Wednesday, November 30, 2005

The Hireling Report #28

Link to Original

Bishop Says Edict Allows Some Gay Priests
U.S. Catholics at Odds Over Interpretation of Vatican's New Directive

By Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, November 30, 2005; Page A01

The president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said yesterday that under a new Vatican directive on homosexuality, men with a lasting attraction to members of the same sex can still be ordained as priests, as long as they are not "consumed by" their sexual orientation.

Bishop William S. Skylstad's flexible interpretation of the document, which was officially issued in Rome yesterday, was sharply at odds with the position of some other U.S. bishops. They said the Vatican intended to bar all men who have had more than a fleeting, adolescent brush with homosexuality.

"I think one of the telling sentences in the document is the phrase that the candidate's entire life of sacred ministry must be 'animated by a gift of his whole person to the church and by an authentic pastoral charity,' " Skylstad, the bishop of Spokane, Wash., said in an interview. "If that becomes paramount in his ministry, even though he might have a homosexual orientation, then he can minister and he can minister celibately and chastely."

Skylstad's comments are the opening salvo in what promises to be a wide-ranging battle within the U.S. church over the document's implementation. Bishop John M. D'Arcy of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Ind., said yesterday that Skylstad's interpretation is "simply wrong" -- a rare public clash among bishops, who usually go to great lengths to preserve an image of collegiality, even when they disagree.

"I would say yes, absolutely, it does bar anyone whose sexual orientation is towards one's own sex and it's permanent," D'Arcy said of the document. "I don't think there's any doubt about it. . . . I don't think we can fuss around with this."

Although each bishop can apply the document as he sees fit in his diocese, the fallout could reach thousands of Catholic schools and parishes as gay men who are considering the priesthood -- and some who have been ordained -- reevaluate their place in the church.

"I think every gay seminarian faces a question of conscience now," said a 33-year-old gay seminarian from New England who requested anonymity because he has not yet decided whether to leave his seminary. "There's no question of leaving the church. I'll die a Catholic. The question is whether I can with integrity be a priest."

The six-page instruction from the Congregation for Catholic Education, the Vatican department in charge of seminaries, was leaked by an Italian news agency a week ago. But most bishops were silent about it until its official publication yesterday. As soon as it was released in Rome, many U.S. dioceses posted statements on their Web sites, and many bishops held news conferences.

The document says that "the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called 'gay culture.' "

It adds that men can become priests if their "homosexual tendencies . . . were only the expression of a transitory problem -- for example, that of an adolescence not yet superseded." But those whose homosexuality is deep-seated "find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women," the official English translation says.

Several prelates, including Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington, indicated that they will continue to ordain seminarians regardless of sexual orientation, as long as the candidates are committed to live in celibacy and to uphold church teachings.

"It is important to look at the whole person. One issue of many that are looked at in the overall evaluation process is in the area of human sexuality," McCarrick said in a written statement. "Applicants for the Archdiocese of Washington must have a demonstrated commitment to living a chaste life and must fully embrace, through belief and action, the Church's teachings, including those on human sexuality."

Asked whether that means the archdiocese will still accept gay seminarians, the cardinal's spokeswoman, Susan Gibbs, said: "We don't anticipate our admissions policy changing based on the document. There can be people whose orientation is homosexual if it's not such a strong part of their makeup that it interferes with their ability to live out church teaching. It's part of the larger picture we have to look at."

Skylstad took a similar approach. He said the barring of men with "deep-seated homosexual tendencies" refers to those who are "principally defined by" or whose "primary identification" is their sexual orientation. Although the document does not say so, he said, the same implicitly applies to men who have deep-seated heterosexual impulses.

"Absolutely, it cuts both ways. . . . I think if the orientation dominates one's personality, whether that be homosexual or heterosexual," then the candidate is not suitable for ordination, Skylstad said. "You know, a heterosexual person who cannot live the celibate life in fidelity to his mission, in fidelity to appropriate boundaries, is not going to be called by the church to priesthood, either."

The same point was made by Bishop Matthew Clark of Rochester, N.Y., in a statement on his Web site; it noted that the Vatican's instruction requires all candidates for the priesthood to show emotional maturity.

"I must concur, and add that such criteria also would be applied to a heterosexual man whose sexual behavior would in any way interfere with his celibate service to the Church and to those to whom he would minister," Clark wrote.

But in Rome, the head of the Congregation for Catholic Education, Cardinal Zenon Grocholewski, said that the problems of homosexual and heterosexual candidates are not equivalent. Although many people think homosexuality is a "normal condition of the human person," he told Vatican Radio, it "absolutely contradicts human anthropology" and violates "natural law."

For the church, denying ordination to gay men is no more discriminatory than "if a person who suffers from vertigo is not admitted to a school for astronauts," the cardinal said.

The Rev. Richard John Neuhaus, editor of the conservative Catholic journal First Things, said that "human nature being what it is, those who want to evade the clear statement of the instruction will have ample opportunities to seek loopholes, evasions and rationalizations."

The Rev. James Martin, a Jesuit priest and generally a liberal commentator on church affairs, agreed.

"Over the next few months we will hear from plenty of canon lawyers and theologians and bishops, as we have already, arguing, out of a genuine and compassionate desire to help the church continue to accept celibate gay men into the priesthood, that the document needs to be interpreted in the most positive light possible," he said.

"But it is impossible, after reading the Instruction, to escape the fact that when the Vatican says men with 'deep-seated homosexual tendencies,' it means what it says."

Special correspondent Sarah Delaney in Rome contributed to this report.

The Hireling Report #27

Link to Original

A Critique of the Franklin Report*

*- see link above for Franklin Report and other relevant material

On February 25, 2004, Bishop William E. Franklin issued a report on the Davenport crisis, and his "transparency and openness" were hailed as a positive development. But a close analysis reveals many apparent errors and omissions in the bishop's account. What do these problems say about the diocese's management of the abusers in its midst? And in light of the questions we raise, how is the diocese likely to approach the rigors of bankruptcy and the jury trials that will surely come?

We have checked the Franklin report against other sources of information about the diocese, especially its own documents and the standard work on the subject, the Official Catholic Directory. We have found many surprising discrepancies. Instead of explaining these inconsistencies, we have tried to present them clearly for your evaluation in the pages that follow. Below we reproduce a full text of the Franklin report, with omissions added in red for your review. We have also supplied commentary in red when it appears that the Franklin report is in error. The problems fall into five groups (you may click on the highlighted title to go to the relevant section of the Franklin report):

John Jay Issues - Like many other "diocesan John Jay reports," the Franklin report names only some of the accused priests in the diocese, and its statistics on priests and abuse costs are limited. We provide some other reports for comparison.
• Limits of the Investigation - The Franklin report explains that "it is impossible to confirm or refute many of the allegations due to the death of clergy and the unavailability of witnesses." But it does not explain that the diocese's own policies have contributed to this result. We offer a summary.
• List of Allegations - The Franklin report withholds the names of some accused priests (even some whose names have been made public) and it compounds the problem of unnamed priests by giving partial information about the accused, thereby causing suspicion regarding priests who are innocent.
• Action Regarding Certain Priests - The Franklin report gives accounts of the five priests whom the diocese has asked the Pope to laicize. These accounts unfortunately misquote diocesan documents and leave out pertinent information. Important accused priests like Rev. Theodore Anthony Geerts are not discussed in this section. Yet Geerts is alleged to have had many victims, and there are many mysteries about the diocese's management of his case.
• Assignments - The Franklin report gives assignment records for the five accused priests whom it has asked the Pope to laicize. These records are inaccurate in surprising and possibly significant ways, especially as regards the priests' assignments in other dioceses and their recent histories. We note the problems, and we also provide detailed assignment records of our own for all the accused priests whose names are public, not just the five who are to be laicized.

Report #37 on the Era of Peace

Link to Original

Khaleej Times Online

Hindu legislator, seven others shot dead in northern India
(AFP)

29 November 2005


LUCKNOW, India - Gunmen shot dead an opposition Hindu nationalist legislator and seven others on Tuesday in northern India, a senior state official said.

Krishnanand Rai was on his way to a wedding when attackers ambushed his jeep and sprayed it with bullets, Alok Sinha, principal home secretary of Uttar Pradesh state, said.

Rai and seven others -- including supporters and security guards -- were killed near Ballia town, 350 kilometres (220 miles) southeast of the state capital Lucknow, Sinha said.

Rai was rushed to hospital where doctors pronounced him dead.

The slain legislator, a member of the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), was facing some 40 criminal charges including kidnapping and murder, Sinha said.

Report #11 on the Fall of Communism

Link to Original

Catholic World News

New arrests of underground priests in China's Hebei province

Nov. 29 (CWNews.com) - Six priests of the underground Catholic Church were arrested in China's Hebei province last week, the Cardinal Kung Foundation reports. Two of the priests were badly beaten as they were taken into custody.

The arrests, which took place on November 18, were the third in a series of crackdowns in Hebei-- a province that has the most active underground Catholic Church in China. Early in November police arrested Bishop Jia Zhiguo and two other priests. On November 12, another priest and 10 seminarians were jailed a second raid. Some of the priests and seminarians were released after a few days in custody; Bishop Jia remains imprisoned.

Father Wang Jin Shan and Father Gao Lingshen were beaten by police as they were taken into custody, the Cardinal Kung Foundation reported. Also arrested were Fathers Guo Zhijun, Zhngin Xiuchi, Peng Jianjun, and Zhang Yinhu.

Tuesday, November 29, 2005

The Hireling Report #26

Link to Original

This whole document is interesting and damnable to Cardinal Roger Mahoney of Los Angeles. I suggest reading the whole story in the link above.


