BishopAccountability.org
	Excerpts from Bishop Cullen's Grand Jury Testimony Morning Call September 11, 2011 http://www.mcall.com/news/local/mc-excerpts--20110910,0,1285254.story#loop Bishop Edward Cullen being questioned by Philadelphia Deputy District Attorney Charles F. Gallagher, Nov. 14, 2003 . Gallagher: And the protection of children has to be of paramount concern to the people of the Roman Catholic Church, correct? Cullen: Yes Gallagher: Well, why didn't they take a stand-up position with regard to and say: You know what. Even if the legislators in Harrisburg aren't going to protect children, we're going to do it, and we're not going to let our own people continue to commit crimes if we have information that we want to provide? I mean, is that too much to ask, bishop, because I really don't think it is? Cullen: I think the church has taken that position today. Gallagher: The church. Cullen: Clearly, more than any other institution in the country, but I think the position you are asking the church to take then is the position – that the church took then, is the position that every church took in the United States. It wasn't out of step. It was part of the culture. Gallagher: So you're saying the church throughout the whole United States was wrong? Cullen: I was saying by – when you say wrong and right, I don't know what you mean. Gallagher: They were wrong because they didn't report this to law enforcement. Cullen: They didn't have to report it to law enforcement. Gallagher: I don't care what they had to do or what they didn't have to do. Excuse me bishop. Cullen: Yes Gallagher: Let me calm down. Cullen: That's all right. Gallagher: "I don't care what they had to do or what they didn't have to do as far as the dictates of the law. The dictates of the Catholic church, the dictates of their conscience, the dictates of what is right and what is wrong, why didn't they call law enforcement and say: We got a pedophile on our hands and we need law enforcement to take him off the streets." Cullen: That's – I think that's a very – Gallagher: I'm sorry I raised my voice. Cullen: Oh, no, no no, I understand. That's a very delicate topic. I'm just saying when you ask about the Catholic church, that is what all --that is modus operandi of how things were handled in those days, and it wasn't just the Catholic church. It was all the churches. Gallagher: Well, let me ask you this. Cullen: And I think it's – I think it's better the way they do it today. Gallagher: Why did the Catholic Church listen to their lawyers telling them that this is the law instead of looking into their hearts and their own minds and what they learned in their faith and do the right thing? Why didn't they do that? Cullen: I think when it comes to issues of this kind, at that time they did follow the law. There is no question about it. And I wish it had been a different setting and a different – a different manner of acting, but unfortunately, that's what happened. Bishop Edward P. Cullen being questioned by Philadelphia Assistant District Attorney William Spade, Jan 22, 2004 . Spade: The next question – and again, this is a two-part question. The first part is: If you had to grade your own performance in the management of the Stanley Gana file, and I guess by that the juror meant your performance overseeing fathers Molloy and Lynn, and to a certain point Father Cistone, if you had to grade your performance as a manager, what grade would you give yourself? Cullen: (Pause.) I never really had to grade myself in anything. I mean, I … going through the process, as I said, I don't recall that case. When I read the testimony of one of the people who gave it, I hear that it wasn't handled – it was dropped through the cracks on his part; and you know, looking back, it's – you know, it was a failing on the part of -- as Father Lynn gave in his testimony, he let it fall through the cracks. So you understand my role as a vicar general was handling a diocese, as I said in the beginning, of almost a million and a half people, three hundred sixty-five parishes, hospitals, and a hundred thousand kids in school, this is a case that was done with a specialty, and when I look back now, I'm sad that it, you know, that it was – that it fell through the cracks. I had no idea. Event at that time when I gave – I don't recall him ever saying this wasn't handled or – I don't know. I don't know how it evolved at that point. It was … so when you focus on a little case like that, in terms when I say a little case, I mean, in the volume that's on my desk, it's not a little case in its importance, but it's – you know, that's why you have people that are delegated to do that. I don't know. I wouldn't – I wouldn't attempt – I don't know how to go about evaluating myself on that, and I'm not trying to minimize or maximize whatever evaluation anyone gave me, but a competent person who had a background in that, who was dealing with it, and I learned here for the first time when I read that testimony that fell between the cracks, that's why I said it struck me. Now I know why I can't remember it. So you know, it's a huge organization, and there was a failing there that came out, very evident in the – you know, I leave it to whoever wants to evaluate me to evaluate me. Spade:: OK. The second – Cullen: I can't make a judgment on that. Spade: The second part of the question was: One of the jurors made the observation that in the progress of your career, you obviously have a very distinguished career within the church, rising from parish priest within the ranks of administration of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, which is one of the largest and most important dioceses in America, for you to have progressed that far and to have achieved as much as you achieved in your career as a priest, you obviously have a lot of skills, management skills, people skills, various sorts of skills. Given all of that, should you accept responsibility – given your obvious skill and your obvious record of accomplishment, should you accept responsibility for the fact that Gana, who was an admitted sex offender, was left in a parish with faculties until February of 2002, and I guess I should amend that since you left the diocese in early 1998, should you accept responsibility for the fact that Gana was left in a parish until the time that you left in 1998? Cullen: There's two – both those questions you're asking me to evaluate myself, and I just have. You know, you could make cases on both sides of that. You could say you're totally responsible or you're not. You gave a very responsible – put a very responsible person to handle this, and you did that because of the magnitude of what you have to do every day in many, many areas, and that person dropped the ball. Am I responsible? I think you could make a case both ways, I guess. I don't know. Bishop Edward P. Cullen being questioned by Philadelphia Assistant District Attorney Maureen McCartney, Jan. 23, 2004. McCartney: …Father