topel, even "in last rites" before he died in 1986, ever told the archbishop that he knew O'Donnell was a child molester. "No, he did not," Hunthausen said. Earlier Monday, the eight-woman, four-man jury learned one of the two plaintiffs in the case had settled. Patterson said the man accepted about $550,000, the same amount he was offered about three months ago in arbitration. Combined with earlier settlements with the Spokane Diocese and a religious order that operated the seminary where O'Donnell was trained as a priest, the man is receiving close to $1 million, said Timothy D. Kosnoff, another lawyer for the plaintiffs. The remaining plaintiff is unlikely to accept a settlement, Kosnoff said. "He wants to see this all the way through to the end ... and that means a decision by the jury," the lawyer said.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.