Hart Says Publicity Poses Crisis for Church
Abuse Not As 'Rampant' As Newspapers Portray, Norwich Bishop Claims

By Day Staff Writer
The Day [New London CT]
March 21, 2002

Norwich - The sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests is evil but not so widespread as to pose a crisis for the church, says Bishop Daniel A. Hart of Norwich. The crisis, Hart says, is in the publicity such cases have received.

In a wide-ranging interview in his offices this week, Hart spoke of his concerns about news reports of the cases of sexual abuse that were covered up in Boston, Bridgeport and other dioceses.

The sexual abuse of children and teen-agers, Hart said, "is something that happens in families, we know, much more frequently than in the priesthood. I suppose it's like two percent of the priests that there are allegations about them."

"But I don't think," Hart said, "the abuse is as rampant as a person might consider by reading the newspapers."

The newspapers have been filled with stories of pedophile priests and the church officials who protected them, both by moving the molesters to other parishes and by paying out settlements that bought silence from the victims.

The most infamous case has been that of former priest John Geoghan of the Archdiocese of Boston, who allegedly molested at least 130 children as he was moved from parish to parish in the Boston area during the course of his career. Since the mid-1990s, the archdiocese has paid out $15 million to 100 of his victims.

In response to increasing pressure from the Massachusetts attorney general, Boston's Cardinal Bernard F. Law has turned over the names of some 90 priests who have been accused of sexually molesting children and, on Tuesday, turned over files on their victims.

Closer to home, sealed court documents acquired by The Hartford Courant revealed that when he was bishop of the Bridgeport Diocese, New York Cardinal Edward M. Egan allowed priests accused of sexual misconduct to keep working, did not investigate the allegations against them, and failed to report them to criminal authorities.

Last March, the Bridgeport Diocese paid 26 victims $15 million to drop their cases against six priests and the diocese.

In the past decade, more than a dozen Connecticut priests and clergy have been criminally charged with or named in lawsuits for sexually abusing minors. Four of those cases have named the Norwich Diocese as a co-defendant.

In two of those cases, the diocese was dismissed from the suit because it was determined that the diocese did not have prior knowledge of the priests' behavior and therefore could not be held liable, Jacqueline Keller, diocese spokeswoman, said Wednesday.

In the first of those, Tracy Beach sued Raymond J. Jean and the diocese, saying Jean repeatedly molested him from 1973 to 1984, when Jean was pastor at Notre Dame Church in Durham. Beach was 9 when the abuse began.

Jean, who was transferred to Our Lady of Lourdes Church in Gales Ferry in 1984, has since died, and the suit against his estate is still pending.

In the second, filed by Matthew and Mark Nutt against the Rev. Thomas Doyle, who allegedly abused them during his tenure at Sacred Heart Church in Vernon, an attorney for the plaintiffs, Holly Abery-Wetstone, released an extraordinary statement exonerating the diocese:

"Based on the particular facts of this case obtained through the discovery process, Attorney Wetstone is ... satisfied that the actions of the Diocese and Sacred Heart do not make the Sacred Heart Church or the Diocese a haven for pedophiles."

Two other cases against the diocese are pending.

In the first, a New Mexico appeals court has ruled that a New Mexico man could sue the diocese for the abuses of the Rev. Bernard W. Bissonnette after he was transferred to New Mexico but still on the diocese payroll. That case is now pending before the New Mexico Supreme Court.

In the second, John Doe, a pseudonym to protect the identity of the plaintiff, says the Rev. Richard T. Buongirno repeatedly molested him between 1987 and 1991, when Buongirno was the pastor of St. Matthias Church in East Lyme and Doe was 9.

New London attorney Robert Reardon, representing John Doe, says that even when the diocese knew Buongirno "had a propensity to use his position as a teacher or priest to coax young boys into these bizarre sexual relationships," it sent him to other parishes without warning them.

The diocese has taken the position that it had no prior knowledge of Buongirno's behavior and that it should be dismissed from the case because the sexual molestation of a child "represents an abandonment of his pastoral duties and, legally, is outside the scope of his employment."

Citing several examples from Connecticut case law, Joseph Sweeney, representing the diocese, has argued that "in order to hold an employer liable for the intentional torts of his employee, the employee must be acting within the scope of his employment and in furtherance of the employer's business."

Asked whether this was a sophistical argument for the diocese to make, Hart replied, "I'd encourage you to talk to a lawyer about it," and would make no further comment.

On the more general topic of sexual abuse, Hart said, "I don't think that sexual abuse of a minor or sexual abuse is something that can be allowed. It certainly is forbidden by all the teachings of the gospel and the teachings of the church. And it's a mortal sin and evil and a crime."

Last week, Hart released a pastoral letter apologizing "in the name of the church" for these crimes and expressing his "feelings of sadness, shame, anger, revulsion and discouragement as a result of the publicity about allegations of sexual misconduct by bishops and priests."

This week he pointed out that, since 1991, the policy of the diocese has been that "the state's attorney is notified immediately when any allegation of sexual abuse by a priest or employee is alleged. And their investigation takes place first, before the diocese starts an investigation."

While other dioceses are being asked to turn over information on any complaints that have been made in the past five years, Hart said, the Norwich Diocese does not need to do so.

"The state's attorney received any allegation when it was made," he said. "Anything of a criminal nature or that even had the appearances of a criminal nature.

"We have to know that priests are human and bishops are," Hart said. "We make mistakes, we do the wrong thing. We should do the right thing.

"There has to be penalties for that and punishment for it." k.robinson@theday.com