Mahony E-Mails Cite Fears Over Scandals

By Larry B Stammer and Richard Winton
Los Angeles Times
April 6, 2002

Link to Original Article

A series of confidential e-mails written by Cardinal Roger M. Mahony show how pervasively the nationwide child-abuse scandal in the Catholic Church has affected the Los Angeles Archdiocese.

The e-mails, leaked to radio station KFI, which provided copies to The Times, paint a picture of a sometimes-agitated archbishop alarmed that he is losing public relations ground.

The memos, written during the past three weeks, capture an archdiocese confronting political, legal and moral challenges: where to place a priest newly accused of molesting children; whether the church should start a victims support group; how to anticipate and counteract media accusations; how to give "instruction" in child-abuse law to Los Angeles Police Chief Bernard C. Parks, and how to measure the number of weeks or months before a "healing" process begins in the church. The e-mail also reveals that a Fresno woman made a 32-year-old unspecified "claim" against Mahony. Questions by reporters prompted the cardinal Friday night to issue a categorical denial of "ever having molested anyone."

Fresno police Lt. Keith Foster confirmed Friday that an investigation is underway. The Fresno Diocese turned over a recent two-hour taped interview with the woman to police, an e-mail says.

The woman told The Times on Friday that Mahony molested her in 1970 when he visited the San Joaquin Memorial Catholic High School, where she was a student. She provided few other details, saying police asked her not to talk.

Mahony, who was then a priest in Fresno and rose to the position of auxiliary bishop, "categorically" denied "ever having molested anyone."

In a March 28 e-mail, Mahony expressed willingness to be interviewed by Fresno detectives and wrote his advisors that he did not need an attorney because he had no recollection of the woman making the complaint and informed the LAPD the same day he was told of the accusation.

Other e-mails focus on the growing demands that Mahony fully disclose the names of the eight priests he had fired in February for molesting minors. The archdiocese subsequently turned the information over to police but has yet to disclose it to the public.

In one e-mail, a top Mahony advisor recommends that the cardinal remain deliberately vague about where the eight priests served before Mahony fired them. While Mahony told The Times in a separate interview that none of the priests were in parish ministries, the e-mail from Msgr. Craig Cox, vicar for clergy, says that some did serve on a part-time basis in parishes--a fact that implies they had were around children.

At times, Mahony and his inner circle are shown attempting to promptly cooperate with police on new allegations of sexual abuse. In other e-mails, there is a clear determination to protect the institution.

The communications also reveal that:

ٱ Mahony was so upset by the archdiocese's failure to turn over some names of several dismissed priests to police that he warned his general counsel he might be subpoenaed by a grand jury.

"If we don't, today, "consult" with the [detective] about those three names, I can guarantee you that I will get hauled into a Grand Jury proceeding and I will be forced to give all the names, etc.," Mahony wrote to his top lawyer, Sister Judith Murphy.

At that point, March 27, the archdiocese had not turned over to police the names of three of eight priests he dismissed in February. The names were subsequently turned over to authorities.

ٱ Mahony wrote Murphy in that same e-mail that the archdiocese had made a "huge mistake" by withholding the names of the three priests.

"I'm not sure you grasp the gravity of the situation and where this is heading--not only with the media, but with the law enforcement and legal folks," Mahony wrote Murphy.

"If we don't take immediate, aggressive action here--the consequences for the AD [archdiocese] are going to be incredible: charges of cover-up, concealing criminals, etc., etc.," Mahony wrote.

* In another e-mail, Mahony says he wants to step up outreach to sexual abuse victims. While the archdiocese already provides counseling and cash settlements, Mahony said he wanted to start a victims support group that would be "almost entirely spiritual."

* Archdiocesan attorney John McNicholas in another e-mail recounts debate over whether a well known and highly regarded gay priest should continue to teach a course at Crespi Carmelite High School in Encino, whose president was recently removed because of an allegation of sexual abuse in his past. Sister Murphy, in a separate e-mail, notes that a critical "off-the-wall right wing throw-away newspaper has been gunning for him [the gay priest] for years."

* Sister Murphy in another e-mail invokes the slogan of television's Sgt. Joe Friday--"only the facts, sir, only the facts"--in advising church officials about a pending visit from two police detectives. The police were coming in response to an alert by church officials of possible abuse.

"Listen to their questions and take your time answering," Murphy wrote. "Do not volunteer information. This is not a session to be chatty."

* Outside attorney L. Martin Nussbaum worries on another day that "the next wave of this press feeding frenzy" about pedophile priests may focus on priests who have had adult "romantic or sexual liaisons." Nussbaum advises Mahony to comb through the files of every priest ever disciplined to "assess the scope of any such problem."

* Mahony in another missive wrestles with his decision to release one priest's name to police. "His case troubles me." Mahony writes to Msgr. Cox. "I am leaning toward giving it to the LAPD to review. We could be very vulnerable on any case where there is a dispute between folks, and we have not referred it out."

* Mahony's aides confront the problem of a priest who last month was reassigned after being accused of molesting youths at his Azusa church. The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department is investigating. Cox writes that the priest "denied forcefully any misconduct."

"If there is something to the allegations, then we want to be sure he is removed from ministry," Sister Murphy writes. "But if the allegations are unfounded, the sooner that can be established and he restored to ministry, the better. If he is innocent, I am most concerned that his reputation not be damaged more than it will already be by having things drag on and on and on."

FBI Investigating Who Leaked E-Mails

The FBI on Friday launched a criminal investigation to uncover whether a computer hacker broke into the e-mail system or a church insider leaked the information.

Laura Bosley, an FBI spokeswoman in Los Angeles, said the bureau is investigating whether Mahony's e-mail was "compromised and leaked."

At the same time, Los Angeles Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley said he was prepared to launch his own investigation into the "illegal access" of the e-mails. He also served notice that Mahony's written statements in the communications are "of grave concern." Cooley said he wants to find out if the archdiocese illegally withheld information about child abuse from authorities.

At the first banquet held at the archdiocese's downtown Cathedral Conference Center on Friday, Mahony stepped quickly through a door to avoid reporters following a speech to the downtown Rotary Club.

Mahony confined his remarks before 500 Rotarians and guests to the new $193-million Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels, which opens Sept. 2. An aide cautioned reporters before the speech that Mahony would refuse to take any questions about the sexual abuse scandal rocking the Roman Catholic Church.

Mahony did respond Thursday night to an e-mail from The Times with a no comment. "I cannot and will not comment on privileged client-attorney communication that was criminally stolen," Mahony wrote in a return e-mail.

At the archdiocese's administrative headquarters in the Mid-Wilshire district, employees said many were on edge. "It's getting tense," said one.

Cardinal Asked Judge to Block Publication

The tension began to build Thursday when KFI disclosed that it had obtained leaked copies of scores of e-mails which were written late last month and early this month by Mahony and trusted confidants.

Ray Lopez, KFI producer, said he received the e-mails from an "anonymous individual." He said the person called him and offered to fax him the e-mails, then sent them via computer.

Two of the station's talk show hosts, John Kobylt and Ken Champou, began reading portions of the e-mails on their show Thursday afternoon in a remote broadcast from outside the cathedral.

As word reached the archdiocese of the disclosures, Mahony moved forcibly Thursday night to block publication of the e-mails by The Times.

Lawyers who anticipate filing a late-night motion usually contact the writs courtroom's clerk during business hours. But a lawyer for the archdiocese obtained their hearing by telephoning a retired presiding judge of the Superior Court, Richard Byrne. Byrne called a judge who specializes in writs. That judge provided a referral to a senior colleague who set a highly unusual 10:30 p.m. hearing.

In a ruling delivered just before midnight, Judge David Yaffe held that the U.S. Constitution prevented him from preventing publication of the documents.

In denying the Fresno molestation allegation Friday, Mahony saidin a written statement, "Such false allegations are hurtful and troubling to me, yet I continue to pray fervently for those who make them.

Reached by telephone Friday night at her home in Fresno, the woman said she reported her allegation recently to the school and that school officials informed Fresno police.

"It kept eating away at me," she told The Times.

In a March 28 e-mail, Mahony expressed willingness to be interviewed by Fresno detectives and wrote his advisors that he did not need an attorney because he had no recollection of the woman making the complaint.

"The Fresno PD can call me any time for a telephone interview; they can tape-record the interview, and I don't need an attorney on the line. Since I have no recollection of ever meeting the lady, I welcome the interview. Please give them my home number if they wish to call during these days of Holy Week or over the weekend," the cardinal wrote. He sent the message to Msgr. Richard Loomis, who heads the administrative services secretariat of the archdiocese, and to media relations director Tod Tamberg.

Mahony said in his Friday night statement that he was informed of the allegation March 22 by Fresno Bishop John Steinbock.

The e-mails shed new light on a debate that began March 4 when The Times reported that Mahony had dismissed six to 12 priests.

Alerted by the story, LAPD Chief Parks wrote Mahony on March 25 and pressed him for the names. He said a criminal investigation was underway.

Times staff writer Michael Krikorian contributed to this story.

Report #36 on the Era of Peace

Link to Original

From The Independent

November 29, 2005

Third Briton dies after Iraq bus attack
By Martha Linden, PA
Published: 29 November 2005
A third British Muslim has died following a gun attack on a bus carrying pilgrims in Iraq.

Yahya Gulamali, 60, a businessman from Greenford, west London, died from his injuries in hospital following the attack which claimed the lives of two other British Shiite Muslims and injured two more.

The pilgrims, from the Husaini Masjid (mosque) in Northolt, west London, were en route to religious sites when they were ambushed by gunmen as they neared a checkpoint in the Dora neighbourhood on Sunday, according to Iraqi police.

Two of the dead were named yesterday as businessmen Saifuddin Makai, 39, from Streatham, south London, and Husain Mohammedali, 50, from Harrow, north-west London.

The group were on a pilgrimage to holy shrines at Kerbala, Najaf and Kufa, according to a friend of the victims, Shabbir Abidali.

