The Battle Is Joined over Bishop Murphy

By John Rather
New York Times
August 3, 2003

In nearly two years as the leader of 1.4 million Roman Catholics on Long Island, Bishop William F. Murphy of the Diocese of Rockville Centre says he has taken decisive steps to ferret out and report priests who have sexually abused children.

But last week the long shadow of Bishop Murphy's eight years as the second-highest official in the Archdiocese of Boston deepened across Nassau and Suffolk, and for the first time a Catholic group called for his resignation.

Pressure mounted after a report by Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly of Massachusetts placed Bishop Murphy squarely among top officials in the Boston archdiocese who shielded abusive priests. The report, released on July 23, said that Bishop Murphy showed by his actions that he valued protecting the church and predator priests more than protecting children.

Citing the findings, Voice of the Faithful of Long Island, an influential Catholic lay group that says it has about 1,300 members, said that Bishop Murphy was now without the moral authority to lead the Long Island diocese, hurt it by remaining and should offer to resign immediately.

Patricia Zirkel of Babylon, the group's co-director and a retired associate professor of theology at St. John's University, said that stepping down was the most honorable step Bishop Murphy could take.

"I don't think it's possible for any of those bishops to regain their credibility," Dr. Zirkel said. "They should all resign."

But a national group, the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, based in Manhattan, is mounting a petition drive to support Bishop Murphy. William A. Donohue, the president of the group, which he said has 15,000 members in Nassau and Suffolk, said the Massachusetts report offered no evidence that Bishop Murphy shared equal culpability with other top church officials.

Mr. Donohue dismissed Attorney General Reilly's assertion that the top officials of the Boston archdiocese were uniformly aware of and involved in the handling of abusive priests and their victims and had escaped prosecution only because they had exploited a legal loophole that did not require them to report abusive priests to authorities.

"I am not interested in someone's editorial opinion," Mr. Donohue said. "I want evidence."

"What we have here is classic McCarthyism, guilt by association," Mr. Donohue said later in the interview. "Simply because Bishop Murphy served in Boston, he is presumed guilty."

Bishop Murphy was on vacation last week and would not return until later in August, said Joanne Navarro, the spokeswoman for the Rockville Centre diocese. She said she did not know the exact date the bishop would return. In the past he has told church groups that he expected to remain head of the diocese for many years. Now 63, he could serve until he was at least 75, when he would have to offer to retire. His resignation would require Vatican approval.

A statement released by the diocese said Bishop Murphy would respond to Voice of the Faithful "in the near future."

In a report to Long Island Catholics issued in anticipation of the release of the Massachusetts report, Bishop Murphy said that while in Boston he had access to but had not reviewed confidential files about abusive priests. He said media reports had confused him with a subordinate priest by the same name who reported to Cardinal Bernard F. Law about pending abuse cases. Cardinal Law was the archbishop of Boston from 1984 until his resignation in December. Bishop Murphy was the archdiocese's vicar general from 1993 until he came to Rockville Centre.

In the report Bishop Murphy wrote, "I can say with complete honesty that I was not involved in handling allegations made against priests, and I was not involved in recommending the assignment of any such priest to pastoral ministry where he might have had contact with minors."

But Bishop Murphy acknowledged that he did routinely review the Boston archdiocese's settlements with victims. "While I deeply regret now that most of these settlements contained provisions for confidentiality, it was my understanding at the time that such confidentiality agreements were routine in the resolution of personal injury cases," he said. "That approach was wrong, and I apologize that I went along with this."

He also defended his role in counseling John J. Geoghan, once a priest in the archdiocese who has been defrocked and is now serving a 9-to-10-year sentence for groping a boy in 1991. The bishop said that at the request of Cardinal Law he reviewed Father Geoghan's confidential file, urged him to resign from the priesthood and ultimately removed him against his will.

The report was the first detailed account by Bishop Murphy about his years in Boston, a subject he had previously declined to discuss.

"The grand jury will reach its conclusions without hearing any counterarguments from me or my counsel," the statement said. "I have no defense against that." But, it continued, "I have shared with you my role in Boston as completely and as honestly as the facts and my memory have been able to record them."

Voice of the Faithful has not been swayed. After the Massachusetts report was issued, the group's board of directors said in a statement, "Bishop Murphy's very presence causes disunity and hinders the restoration of trust in our diocese." The group said that 95 percent of 385 members supported resignation in four days of e-mail voting that ended last Sunday.

A Suffolk County priest, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that some priests supported Bishop Murphy and stressed obedience to church hierarchy while others thought the bishop should be held to account. "The lines are being drawn in the sand, " he said.

The Rev. Gerald Twomey, co-pastor of St. Anne Roman Catholic Church in Brentwood, said Bishop Murphy "deserves the opportunity to explain and clarify his own history" in Boston.

"He is on vacation, and it is not clear if he has read the report," Father Twomey said. "Therefore, I do not see an advantage to a rush to judgment."

He said Bishop Murphy's account of his Boston years had thus far been insufficient. "Obviously, there is a discrepancy" between the bishop's account and attorney general's report," he said. "What did he know and when did he know it -- that's the operative question."

[Photo Caption: Patricia Zirkel, co-director of Voice of the Faithful, which is asking Bishop William F. Murphy to step aside. (Photo by Maxine Hicks for The New York Times)]