Brennan has been asked to leave the parish and to go for evaluation at Saint John Vianney hospital and this document that's marked GJ-494, this deals with the conversation that Father Marine placed to the chancery office on Wednesday, Dec. 7, 1988, because he wanted to discuss some things about Saint Ignatius parish that were occurring in Father Brennan's absence. And this document is broken down into two different parts. The first part deals with Father Marine's concerns, and the second part deals with the response that he got from the chancery office as a result of those concerns, and I want to focus for a moment on point number two of the first part. This would be Father Marine's concern, and I'm going to read it. It says: "He found it more and more difficult to express to the people of the parish that Father Robert L. Brennan is on retreat. He felt that the response of the people was getting more and more out of hand in regard to Father Brennan's inappropriate behavior. He wanted to express to the people that Father Brennan is not on retreat, but on a temporary sick leave." You see where I'm reading from? Cullen: Yes. McCartney: OK. Now, correct me if I'm wrong Bishop, but at the time that this occurred in December of 1988, where Father Brennan has been asked to leave the parish based upon his inappropriate behavior with the children, with the boys of the parish, he was asked to go for an evaluation at Saint John Vianney hospital, I'm correct in stating that Father Brennan was not on retreat; is that right? Cullen: Now, the record says that. McCartney: OK. That he was not on retreat? Cullen: That's what it says. McCartney: OK. Now, based upon the concern expressed by Father Marine, Father Marine was asked to tell the people at the parish that Father Brennan was on retreat, correct? I don't want to be indelicate about that, but that's a lie; is that right? Cullen: It's certainly not – it's not the truth. It's not what it was. McCartney: OK. So it's a lie? Cullen: You could call it that. … McCartney: OK. And it says "After careful consultation with the chancery staff" with regard to that particular issue, and if you go down to number two, this is the response that Father Marine gets: "Monsignor Shoemaker asked Father Marine to please continue to use the term 'retreat' until further notice, at least until further evaluations were completed," or "are completed." I'm sorry. I read that wrong. So Father Marine calls down to the chancellor's office, says: I'm uncomfortable lying to the parishioners at Saint Ignatius. What can I do about this? Can I tell them that he's actually on health leave? And the response back is: Again, not to be indelicate, but continue to lie. Is that right? Cullen: The response is exactly what it says on the paper here. McCartney: Continue to use the term — Cullen: It doesn't say continue to lie. … McCartney: Continue to use the term 'retreat,' correct? Cullen: The thing I – yes. McCartney: OK. Do you have any recollection of that conversation? Cullen: No. No. Bishop Edward P. Cullen being questioned by Philadelphia Deputy District Attorney Charles F. Gallagher , Jan. 23, 2004 . Gallagher: When did your diocese in Allentown start the background checks on priests? Cullen: When did the diocese in Allentown start the background checks on priests? You mean checking every priest out? Gallagher: Right. Cullen: I don't know when they started them. Gallagher: Well, isn't it in your procedure now based on the norms? Aren't all the dioceses now checking priests' backgrounds? Cullen: Oh, yes. Gallagher: OK. Cullen: But we did it. I did it before – before the – as I recall, I checked the priests out before the norms came in. When I went to Dallas – and again, you know, you're sitting here. You're talking to bishops, and this thing went through and it was really going to – it was a zero tolerance. Anybody who had this in their background would have to – if Rome followed through with it, they'd go out. And bishops would say to me – say to me: 'Gee, you know some of the situations I have, I'll have to get rid of X number of priests because it's in there.' They had no recurrence of it, but they're there in limited ministry and so forth. 'How many you have?' I said, 'Have none.' I went through them all before I went to Dallas. Gallagher: How many of those have criminal records? Cullen: I don't – I don't know. Numbers I don't know. They all had in my mind – not all of them, but some were still being examined actually, because it's – it's not clear whether they're founded or not. Gallagher: Recently the U.S. Conference of Bishops released the Gavin report about how all the dioceses were evaluating? Cullen: Yes. Gallagher: Are you familiar with that, bishop? Cullen: Oh, yes. I had to comply with it. Gallagher: And you complied with it in Allentown, and there's a pronouncement in The Catholic Standard and Times here in Philadelphia that the Philadelphia Archdiocese also had complied with it. Cullen: Everyone in the country. Gallagher: And one of the most important salient points of that is that now, now, in 2003 and 2004, it's required that all priests undergo a background check – Cullen: That's right. Gallagher: Is that right? Cullen: I understand that it is, yes. Gallagher: OK Cullen: That's my understanding. Our priests all have background – Gallagher: And the Archdiocese of Philadelphia in the spring of 2002 made a public release, a press release indicating that over the last 50 years, they had 35 priests with credible allegations and credible evidence of sexual abuse in their background. Cullen: That's what I heard here, yes, and that's what I thought I heard when I was here last November. Gallagher: OK. If only one or two of those priests were ever arrested and ever faced civil liability for their crimes, what is the value of the background check as far as the balance of those priests are concerned? Cullen: It wouldn't be in there. It wouldn't be in their background unless someone reported it. Gallagher: Well, how do the bishops feel that there is a valuable aspect of their program of restoring trust? If the priests were never reported to law enforcement and they were either given administrative leave or allowed to go live down the shore or go live in another state and it was never reported to law enforcement, how is a background check on those individuals going to find out anything about them? Cullen: I don't know how they would find out about them. Gallagher: So, if they FBI background check and the state police background check, if they're not in any of those data bases, what is the value of it? I mean, how can the bishops say this is a great thing, Restoring trust if they're not going to find any of these guys because none of these guys are in there? Cullen: Well I really understand what you're saying. All I can say is all of my guys, dead or alive, were reported to the district attorney. Every one. I don't know what they did in Philadelphia.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.