Mr Abidali said Mr Gulamali had been transferred to the American Hospital in the heavily fortified Green Zone in Baghdad for emergency treatment but had died overnight.

A Foreign Office spokeswoman confirmed the news of the death.

Those wounded in the attack were Ali Qaiyoom, 46, from Harrow, and Miss Zehra Jafferjee, 60, from Wembley, north-west London.

The news of the third death comes after the Iraqi government pledged "every assistance" in helping to find British peace activist Norman Kember, kidnapped in Baghdad.

A retired professor, Mr Kember was snatched alongside two Canadians and an American in Baghdad on Saturday.

Mr Kember, 74, a grandfather and an ex-professor at a teaching hospital, is a former secretary of the Baptist Peace Fellowship and a trustee of the Christian peace organisation the Fellowship for Reconciliation.

The Foreign Office has not confirmed who he was working for or the location where he was kidnapped.

A third British Muslim has died following a gun attack on a bus carrying pilgrims in Iraq.

Yahya Gulamali, 60, a businessman from Greenford, west London, died from his injuries in hospital following the attack which claimed the lives of two other British Shiite Muslims and injured two more.

The pilgrims, from the Husaini Masjid (mosque) in Northolt, west London, were en route to religious sites when they were ambushed by gunmen as they neared a checkpoint in the Dora neighbourhood on Sunday, according to Iraqi police.

Two of the dead were named yesterday as businessmen Saifuddin Makai, 39, from Streatham, south London, and Husain Mohammedali, 50, from Harrow, north-west London.

The group were on a pilgrimage to holy shrines at Kerbala, Najaf and Kufa, according to a friend of the victims, Shabbir Abidali.

Mr Abidali said Mr Gulamali had been transferred to the American Hospital in the heavily fortified Green Zone in Baghdad for emergency treatment but had died overnight.

A Foreign Office spokeswoman confirmed the news of the death.

Those wounded in the attack were Ali Qaiyoom, 46, from Harrow, and Miss Zehra Jafferjee, 60, from Wembley, north-west London.

The news of the third death comes after the Iraqi government pledged "every assistance" in helping to find British peace activist Norman Kember, kidnapped in Baghdad.

A retired professor, Mr Kember was snatched alongside two Canadians and an American in Baghdad on Saturday.

Mr Kember, 74, a grandfather and an ex-professor at a teaching hospital, is a former secretary of the Baptist Peace Fellowship and a trustee of the Christian peace organisation the Fellowship for Reconciliation.

The Foreign Office has not confirmed who he was working for or the location where he was kidnapped.

Report #35 on the Era of Peace

Link to Original

Sunni politicians shot dead
From: Reuters
November 29, 2005

TWO Sunni Arab politicians and their bodyguard have been shot dead while driving in western Baghdad today, members of their party said.

Iyad Alizi and Ali Hussein died when gunmen opened fire on their car as they drove near Abu Ghraib in the west of the Iraqi capital.
It appeared to be a politically motivated attack ahead of December 15 elections.

Mr Alizi and Mr Hussein were both members of the Iraqi Islamic Party. Mr Alizi was one of the party's candidates for next month's parliamentary polls.

Iraqi President Jalal Talabani condemned the shootings as an "act of terrorism", saying Mr Alizi was killed only because he was "a good Muslim who rejected violence and terrorism".

There has been an upsurge in Iraq's insurgency in the lead-up to the poll, in which voters will decide on Iraq's first full four-year parliament since the fall of Saddam Hussein.

Sectarian violence has been on the rise in Iraq since the 2003 US-led invasion, pitting the Sunni Muslim minority, once dominant under Saddam, and the Shi'ite Muslim majority, now in control of the country with ethnic Kurds.

On November 5, Fakhri al-Qaisi, a spokesman for the National Dialogue Council, was badly wounded when he was shot five times in a similar attack in western Baghdad.

With Sunnis expected to vote in large numbers and the poll less than three weeks away, another attack on a Sunni politician was likely to provoke further anger towards the Government.

Sunni leaders accuse the Government of failing to stop, or even colluding with, "death squads" formed by Shi'ite militias bent on asserting the once-oppressed majority's domination and on reprisals against Sunni supporters of Saddam's rule.

Mr Alizi's Iraqi Islamic Party and Mr Qaizi's National Dialogue are part of a strong-looking Sunni Arab list for the election - the Iraqi Accordance Front.

The Sunni vote is hard to predict as most of the 20 per cent minority shunned Iraq's first post-Saddam ballot in January.

Report #34 on the Era of Peace

Link to Original

Five dead in two suicide bomb attacks in Bangladesh: police

Yahoo! News

November 29, 2005

CHITTAGONG, Bangladesh (AFP) - Five people died, including two suicide bombers, and 16 others were wounded in two attacks targeting Bangladesh's judicial system, police said, following a wave of violence linked to Islamic extremists.

"We're stepping up security around the country and seeking details (about those responsible for the blasts)," national police chief Abdul Kaiyum said on Tuesday.

Previous blasts have been linked to the hardline Islamist group Jamayetul Mujahideen, which wants to impose strict Islamic law in the Muslim-majority country of 140 million people.

All those injured were in serious condition, police said.

The first attack was in the main court in the southeastern port city of Chittagong while the second was on a bar association in Gazipur, near the capital Dhaka.

"A man came to the police stand at the court. When he saw he was going to be searched he threw one bomb and detonated another, killing himself and a police officer," Chittagong police sub-inspector Rahul Amin said.

"A second man was injured after detonating a bomb strapped to his body and seven police officers are in serious condition in hospital," he added.

Three men died in the second attack on the bar association in Gazipur. Two of the dead were believed to be lawyers while the third was a suicide bomber, police officer Kamrul Islam said.

Eight others were badly hurt, Islam told AFP.

The blasts follow the killing of two judges earlier this month and a series of small explosions on August 17 and October 3 at court and other official buildings that killed five people and injured over 100.

Report #33 on the Era of Peace

Link to Original

November 27, 2005

Eight Iraqis Killed In Fresh Violence

Radio Free Europe

-- At least eight Iraqis were reported killed in violence across the country today, including a banker, his driver, and a member of the special police force for major crimes.


Also today, the U.S. Army announced that a U.S. soldier was killed by a roadside bomb yesterday.

Meanwhile, President Jalal Talabani said insurgent groups have responded to his call for talks and have contacted his office. He did not give further details.

Also today, Interior Minister Bayan Baker Solagh announced the suspension of a large-scale military operation against rebels following an appeal by Arab League Secretary-General Amr Mussa.

On 24 November, Solagh announced his forces would "forcefully strike at hotbeds of terrorism" over the coming weeks.

In Washington, the White House for the first time has claimed ownership of an Iraq withdrawal plan.

A spokesman signaled late yesterday Washington's acceptance of a recent U.S. Senate amendment designed to pave the way for a phased U.S. military withdrawal from the country.

Report #32 on the Era of Peace

Link to Original

Darfur rebels say attack town, demand seat at talks

November 29, 2005

Yahoo! News

KHARTOUM (Reuters) - A Darfur rebel faction said it attacked a town in West Darfur state on Tuesday, killing 37 soldiers and police, to push for its inclusion in peace talks due to open in the Nigerian capital Abuja later in the day.

The Sudanese army confirmed troop movements in the area where the rebels said they carried out their attack but gave no further details. A source in the aid community confirmed an attack on a police station in the town of Sirba and said three policemen had been wounded.

The rebels, the breakaway National Movement for Reform and Development, (NMRD) are not represented at the Abuja talks under African Union (AU) mediation.

AU mediator Sam Ibok said the Abuja team would seek information from their colleagues in Sudan before issuing any reaction to the attack, adding that causing mayhem in Darfur was not a criterion for inclusion in the peace talks.

"We do not subscribe to the fact that somebody has to kill people in Darfur to have a place at the talks. It's a peaceful process and we do not want to link it to violence," he told Reuters in Abuja.

"All the people of Darfur will have a chance to express themselves in the peace process and there will be a time to involve groups like the NMRD, but not until the talks have made sufficient progress," he added.

The NMRD say they no longer respect a ceasefire they signed with the government, after Sudanese armed forces attacked their positions near the border with Chad.

"At 6:30 a.m. (0330 GMT) we attacked and took control of Sirba town in West Darfur. We are now in control of the town," Khalil Abdallah, the political leader of the group, told Reuters from Darfur.

He said the rebels had killed 37 troops and police and taken six vehicles.

"For one year we are cooperating with the African Union and still we are not part of the negotiations in Abuja," he said, giving that as the reason why the group attacked the town.

Abdallah said the group was also retaliating to government strikes on their bases in the Jabel Moun area near the Chadian border earlier this month.

He said the more than 6,000 AU troops monitoring a shaky ceasefire in the remote west of Sudan were doing nothing to rein in Khartoum's security forces.

The NMRD's demand to take part in the Abuja peace talks came as representatives of the two main Darfur rebel groups and the government prepared to open the seventh round of negotiations.

But observers are sceptical that the talks will produce any concrete developments. They say one reason is the insufficient representation of those fighting in the field.

(Additional reporting by Estelle Shirbon in Abuja)

Monday, November 28, 2005

The Hireling Report #25e

Lori works to rebuild diocesan credibility
Documents: Ex-bishop Egan shuffled priests in sex cases

By Daniel Tepfer

(Bridgeport, CT) Connecticut Post
March 17, 2002

Bridgeport - While priest sex scandals make headlines nationwide, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Bridgeport is quietly working to rebuild its credibility under Bishop William Lori's supervision.

Lori -- who became bishop of the Bridgeport diocese a year ago Tuesday -- said he plans to step up enforcement of the diocese's sexual-misconduct policy.

This involves reviewing all files of the diocese's 285 priests and 86 deacons to see if any pose a danger to children. Lori also vowed that priests who have been suspended because of sexual misconduct allegations will never hold a clergy post again.

