Editorial: Community deserves more details on priest’s leave

The Morning Sun
July 11, 2015

http://www.themorningsun.com/opinion/20150711/editorial-community-deserves-more-details-on-priests-leave

Last week, it was announced that the Rev. Denis Heames, of St. Mary’s Parish on the campus of Central Michigan University, was being placed on administrative leave due to “boundary violations related to his priestly ministry.”

A statement released by the Diocese of Saginaw stated: “Last weekend, it was brought to my attention that Father Heames has been involved in boundary violations related to his priestly conduct, serious enough to require appropriate assessment and treatment,” Bishop (Joseph) Cistone shared with parishioners at St. Mary University Parish… ‘It is important to assure you that these actions in no way involved minors. Nonetheless, peoples’ lives have been affected and Father Heames will need to address these matters in a comprehensive way. Consequently, this past week, I placed Father Heames on an administrative leave of absence.’”

The reaction from the community was one of shock. Father Heames, or Father Denis, as he is also known, seemed to be well liked in the parish community.

Once the shock wore off, questions quickly emerged: What on earth are “boundary violations” and what exactly is Heames accused of? Soon theories were being debated, often by people who had no idea of what the facts were.

The diocese is doing a disservice to itself, to its parishioners and to the CMU community by not being more forthcoming. Heames will endure Trial by Facebook, as everyone weighs in on what he may or may not have done. The diocese will be criticized for not being more open, with the implication church officials are hiding something that could be criminal behavior.

Just as important, the parishioners and CMU community will be left wondering what happened. Was their trust in him misplaced? Did he take advantage of them in some way? Were any parishioners in the mostly student congregation harmed in any way and if so how severely? Were any laws broken? If anything is suspected along those lines, are police being informed so they can do their own independent investigation? Could he have been falsely accused of something?

To its credit, the diocese did notify CMU President George Ross of the situation, according to CM Life, but it’s unclear how much detail they provided CMU with.

There are some unpleasant facts at play here. The first one is we are so quick to forget “innocent until proven guilty.” Once Heames’ name hit the headlines, his reputation was ruined.

The second fact is the Catholic Church has still not recovered from years of abuse scandals when it covered up sexual abuse of children committed by priests and was more concerned with protecting the priests than with helping the victims.

Bishop Cistone’s made headlines in Philadelphia in 2012, as a trial was underway for three others. Cistone was never indicted on any criminal charges. However, according to MLive reports, lawyers claimed Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua in 1994 ordered the destruction of documents naming 35 priests suspected of child molestation. Cistone was accused of witnessing the shredding while serving as a church official in the Philadelphia area and attorneys also accused him of lying to a grand jury when he did not acknowledge the documents or their destruction during a previous testimony, according to MLive reports from 2012.

Cistone tried to assure the St. Mary’s parishioners that the current situation is being handled in the proper way and that no minors were involved. Unfortunately, the bishop can’t escape the suspicion that he would cover up for a priest.

Not giving more details of what happened adds fuel to the fire.

It may turn out that what Heames is accused of is something minor, something that it would be perfectly appropriate for his employer – the Catholic Church – to handle internally, as any employee-employer situation would be.

Or it could be something much worse.

It should be noted that in some other professions, such as counseling, a boundary issue could involve a consenting relationship between the practitioner and a client – something that violates a code of ethics and could result in loss of license, but is not criminal in any way.

We do not need all the details in this case. However, we do need some answers.

Until the diocese is more forthcoming, the issue will not go away.