Priest breaks silence over his removal

By David C.l. Bauer
Journal Courier
May 13, 2015

http://www.myjournalcourier.com/news/home_top-news/153443709/Priest-breaks-silence-over-his-removal

JACKSONVILLE — A former Jacksonville priest is striking out at what he calls a witch hunt that led to his removal after a decades-old abuse allegation.

In a rare move, Bishop Thomas John Paprocki forced removal of the Rev. Robert “Bud” DeGrand earlier this month. DeGrand was pastor of Catholic churches in Lillyville, Green Creek, Sigel and Neoga. He previously served parishes in Bluffs, Winchester and Jacksonville.

DeGrand was accused of sexually abusing a minor while at Our Saviour Catholic Church in 1980 — the year he was ordained into the priesthood. The accusation was not made until more than three decades later.

DeGrand’s removal was not directly related to the allegation but to his refusal to comply with Paprocki’s order that he move to a private home in Springfield while on administrative leave during the investigation of the allegation.

DeGrand remained relatively silent as the allegation was investigated following protocol established by the Vatican. But now, in a letter he has distributed to parishioners and to several newspapers, DeGrand said it would be an “understatement” to say he was disappointed with the treatment he received.

Paprocki issued his own letter after removing DeGrand from the four parishes. In it, the bishop laid out the chronology of action that took place since the allegation was made.

“The bishop’s letter is, sadly, part of a negative pattern that I have witnessed since this accusation was first made against me,” DeGrand said. “Instead of supporting me and serving as my pastor, the bishop has treated me as though I have already been adjudged guilty of wrongdoing and deserving of punishment.”

The allegation against DeGrand was first revealed in September 2013. He said representatives of the bishop went to the rectory in Sigel and told him about the accusation, then “summarily and immediately evicted from what had for years been my home” without offering any other living arrangements.

“I was effectively rendered homeless based on nothing more than an accusation that was, at that time, more than 30 years old,” DeGrand said. “Through the great kindness of parishioners, I was able to find temporary lodging, and later, a home in Sigel that I could call my own.”

Paprocki, however, said church policies require a priest be placed on administrative leave while an accusation is under investigation and that he live away from the location of his assignment during that time.

“A private house in Springfield was arranged for Father DeGrand to use as his residence free of charge while on administrative leave, but Father DeGrand refused to move there,” Paprocki said.

The bishop said the refusal constituted a violation of DeGrand’s promise of obedience.

In December 2013, DeGrand appeared before the Diocesan Review Board to address the accusation.

“That meeting felt more like a witch trial than any real search for the truth. I was seated in a room with several individuals, including Bishop Paprocki, and cross-examined about such matters as what wall hangings decorated my living quarters 30 years ago,” DeGrand said. “The ‘meeting’ was a farce, and appeared to me and my counsel designed simply to reinforce my bishop’s conclusion that I was guilty of the charge made against me. I was never even told what evidence the review board possessed to support the charge made against me.”

In January 2014, the review board unanimously determined the allegation of clerical sexual misconduct with a minor was credible and those findings were sent to the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. That council said a trial could not take place because of “prescription” — the equivalent of a statute of limitations in civil law — and after DeGrand declined to waive the time provisions the Vatican essentially directed Paprocki to determine whether the priest was suitable for public ministry.

“A rumor circulated that the letter from the Vatican ‘cleared’ Father DeGrand and dismissed the charges against him. That rumor was not and is not true,” Paprocki said.

DeGrand maintains the decision by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome that the charge was too old was a crucial determination because it “rightly found that my ability to defend myself would be materially compromised were the matter to proceed. In the more than 30 years that have elapsed since I served in Jacksonville, Illinois, witnesses have died and evidence that would support me has become unavailable. That is exactly why statutes of limitations exist — because it is intrinsically unfair to expect an individual to defend a charge that is this old.

“To understand this, you need only consider how you would respond if someone accused you of doing something 30 years ago to which only he and you were witness,” DeGrand said.

The Department of Children and Family Services also investigated and “determined the report to be ‘unfounded.’ This means that credible evidence of child abuse or neglect has not been found,” DeGrand said.

Paprocki, however, said the agency was “unable to document credible evidence of child abuse or neglect in the investigation” in terms of any present risk to children, “but that it conducted no investigation about the allegation from the 1980s. The Catholic Church has its own independent process with a higher standard of suitability for ministry,” Paprocki said.

The priest was given the chance to appear before the Diocesan Review Board again before Paprocki made a decision, according to the bishop’s letter, but he refused. He also declined to take a lie-detector test, although his accuser agreed to so, according to the letter.

DeGrand also refused to be evaluated at a facility in Minnesota where he previously was treated for alcohol abuse in 1996, but offered to see a psychiatrist in Pennsylvania. Paprocki agreed if DeGrand would release the results to the review board, but “DeGrand refused to do so. Moreover, Father DeGrand did not fully disclose information to the psychiatrist, thus compromising the psychiatrist’s ability to render accurate conclusions,” according to Paprocki’s office.

“The bishop has, most recently, offered me a ‘compromise.’ If I will resign my ministry and agree to relocate outside of the parishes where I have made my home for the past 16 years — and where I have the support of my friends — he will allow me to continue receiving the monthly stipend reserved for retired priests. If I accepted his proposal, the bishop vowed to maintain public neutrality regarding the charge. However, if I refused, the bishop made clear that … I would be reduced to a bare sustenance level of financial support, and … he would publicly humiliate me by further disclosures regarding the accusation,” DeGrand said.

DeGrand said he considered resigning “tantamount to an admission of guilt” and therefore declined.

“You are witnessing the result of that decision,” he said.

DeGrand’s “refusal to cooperate with the process to determine his suitability to return to ministry” left no choice but to remove him from the four parishes, according to the bishop.

“Based on the unanimous recommendation of the Diocesan Review Board and Bishop Paprocki’s own assessment of the information available … it would not be responsible to allow Father DeGrand to return to public ministry,” according to a statement from Paprocki.

DeGrand said he has received words and letters of support from people who have been a part of his priesthood, including his time in Jacksonville. Several people have contacted the Journal-Courier or commented through social media about DeGrand’s service to the community.

“Those letters, from young men with whom I had a close relationship in the time frame of the accusation, attest to the service I provided and confirm that there was never a hint of improper or inappropriate conduct,” DeGrand said.