"At this point, I can say that, to the best of my knowledge, there are no priests or deacons of the diocese of Bridgeport in active ministry who pose any threat of committing sexual misconduct with a minor," Lori said in a wide-ranging interview last week. Just before Lori's installation last year, the diocese, after seven contentious years of litigation, agreed to settle lawsuits filed by 26 people who claimed they were abused by diocesan priests in the 1970s and 1980s.

While the exact settlement was not officially disclosed, sources say it totaled $15 million. While the diocese contends that figure is too high, it nonetheless is believed to be the largest amount ever paid out by a state diocese to settle such claims.

But it is far from the largest in the nation, as the Boston archdiocese expects to pay out $100 million to settle lawsuits against priests accused of sexually abusing children there.

The Bridgeport settlement also marked the first time diocesan officials publicly admitted that some of its priests had molested children.

Lawyers for the victims claimed that the main stumbling block to settlements had been former Bishop Edward Egan, now cardinal of New York's Archdiocese.

Court documents obtained by the Connecticut Post show that soon after becoming Bridgeport's bishop in 1988, Egan was informed of sexual-abuse complaints made against particular priests.

But instead of reporting these complaints to authorities, Egan essentially played a shell game by re-assigning the priests involved to churches around the diocese, the documents show.

In June 1989, Egan moved the Rev. Charles T. Carr -- who previously received psychiatric treatment for allegedly molesting children at churches in Bethel and Norwalk -- to Central Catholic High School as spiritual director. And in 1990, after receiving more complaints about Carr, he moved him again to St. Philip Parish in Norwalk, according to court records.

The Rev. Martin Federici, accused of abuse in several complaints and who was diagnosed by a psychologist as having "poor contact with reality," was assigned by Egan in 1989 to Cathedral High School.

Court records show numerous other transfers of priests accused of abuse.

Four of the six priests listed in the 2001 settlement -- Raymond Pcolka, W. Phillip Coleman, Federici and Carr -- were suspended by the diocese only after lawsuits naming them as abusers were filed.

Sources close to the settlement negotiations said it was no coincidence the deal was reached only after Egan had officially left the diocese for New York.

"Bishop Egan and the diocese of Bridgeport handled the sexual-abuse claims like the head of a tobacco company or a high-level Enron executive," said Jason Tremont, whose Bridgeport law firm represented the 24 of the 26 victims in the settlement. "They attempted to wage a public relations campaign of denial and, at the same time, obtained a court order preventing the public from hearing the truth."

But in a reversal of previous policy in New York, Egan last week said that archdiocese will now report suspected pedophile priests to authorities for criminal investigation.

Lori, who took over 10 days after the Bridgeport settlement was finalized, immediately set about reforming Egan's policies in Bridgeport.

"Priests are no longer moved around willy-nilly because of allegations of abuse," Lori said. "Those days are long over. When a lot of that was done, people did not understand the high rate of recidivism, the nature of the disease and the bad effect it had on the victims.

"Today we do. For that reason, the church, as well as the rest of society, has taken a new approach" to matters of sexual abuse.

Lori explained that now, when a credible abuse allegation is received by the diocese, the person involved is confronted, relieved of his or her duties and sent for evaluation or treatment. Also, the diocese will try to cooperate with victims and their families and, if warranted, refer cases to state authorities.

"It is very important for us to reach out to anyone affected by this and I want to apologize to anyone who has been hurt. It is utterly against all we stand for. The only way we can really prevent this is to be as vigilant as we can," Lori said.

A bishop apologizing in the Bridgeport diocese was unheard of previously, but Lori appears to take the issue very seriously.

Last May, when the Rev. John Castaldo, Trinity Catholic High School's chaplain, was charged with soliciting sex over the Internet from an undercover investigator he thought was a 14-year-old boy, Lori went to the school and apologized to graduating seniors and their parents.

After meeting with Castaldo, Lori suspended the priest from his duties. A lawsuit pending against the diocese claims Castaldo in 1991 molested a 13-year-old boy at St. Teresa's Church in Trumbull. The bishop would not comment on that lawsuit.

Egan had adamantly refused to give interviews about sexual allegations against priests, going so far as to run from a reporter who sought to question him at the Holiday Inn in Bridgeport. So Lori readily agreeing to an interview can seem surprising.

The interview was held in the bishop's office in the Catholic Center, a mammoth room with yellow walls. Lori sat at a large carved wood desk that came with him from Washington, D.C., where he had served as auxiliary bishop.

"They insisted I take it with me," he joked.

Physically, Lori is a sharp contrast to his predecessor. While Egan was a large man with a booming voice, Lori is slight and speaks softly.

The bishop said he is aware of the extreme financial burdens other dioceses are facing because of sex-abuse complaints and damage awards. Bridgeport, however, is not one of them, he said.

"The diocese is in good financial condition. The funds donors gave us for charities are being used for those purposes, the money given for the annual bishop's appeal is not going to these settlements," Lori said. "Most of the money for the settlements is from insurance money and reserves set aside for such eventualities."

Lori's review of priests' files -- which he says shows no instances of sexual abuse -- includes the "mysterious seven" priests who lawyers claimed allegedly were involved in abuse incidents, but were not named in lawsuits and referred to only as colors, "Father Purple, etc." in court hearings.

The review also includes the file on the Rev. Joseph J. Malloy, former chaplain of the Bridgeport Fire Department and former pastor of St. Ann's Church in Bridgeport, who was accused of molesting a boy in a complaint included in the settlement. Malloy, now in Stamford, has not been suspended.

"As to Father Malloy, we did not find the allegation credible. We publicly stated that," Lori said. "We have confidence in Father Malloy, the description of the allegation did not make sense."

The Bridgeport man told the Connecticut Post he was 10 years old and an altar boy at St. Catherine of Siena Church in Trumbull when the assault took place.

Malloy has denied the allegation.

Lori admitted he never interviewed the alleged victim, but relied on what other diocesan officials told him of the incident.

Boston's Cardinal Bernard Law, whose diocese has been wracked with sexual-abuse cases over the last several months, recently turned over to state prosecutors the names of at least 80 priests accused of abuse. But Lori said he is not planning to do the same.

"We have always cooperated with civil authorities in the past and we will have to see what happens with future legislation. What the law would ask of us we would do," he said. "The vast bulk of what we have is already out there and has been made public.

"The files of the priests involved in the cases were reviewed by the judge and anything relevant to the situation is known. I want to get this on the table, but I want to make sure that good priests are not victimized by allegations."

Lori said he has learned that Carr was ministering in a nursing home in Danbury and had him removed. This came just after Tremont notified diocesan officials of a new complaint against Carr by a man who says the priest abused him in a Wilton church in 1982.

"We keep abreast of where these priests are and if we ever discover they are doing any kind of ministry we will make contact with the appropriate authorities and put an end to it," Lori said. "We are very vigilant lest any of these people seek a ministry."

One priest who has managed to avoid the diocese's scrutiny is the Rev. Lawrence Brett, one of the country's most notorious child abusers.

Brett, who is being sought by the FBI, is accused of sexually abusing children in Fairfield and Stamford in the 1960s and later in California and Baltimore. Sources estimate he cost the diocese nearly $1 million in settlements.

Court document show that in 1990, Egan apparently knew where Brett was and even invited him to return to Bridgeport.

"We have no information where Brett is and we would be happy if he were found and brought to justice," Lori said.

At one point, records show that Brett appeared ready to voluntarily be defrocked -- called "laicized" in church terminology -- but never signed the papers necessary.

Lori was asked why the diocese now does not forcibly laicize Brett and the other priests who are currently suspended.

"I simply can't laicize them at will. I can recommend that they voluntarily receive laicization," the bishop said. "I can't do it without going through a difficult process.

Many of the suspended priests still live in the area. Pcolka, accused of molesting 16 children, left a psychiatric treatment center without permission. He is living in Southbury.

Lori said the diocese is continuing to pay the suspended priests, but he said they are paid only enough to sustain them and keep them off the welfare rolls. He said the diocese will stop payments once they get non-religious jobs.

The Hireling Report #25d

Link to Original

The Egan File

Hartford Courant
March 17, 2002

On Oct. 7, 1997, and again on Sept. 23, 1999, Bishop Edward M. Egan was questioned by lawyers for people alleging sexual abuse by priests in the Bridgeport diocese. Following are excerpts from Egan's depositions, which were sealed by the court as part of about $12 million settlement last year:

On scope of abuse:

Egan: These things happen in such small numbers. It's marvelous when you think of the hundreds and hundreds of priests, how very few have even been accused, and how very few have even come close to having anyone prove anything. Claims are not of interest to me. Realities are. Claims are claims. Allegations are allegations.

Q: And are you saying that over time, the instances of clergy sexual abuse have increased?

Egan: Over time the allegations have increased.

Q: OK. Well, I'd like to -

Egan: Did you hear that? Not instances - your word was instances.

Q: Bishop, I can hear quite well ...

On Pcolka case:

Q: Are you aware of the fact that it involves instances of oral sex, anal sex, beatings, violence, sadistic verbiage - are you aware of the extent of the claims in this case?

Egan: I am not aware of any of those things. I am aware of the claims of those things, the allegations of those things.

Q: And you clearly are aware of the number of people that are making these similar claims during the same period of time, involving Father Pcolka, correct?

Egan: I am aware that there are a number of people who know one another, some are related to one another, have the same lawyers and so forth, I am aware of the circumstances, yes.

Q: So you understand that there is a significant part of the Catholic faithful that have claimed to be affected by Father Pcolka's sexual abuses, correct?

Egan: I am not aware that a significant part of the Catholic faithful claim to have been affected by father's abuses, no. ... The Catholic faithful of Fairfield County, of which this diocese is comprised, is 360,911 signed up in our parishes. I believe we can safely say there's probably another 150,000 or more not signed up in our parishes. Is 12 a significant portion? And then let us please remember that the 12 have never been proved to be telling the truth.

Q: And Father Pcolka, let us remember, won't tell us the truth because he continues to take the Fifth Amendment ...

On Brett case:

Q: OK. And from that memo you became aware of the fact, did you not, Bishop Egan, that under your predecessor's administration of the Diocese, it was decided that they would feign hepatitis and that is why he was not around?

Egan: That's what the final sentence says on the second page.

Q: So they would hide the complaint of sexual abuse and tell persons that he had hepatitis and that is why he was not around?

Egan: I wouldn't read it that way.

Q: You wouldn't?

Egan: No, I would read it that this man is going away, and if anyone asks, say he's not well, he has hepatitis. That's quite a bit different than saying you are going to hide it. If someone were going to ask - I don't perceive it that way, that's not my style, but I think that it's altogether understandable to anybody reading it. This person has been accused of doing such and such, we're going to be sending him away for attention. I wouldn't have done this, but I don't think it's a serious matter. Someone would say, well, if anybody asks, make it that he's not well, that he has hepatitis. The word "feign," of course, makes it somewhat dramatic, but my reading of it is not - my reading is the one I have just given you.

Q: You say that - he is not only accused but he confesses, does he not?

Egan: Yes, but he is accused and he confesses.

Q: He says, look it, he admits apparently that he had oral sex with this young boy and that he actually bit his penis and advised the boy to go to confession elsewhere?

Egan: Well, I think you're not exactly right. I don't think it was a young boy. Now, I can't remember every detail, but it seemed to me that the gentleman in question was an 18-year-old student at Sacred Heart University.

Q: Are you aware of the fact that in December of 1964 that an individual under 21 years of age was a minor in the state of Connecticut?

Egan: My problem, my clarification, had to do with the expression "a young boy" about an 18-year-old.

Q: A young - all right, a minor, is that better then?

Egan: Fine.

On allowing Brett to remain a priest:

Q: Well, isn't it a fact that by not asking him to remove himself or by not suspending him, in effect you concluded that you would allow him to remain as a priest?

Egan: We had indications from psychiatrists that he was comporting himself appropriately, and our decision was to continue until we came to further conclusions because of the other indications.

Q: The fact that you - at that point you allowed him to remain a priest, that was your conclusion?

Egan: Yes, on the basis of analysis and by a professional.

The Hireling Report #25c

Link to Original

Timeline: The Carr File

Hartford Courant
March 17, 2002

Compiled by The Courant from sealed court documents

May 10, 1980: Charles Carr ordained, assigned to Our Lady of Fatima Parish in Wilton.

Spring 1982: Mother of 11-year-old boy says Carr molested her son in Our Lady of Fatima parking lot (she details the incident in a letter seven years later).

June 21, 1984: Carr appointed to faculty of Immaculate High School in Danbury, living at St. Mary's rectory in Bethel.

August 1984: Father of 14-year-old altar boy at St. Mary's says Carr rubbed his son's leg in movie theater; Carr referred for therapy.

Sept. 20, 1984: Carr transferred from St. Mary's to St. Thomas the Apostle in Norwalk; appointed parochial vicar.

July 1986: Carr appointed to faculty of Notre Dame Catholic High School in Fairfield.

June 1989: Bishop Edward M. Egan transfers Carr to Central Catholic High School in Norwalk; Carr named spiritual director for boys.

Oct. 19, 1989: Mother writes letter to Diocese of Bridgeport, detailing 1982 complaint that her son was molested by Carr at Our Lady of Fatima.

Nov. 17, 1989: Egan briefed by aide about counseling program for Carr.

December 1989: Egan meets with Carr, then writes that Carr denied all charges but was “most cordial and understanding” about staying in therapy.

Jan. 10, 1990: Carr sent to Institute of Living in Hartford for evaluation, then returns to Central Catholic High School.

April 3, 1990: A different parent complains that Carr rubbed his son's leg in a movie theater while Carr was serving at Our Lady of Fatima in 1981; Egan aide notified of complaint.

April 9, 1990: Institute of Living advises diocese to take action “to protect both Father Carr and the public from the possibility of lapses in his judgement [sic] and behavior in the future.”

April 16, 1990: Diocese puts Carr on indefinite leave from job as spiritual director of Central Catholic High School in Norwalk.

April 23, 1990: Carr returns to Institute of Living for in-patient evaluation.

May 3, 1990: Egan aide writes of “developing pattern of allegations” against Carr.

June 29, 1990: Egan appoints Carr parochial vicar of St. Philip in Norwalk; restricts Carr from working with children.

June 20, 1991: Egan appoints Carr parochial vicar of St. Andrew Parish in Bridgeport; restrictions lifted.

Jan. 8, 1993: Former altar boy, now 23, repeats claim Carr molested him at St. Mary's in 1984 and questions why Carr is still an active priest; diocese responds that it is “reasonably satisfied” Carr is no longer a threat.

March 30, 1995: Civil lawsuit filed by another person accusing Carr of sex abuse; Egan puts Carr on indefinite leave and removes him from St. Andrew.

March 2001: Diocese settles civil suits, acknowledging unspecified incidents and apologizing for them.

The Hireling Report #25b

Link to Original

A Defensive, Dismissive Tone

By Eric Rich and Elizabeth Hamilton

Hartford Courant
March 17, 2002

Hours into a closed-door interrogation, a plaintiff's attorney presses Bishop Edward M. Egan on his view of claim after claim of sexual abuse made against the same priest from the Diocese of Bridgeport.

Egan knows that the allegations follow a pattern. He knows that the Rev. Raymond Pcolka exercised his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination more than 100 times under questioning about allegations of sodomy, rape and brutality.

But now, under oath in 1999, Egan gives the priest the benefit of the doubt, and casts an unbelieving eye at the claims of a dozen former altar boys and parishioners.

"Let us please remember," Egan says, "that the 12 have never been proved to be telling the truth."

Egan's confidential deposition, a transcript of which was obtained by The Courant, offers a rare glimpse into the style, personality and beliefs of the nation's most visible ecclesiastical figure as he faces questions over his handling of the most difficult issue before the church today.

Egan, now a cardinal and archbishop of the Archdiocese of New York, appears at times combative and legalistic, defensive of diocesan practices dating back years and dismissive of the claims of sexual misconduct brought against priests. He emerges as a figure out of step with today's prevailing views - arguing, for example, that victims have no right to know whether other accusations have been leveled against their abusers.

In one exchange, attorney Cindy Robinson asks Egan if he is aware that the cases against Pcolka involve oral sex, sodomy and beatings.

A: I am not aware of any of those things. I am aware of the claims of those things, the allegations of those things.

Q: And you are clearly aware of the number of people that are making these similar claims during the same period of time, over a long period of time, involving Father Pcolka, correct?

A: I am aware that there are a number of people who know one another, some are related to one another, have the same lawyers and so forth, I am aware of the circumstances, yes.

Eighteen months later, the diocese admitted that "there were incidents of sexual abuse" and paid out about $12 million to settle 26 claims against five priests. Egan's depositions were taken in connection with those cases, which remain sealed by a judge.

Egan largely eschews interviews with the media and thus remains something of a mystery to the general public. Last week, despite pressure to follow the lead of lesser Catholic figures across the country, a spokesman for Egan said the cardinal would have no comment on the sexual abuse crisis rippling out from Boston.

Detractors in New York have called Egan clinical and distant, even imperious. It is an assessment that resonates with the criticism that attached to him in 1997 after he testified publicly at the civil trial of the Rev. Laurence Brett, a Bridgeport priest.

Former altar boy Frank Martinelli sued the diocese, claiming he had been sexually abused as a teenager in the 1960s by Brett, then an assistant pastor at a parish in Stamford. Brett had admitted assaulting children and teenagers across the country; the diocese did not deny that he was a child molester.

But Egan testified that the diocese could not be held responsible because priests are "self-employed." The claim struck some as insensitive to the victim and was blamed, in part, for the jury's verdict against the diocese.

The deposition he later gave at a law office in Bridgeport, during two sessions in 1997 and 1999, reveals a similar affinity for legalistic evasion and semantic parsing.

Under questioning, Egan is reluctant to describe allegations of sexual misconduct as true - even in one case in which he had already taken the extraordinary step of asking the accused priest to sever his ties to the church, a process known as laicization.


Q: Would it be fair to say, Bishop, that you felt that these were more than allegations, that you felt that this was truthful?

A: I felt that they were substantial.

Q: So that you felt that Father [Gavin] O'Connor indeed had - was guilty of sexual misconduct with children?

A: I felt there were substantial allegations, felt the circumstances were such as to make them substantial, and it was my judgment that he would be best reduced to the lay state.

Although the settlement is less than 18 months away, Egan says during his deposition that the actual instances of sexual misconduct by priests are extremely limited - and he appears to imply that false allegations may be more common. During a terse exchange with Robinson he claims there were not more than "two or three" cases of clergy sexual abuse in the diocese before the 1980s.

Q: And are you saying that over time, the instances of clergy sexual abuse have increased?

A: Over time the allegations have increased.

Q: OK. Well, I'd like to -

A: Did you hear that? Not instances - your word was instances.

Q: Bishop, I can hear quite well ...

Again and again, Egan extends the benefit of the doubt to the accused while showing little sympathy for the accusers, and appears to minimize the conduct in question. Consider this exchange about Brett's confessed sexual misconduct in 1964.

Q: He admits apparently that he had oral sex with this young boy and that he actually bit his penis and advised the boy to go to confession elsewhere?

A: Well, I think you're not exactly right. ... It seemed to me that the gentleman in question was an 18-year-old student at Sacred Heart University.

Q: Are you aware of the fact that in December of 1964 that an individual under 21 years of age was a minor in the state of Connecticut?

A: My problem, my clarification, had to do with the expression "a young boy" about an 18-year-old.

Q: A young - all right, a minor, is that better then?

A: Fine.

Brett was sent to New Mexico for treatment after admitting that he bit the young man's penis to prevent him from ejaculating. He was allowed to continue working as a priest elsewhere in the country under the auspices of the Bridgeport diocese.

Egan defends the diocese's handling of the Brett case even though much of it occurred years before his arrival in 1988. In so doing, he spars with the attorneys over the meaning of plain language.

Consider his defense of a 1964 directive to mislead anyone who might inquire about Brett's sudden absence. The memo reads: "A recurrence of hepatitis was to be feigned should anyone ask."

Q: So they would hide the complaint of sexual abuse and tell persons that he had hepatitis and that is why he was not around?

A: I wouldn't read it that way.

Q: You wouldn't?

A: No, I would read it that this man is going away, and if anyone asks, say he's not well, he has hepatitis. That's quite a bit different than saying you are going to hide it.

Brett continued to work, out of state but under the auspices of the Bridgeport diocese, for decades afterward. He did so first with the approval of Bishop Walter Curtis and then, when Egan was appointed, with his consent.

Egan shows a similar unwillingness to concede the apparent intent of letters Brett sent back to the diocese while he was out of state. Attorney Paul Tremont maintains that the letters amount to requests - not granted - to come back, apparently implying that Brett was permitted to serve as a priest as long as he was out of the diocese.

Egan resists the interpretation.

In one early letter, Brett writes: "I still hope to return to Connecticut. In fact, I long for the time when I come back. It has been my understanding that I would be able to do so but I will wait until I hear from you upon this matter."

Q: You indicated that the letter of April 21, 1967 is not a request to come back?

A: I don't read it as a request. ... I would think the text is what the text is.

Brett did eventually return, to meet with Egan, in July 1990. At the time, Brett was working in Baltimore even though his authority as a priest came through the Bridgeport diocese.

Egan, who had testified that he familiarizes himself with priests before he meets them, recorded his thoughts in a church memorandum: "All things considered, he made a good impression. In the course of our conversation, the particulars of his case came out in detail and grace."

Egan is pressed on whether the memorandum indicates that he knew of Brett's sexual history when he found Brett so impressive. In response, Egan claims, essentially, that he can't remember what he meant.

Q: Now what did you mean by that [second sentence]?

A: Well, I think someone could take that case to mean some kind of court case or something of the sort.

Q: No, I am asking what you meant.

A: All I mean is that his story came out in some detail ...

Q: Doesn't that relate to sexual misconduct?

A: I cannot be sure it does ...

Q: So you think that [the memo] had nothing to do with the prior sexual complaints against him?

A: Sir, I - that is my current feeling on this thing.

The Hireling Report #25a

Link to Original

By Elizabeth Hamilton and Eric Rich

Hartford Courant
March 17, 2002

Secret court documents reveal that New York Cardinal Edward M. Egan, while serving as bishop of the Bridgeport Roman Catholic Diocese, allowed several priests facing multiple accusations of sexual abuse to continue working for years - including one who admitted biting a teenager during oral sex.

Egan failed to investigate aggressively some abuse allegations, did not refer complaints to criminal authorities and, during closed testimony in 1999, suggested that a dozen people who made complaints of rape, molestation and beatings against the same priest may have all been lying, the documents show.

In comments that seem starkly out of synch with the current climate of zero tolerance for sex-abuse accusations against priests, Egan said he wasn't interested in allegations - only "realities." He added that "very few have even come close to having anyone prove anything" against a priest.

"Allegations are allegations," he said.

In addition, former Bridgeport Bishop Walter Curtis, Egan's predecessor, testified in 1995 that the diocese deliberately shuffled pedophile priests among parishes to give them a "fresh start," and he admitted destroying records of complaints against some priests, the documents show. Curtis, who is now deceased, also said he didn't believe pedophilia was a permanent condition.

The revelations about Egan's role in Connecticut's largest clergy sex-abuse scandal are taken from thousands of documents in lawsuits that Egan and the Bridgeport diocese fought, successfully, to keep sealed from public view. While the files remain sealed following a settlement of the suits last year, The Courant recently obtained copies of much of them, including transcripts of pretrial testimony of Egan and Curtis, internal diocesan memoranda and personnel files.

The documents reveal that, in addition to the eight priests who were originally sued, at least nine others faced molestation accusations but were never publicly identified. The documents - which do not include details of the claims or their outcomes - name seven of the priests, one of whom continues to serve as pastor at a Fairfield County parish.

While glimpses of the allegations against a few of the priests emerged during eight years of legal battle, details of what the bishops and other church officials had to say about the cases, and how they handled them, have never been reported until now.

The Bridgeport diocese settled complaints against six priests for $12 million to $15 million last March, shortly after Egan was promoted to cardinal in New York. Egan, who was bishop in Bridgeport from 1988 to 2000, was a defendant in some of the lawsuits and fought them aggressively from 1993 until the settlement, which ended all of the litigation.

He inherited a budding scandal in the Bridgeport diocese that took root during the 27-year reign of Curtis, who, in pretrial interviews with plaintiffs' lawyers, exhibited a blunt lack of interest in dealing with sexually abusive priests. Asked if he ever transferred a priest "because of pedophilic conduct," Curtis replied, "yes."

"When he was assigned to a different parish, would anyone be advised of the problem which he had previously had?" the attorney asked.

"No," Curtis said.

Under Curtis, the documents show, church officials and other priests often ignored obvious signs of sexual involvement with children - such as Rev. Gavin O'Connor's practice of having boys spend the weekend with him in his bed in the rectory. Typically, when a complaint was made, it was only considered substantiated if the priest confessed.

Curtis also testified that records of complaints against priests would usually be put into the diocese's "secret archive," a canonically required cache of historical documents accessed only with keys kept by the bishop and the vicar. He said he would occasionally go into the archive and remove what he called "antiquated" abuse complaints, and destroy them.

Curtis seemed less interested in pedophilia - which he viewed as "an occasional thing" and not a serious psychological problem - than in weeding out potential gays among clergy applicants:

"We had a policy in this sense, that before a candidate was accepted for study for the priesthood, [they] would have psychological testing, and if there appeared signs of homosexuality, he wouldn't be accepted," Curtis said.

By the time Egan took over in December 1988, complaints were trickling in against several priests, made by adults who said they had been victimized in the 1960s, 70s and 80s. The documents show that he defrocked at least one priest for sexual offenses, and put in place the first written policy on sexual abuse complaints.

But he was slow to suspend or remove priestly powers of some others, even those with multiple complaints against them.

Despite a May 1990 memo by a diocese official worrying about "a developing pattern of accusations" that Rev. Charles Carr of Norwalk had fondled young boys, Egan kept Carr working as a priest until 1995, when he suspended him only after a lawsuit was filed. Egan's aide, Vicar Laurence R. Bronkiewicz, wrote a sympathetic note to Carr.

"Trusting that you understand the reasons for these actions, I join Bishop Egan in praying that the Lord will bless you with the graces you need at this time in your life," Bronkiewicz said.

Egan actually reinstated Carr in 1999 as a part-time chaplain at a church-run nursing home in Danbury. But after yet another accusation against Carr surfaced earlier this year, about an incident from long ago, newly installed Bishop William Lori finally defrocked Carr last month and referred him to state child protection authorities.

The expressions of concern for, and willingness to believe, accused priests stand in contrast to the absence of sympathy displayed for the accusers. For instance, regarding a dozen people who made complaints of sexual abuse and violence against the Rev. Raymond Pcolka of Greenwich, Egan said, "the 12 have never been proved to be telling the truth."

Yet, nowhere in the documents is there evidence that attempts were made to seriously investigate the truth of such allegations - accusers were not interviewed, witnesses were not sought, and no attempt was made to learn of other possible victims. Egan allowed Pcolka to continue working as a priest until 1993, when he suspended him after Pcolka refused to participate in psychiatric treatment.

Egan also doesn't believe accusers have a right to know of other, similar accusations against the same priest: "We're dealing with them as a specific case, and I would have no reason to go into other people's concerns with them."

And he disagreed that a 1964 memo, instructing church officials that "hepatitis was to be feigned" as a cover for the sudden absence of a priest, was an attempt to hide the fact that the priest, the Rev. Laurence Brett, had left because he admitted biting a teenager's penis during oral sex.

"I wouldn't read it that way," Egan said of the memo, written long before he got there. "I would read it that this man is going away, and if anyone asks, say he's not well, he has hepatitis. That's quite a bit different than saying you are going to hide it."

Egan added that he wouldn't have made up an excuse about a priest's absence, preferring instead to simply tell anyone who inquired that it was none of their business.

Egan allowed Brett to continue working as a priest outside of the diocese until February 1993, three months after receiving additional allegations of sexual misconduct against Brett from the 1960s. When the allegations came in, Egan's aide, Bronkiewicz, wrote a letter alerting the archdiocese in Baltimore, where Brett had been assigned.

"At the present time, we have no reason to believe the accuser of Father Brett intends to take legal action of any kind, and there has been no publicity concerning the accusation," he wrote.

There is no evidence from any of the documents that the diocese under both Egan and Curtis alerted the police or state child protection authorities when parents or victims came forward with accusations of abuse. In all of the cases during Egan's tenure, the statute of limitations to bring criminal charges had expired.

But the failure to report those cases meant that police and state child protection authorities were never able to investigate the possibility of other victims or possession of child pornography, a federal crime. Under public pressure, Boston and several other dioceses recently began turning over names of all accused priests, no matter how old the incidents.

Revelations of Egan's actions and attitudes toward sex abuse accusations against clergy are likely to further roil the Catholic Church, which has been rocked in recent months by news of the Boston Archdiocese's decades-long mishandling of abuse complaints against pedophile priest John Geoghan. In the wake of that scandal, Boston and other dioceses - including Bridgeport, under the new bishop, Lori - have taken steps to become more forthcoming with the public and civil authorities.

However, Egan, who as cardinal in New York is the highest profile Catholic in the United States, has come under growing criticism for not speaking out. On Friday, in a New York Daily News cover story headlined "Speak Up, Egan Told," Egan's spokesman said the cardinal planned no public statements on the issue.

Egan did not respond to requests for comments about his actions in the Bridgeport cases, including a list of questions e-mailed to his office at the request of his spokesman, Joseph Zwilling. In an e-mail Saturday, Zwilling referred all questions "concerning the Diocese of Bridgeport and/or any actions that may have occured in that diocese" to Bridgeport.

Joseph McAleer, a spokesman for the Bridgeport Diocese, said in a statement that "this was litigated for 8 years and was in the newspapers practically every day," and that the diocese would have no further comment.

"The diocese of Bridgeport has always acted according to the law and remains proactive on the prevention of sexual misconduct by its clergy and its employees," McAleer said.

Cindy Robinson, whose law firm, Tremont & Sheldon, represented 26 people who settled lawsuits with the Bridgeport Diocese last year, would not comment on any of the information contained in the sealed documents, saying she is prevented by the protective order issued by the judge.

"We have always said we were confident we would prevail at trial proving our claim that both Bishop Egan and Bishop Curtis participated in the ongoing cover-up of these priests," said Robinson.

*

What follows is the first inside look, derived from the court documents, of how Egan and other church officials handled the cases of three priests accused of sexual abuse:

Rev. Charles Carr

Though the diocese kept giving Carr new assignments, allegations of sexual improprieties followed him around.

The Rev. Michael Palmer, the parish priest at Our Lady of Fatima Church in Wilton in the early 1980s, knew as early as 1982 that his assistant, Father Charles Carr, might be attracted to children. That was when the mother of an 11-year-old boy came to Palmer to complain about Carr.

Her son, a student at Our Lady of Fatima School, had gone with Carr and a couple of other boys to Long Island for a school holiday trip a few days earlier and came back drenched with sweat and shaking.

When his mother asked what was wrong, her son told her that after the other boys had been dropped off at their houses, Carr had driven him to the church parking lot and parked. Her son didn't like that, the mother told her priest, because it was already dark and the church was out of the way from their home.

Then Carr started tickling the boy, even though he was asking the priest to stop. When Carr tried to put his hands down the boy's pants, she said, her son pushed the priest away and called him a "pervert."

Palmer told the distraught mother he'd "look into it." When he asked Carr about it a few days later, Carr admitted he'd been tickling the boy and that his hand might have accidentally "slipped," but he denied any sexual intent.

Palmer told Carr to stay away from the boy, but never reported it to anyone else because, he testified in a 1997 deposition, he didn't believe it was a "clear cut" sexual complaint. Attorneys questioned why Palmer would not consider the complaint sexual in nature:

Q: What's not clear cut?

A. That it's a direct intended sexual advance.

Q: Let me ask you, as a priest, as a man, you are an athlete as well, you said you enjoy sports, how many times have you stuck your hand accidentally down the front of an individual, a boy or a man's trousers?

A: I can't remember any.

Carr left the Wilton church in 1984 for what would be a short-lived stint on the faculty of Immaculate High School in Danbury and the parish of St. Mary's in Bethel, where he stayed only three months.

Peter DeMarco, who was the parish priest at St. Mary's in 1984, was asked about Carr's quick transfer during a 1999 deposition, and said he knew only that a group of parents complained to the diocese that Carr had inappropriately touched one of their eighth-grade sons at the movies.

"Monsignor [Andrew] Cusack called me up after the meeting and told me he had met with the parents," DeMarco said. "That they were not - this is what I seem to remember. That the parents were not after any criminal or legal repercussions - I'm not sure what the words were - but they just wanted him to be transferred. And Monsignor Cusack said, `He will be leaving you as soon as possible.' "

Cusack, the Episcopal Vicar of Religious and Clergy for the Bridgeport Diocese, sent Carr for counseling with William Larkin, a Ridgefield therapist with a degree in theology. Bishop Curtis then transferred him to St. Thomas the Apostle Parish in Norwalk, where he met 13-year-old Jon Fleetwood and his family in September 1984.

Fleetwood, who sued Carr in 1993 and has spoken publicly about the sexual abuse he suffered, worked in the rectory answering phones and ran into Carr often. The priest quickly became friendly with the Fleetwood family and was a frequent dinner guest.

One evening, Carr invited Fleetwood to his room in the rectory, which he shared with three other priests, to watch a movie. The fondling began the same way it did with the other boy, Fleetwood testified in 1995.

"He was poking and tickling and soon it just moved down lower toward my penis and he started playing with the inside of my thigh," he said. "And then it turned into rubbing instead of tickling."

That first time, Fleetwood said, Carr did not unzip his pants and fondle his penis. But he did the second time, as well as on three other occasions, Fleetwood said.

Fleetwood eventually stopped accepting Carr's invitations, which got him in a little bit of trouble with his parents - who thought he was being rude to the priest - but he said he felt too ashamed and upset about the sexual encounters to tell anyone why he didn't want to go.

Then, in July 1986, Curtis granted Carr's request to be appointed to the faculty of the Notre Dame Catholic High School in Fairfield. When asked during his 1996 deposition why the diocese would transfer Carr to a boy's school when he was suspected of making sexual advances on boys, Cusack said he was simply acting on Larkin's advice.

"Isn't that like sending Dracula to guard the blood bank?" asked Attorney Paul Tremont, who was representing the plaintiffs suing Carr and the diocese. "Why didn't you put him some other place?"

"That was not the advice of Dr. Larkin," Cusack responded.

The diocese did not at any time, however, request or obtain any written report from Larkin about Carr's mental health or even his diagnosis, which Cusack characterized as primarily a "self-esteem problem." Carr stayed at Notre Dame High School until 1989, when Egan transferred him to a new job - spiritual director for the boys at Central Catholic High School in Norwalk.

Word of Carr's appointment to the Norwalk school got back to the mother of the 11-year-old boy Carr was accused of fondling in 1982, and she was, her son testified in 1996, "outraged."

The woman, who was getting her master's degree in theology at the time, asked one of her professors to write to Egan on her behalf - to vouch for her, in effect - so she could sit down with him and discuss Carr's appointment, her son told attorneys. But Egan refused to meet with her.

Instead, the woman met with Cusack's replacement, Laurence Bronkiewicz, on Oct. 19, 1989, and told him what Carr did to her son seven years earlier. Bronkiewicz then called Cusack, who was now working at Seton Hall University, and asked him whether there were any other complaints against Carr he needed to know about.

Yes, Cusack said, one - and told him for the first time about the 1984 allegations against Carr at St. Mary's.

Egan sent Carr off to the Institute of Living, a Hartford psychiatric hospital, in January 1990 for an evaluation, but doctors there were unable to determine whether Carr's denial of the accusations was truthful, documents show. So, Egan allowed Carr to return to his job at Central Catholic High School that winter.

But a few months later, another parent came forward with a complaint that Carr had fondled his then 11-year-old son in the early 1980s. Carr was returned in April to the Institute of Living, where a doctor suggested the diocese take some sort of "administrative action to protect both Father Carr and the public" from future "lapses" by Carr.

Carr consistently denied the accusations against him, but said he agreed to treatment because it was church policy.

Egan decided that Carr could return to work, and in June Carr was appointed parochial vicar of Saint Philip Parish in Norwalk, with the restriction that he not minister to children and that he continue in therapy.

One year later, in June 1991, those restrictions were lifted when Egan appointed Carr parochial vicar of Saint Andrew Parish in Bridgeport. In a memo written a few days before the appointment, Bronkiewicz wrote "we are satisfied that Fr. Carr is able to be assigned to Saint Andrew Parish without risk."

The whole thing might have ended there if the diocese hadn't tried to collect back tuition for Immaculate High School in Danbury from one of the families that had accused Carr of fondling their son in 1984 - even after the father in that family lost his job.

One of the alleged victims from 1984, who by 1993 was 23 years old, came to see Bronkiewicz to complain about the diocese's actions. In an internal memo, Bronkiewicz quotes the young man as saying "he finds it difficult to believe that the diocese is trying to collect this unpaid tuition when his parents could have sued the diocese in 1984 for the actions of Father Carr."

The first lawsuit against the diocese in connection to Carr was served on March 30, 1995. Later that day, Egan suspended Carr and placed him on an indefinite leave of absence.

*

Rev. Raymond Pcolka

Allegations of abuse against Pcolka stretched back decades and involved more than a dozen accusers.

In 1983, an 18-year-old woman and her counselor came to Cusack, and told him she had been molested by her parish priest, Father Pcolka, 11 years earlier.

Cusack, in pretrial testimony in 1995 and 1996, said the woman told him she'd been "fondled" by Pcolka when she was a young girl attending St. John's in Bridgeport, but that he didn't fully believe her story because it appeared she was being "coached" by her counselor.

Attorneys for the woman, however, say Cusack had been told something far more disturbing: On the girl's seventh birthday, Pcolka told her he was going to give her a "birthday spanking," then he forced her to perform oral sex on him and "beat her while she was naked."

Pcolka denied it. Cusak, who had been placed in charge of handling misconduct complaints for the diocese, sent Pcolka to a psychiatric hospital for an "overnight evaluation," and talked to some of Pcolka's former supervisors and colleagues.

He did not notify the authorities. Nor did he check Pcolka's file for past complaints or specifically ask his former supervisors whether there had been previous sexual abuse charges.

His denials believed, Pcolka was allowed to return to his post at the Holy Name Church in Stratford without restrictions.

In fact, this was not the first time Pcolka had been accused of molesting a child. According to the documents, church officials had been receiving complaints about him since his first assignment, in 1966, at St. Benedict's Parish in Stamford.

In 1976, a parishioner at the Holy Name Church in Stratford wrote to Bishop Curtis complaining that Pcolka was involved in an inappropriate relationship with her daughter-in-law. Curtis wrote to Pcolka's supervisor asking for a response, but no further action was taken.

Pcolka continued on in his ministry, transferring to St. Mary's Church in Bethel and then again, in 1989, to Sacred Heart Church in Greenwich at the behest of newly appointed Bishop Egan. Shortly after Pcolka's reassignment, Egan had Pcolka over to his house for a private dinner, at which, according to Pcolka, the two discussed his transfer to Greenwich.

Asked by plaintiffs' lawyers if the two also talked about any sexual abuse allegations against him, Pcolka denied that they had. On the heels of that dinner came another complaint against Pcolka, this time from a mother claiming her son, James Krug, was molested almost two decades earlier. Egan sent the priest to the Institute of Living for a two-day evaluation.

"It was extensive. It was whatever was required at the Institute of Living and it was enough for an expert of some renown to indicate to us that there was no reason for us to hesitate to allow this person to continue in his duty," Egan testified in 1999.

The 1983 letter written to Cusack by the young woman accusing Pcolka of molestation was missing from Pcolka's file, Egan said, so he was unaware of that earlier allegation when weighing what action to take with Pcolka. He said he relied on the recommendation from a psychologist and the advice of his vicar general, Monsignor William Scheyd.

"He told me that if you were to give him a list of all the priests in the diocese, the last he would ever suspect of any misconduct of this sort would be Father Pcolka," Egan testified, adding that he didn't consider the complaints against Pcolka a "proved reality."

Pcolka was then allowed to resume his duties at Sacred Heart Church without any restrictions.

In 1992, Krug himself came forward, adding weight to the claims his mother made three years earlier. Egan granted Pcolka a leave of absence and returned him to the Institute of Living, where he stayed for approximately 10 days before leaving, against Egan's orders that he stay, Egan testified.

Egan suspended Pcolka at that point, but continued to pay his salary, provide his health benefits and cover the cost of his attorney's fees for several years, documents show.

Egan also did not make any effort to expel Pcolka from the priesthood, as he had done with at least one other priest accused of sexual misconduct. When asked why he had not done this, Egan said he didn't have sufficient evidence that Pcolka had abused anyone.

"If I had proof of his having been out of order, I certainly would have," Egan said.

Later, when asked if he was aware that at least 12 people accused Pcolka of sexual abuse that included oral and anal sex, beatings, violence and sadistic language, Egan responded:

"I am not aware of any of those things. I am aware of the claims of those things, the allegations of those things. .... I am aware that there are a number of people who know one another, some are related to one another, have the same lawyers and so forth, I am aware of the circumstances, yes."

Two years later, the diocese settled lawsuits against Pcolka, who exercised his Fifth Amendment privilege more than 100 times when questioned in 1994 about abuse allegations stretching back three decades and involving more than a dozen victims.

*

Rev. Laurence Brett

Brett was sent out of state - with the admonition that, should anyone ask, "hepatitis was to be feigned" as a cover for his absence.

In December 1964, a teenage student at Sacred Heart University in Bridgeport came forward with an extraordinary complaint: Father Laurence Brett, a spiritual director at the university, had performed oral sex on the student - against his wishes - and had bitten his penis to prevent him from ejaculating.

Brett was confronted that very day. He admitted the claim was true, according to court documents. He said he had a "problem" and confessed to involvement with at least one other university boy.

Church memoranda show that Bishop Curtis discussed the situation with the Apostolic Delegate, the Vatican representative in Washington, D.C. Curtis ended up deciding not to suspend Brett, but to send him out of state - with the admonition to diocese officials that, should anyone ask, "hepatitis was to be feigned" as a cover for Brett's absence.

Thus began a nearly 30-year odyssey for Brett, who bounced around the country, working as a priest in different dioceses, all the while remaining answerable to - and the responsibility of - the Bridgeport diocese.

His first stop after the 1964 incident was New Mexico for psychiatric treatment. From New Mexico and elsewhere, Brett wrote letters pleading with the bishop to allow him to return. Others asked on his behalf.

"He is not welcome," Curtis once told Monsignor Cusak.

In seeming exile, Brett was supported financially by the Bridgeport diocese and was permitted to perform priestly functions under the auspices of the diocese. Almost immediately, an indication came that Brett's misconduct may have been broader than was first suspected.

While he was in New Mexico in 1966, a high school-aged boy from a parish back in Stamford claimed that Brett had made an unwanted advance on him. When the incident occurred, Brett was an assistant pastor at the parish, where he also acted as a mentor and spiritual advisor to a small group of boys who were interested in liturgical reforms in the Catholic Church. The boy who accused him was part of this group, informally known as "Brett's Mavericks."

In a letter that April, Curtis told the Apostolic Delegate that the boy probably was not aware of the actual reason behind Brett's abrupt departure.

"The departure of Father Brett was accomplished very quietly," Curtis wrote.

The boy's parents said their son was traumatized. They were seeking financial support. The Apostolic Delegate suggested meeting with the parents because "such an expression of pastoral concern may relieve them while an official attitude may leave them bitter."

Curtis took the advice and arranged a meeting. He reported back that the parents felt someone in the church had advised the boy not to report the incident to them. In a memorandum, Curtis recounted his portion of the discussion:

"The boy himself ... said he could not bring himself to tell [his parents] and I tried to indicate that this might have been the reason why the advice was given not to tell them, mainly that the boy did not feel up to it and it was judged there was no obligation under the circumstances to do so."

In the years that followed, Brett held a variety of ecclesiastical positions in New Mexico, California and Maryland, to which he finally relocated. There, he held a summer position at a parish and served as chaplain at a school in Baltimore. He became a writer, inspirational speaker and television minister.

Bishop Egan and Brett first met in June 1990. Around the same time, as was his custom when he met a priest for the first time, Egan familiarized himself with Brett's background, Egan testified later.

Egan wrote a memorandum after the meeting: "All things considered, he made a good impression. In the course of our conversation, the particulars of his case came out in detail and with grace."

In February 1991, Egan, after an "investigation" of the priest's history, decided Brett could continue as a priest under the auspices of the diocese. The following exchange comes from Egan's deposition.

A: I had sufficient information for myself and for others to decide that he would continue, but I certainly wouldn't say I stopped keeping an eye on the thing.

Q: But you didn't do anything, you didn't - for example, you didn't...

A: No, I made a decision... on the basis of the information that was given to me professionally, I allowed him to remain in the ministry.

In November 1992, an adult claimed that Brett had molested him, when he was 10 or 12 years old, at a parish in New Mexico in 1966. Two weeks later, Brett admitted past sexual misconduct with at least three other high school-age boys - one in New Mexico and two in Maryland.

In late 1992 or early 1993, another one of "Brett's Mavericks" - Frank Martinelli, then an adult living in Milwaukee - told the diocese that Brett molested him in the 1960s, when he was between 13 and 15 years old.

The allegations were severe and familiar: Brett had performed fellatio on him in a walkway behind the grade school of the church after confession, had induced the boy to perform fellatio on him by telling the child that the act was a way to receive Holy Communion, and he had fondled the boy in a bathroom during a field trip with other boys to Washington D.C.

A short time later, in February 1993, a man claimed that Brett abused him in Sacramento in the 1960s. The new accuser said he expected restitution and compensation.

Nine days later, Egan suspended Brett's priestly faculties.

*

The Situation Today

The Bridgeport diocese has set up a special committee to review all complaints on a case-by-case basis.

Four days ago, Lori, the new bishop of Bridgeport, released a strongly worded statement to the 370,000 Catholics in his diocese about the recent sex abuse scandals that have rocked his church. The statement - part apology and part manifesto -spells out the bishop's zero-tolerance attitude toward the sexual abuse of minors.

First, Lori says, he's beefed up the 1991 diocesan policy to ensure that any complaints, even suspicions of sexual abuse, are immediately reported and investigated. These investigations will now be done by a special committee, made up of psychologists and other experts, who will review complaints on a case-by-case basis.

Second, the diocese is conducting a detailed review of all 285 active priests and 86 deacons under its auspices and, at this point, has determined there are none "who pose any threat of committing sexual misconduct with a minor."

One action Lori also took, but didn't mention, was his removal last month of the Rev. Charles Carr from his job as part-time chaplain of the Pope John Paul II Center for Health Care in Danbury.

In the March issue of Fairfield County Catholic, Bronkiewicz notes at the bottom of a list of staffing announcements that Carr has recently had "his priestly faculties removed" and is "no longer available for priestly ministry in the Diocese of Bridgeport."

How is it that Carr, who was suspended by Egan in 1995 for a string of sexual abuse complaints with minors, was still working as a priest?

"This would have been a decision made by Bishop Egan," said Joseph McAleer, the diocese spokesman.

Carr began his job at the nursing home in 1999, McAleer said, after it was decided that it was safe to return him to a "limited ministry where he would have no contact with children or adolescents." When a new claim of sexual abuse - alleged to have occurred years ago - came in at the beginning of this year, Lori decided enough was enough.

"The bishop was not comfortable with the past allegations," McAleer said, adding that the new complaint was reported to the state Department of Children and Families.

Carr still receives a stipend from the diocese, as does Raymond Pcolka, who is living in Southbury and is also suspended from the ministry. McAleer said the diocese is required by Canon Law to pay a modest living allowance to priests even if they are not technically working.

As for Laurence Brett, his whereabouts remain a mystery. He receives no stipend from the diocese.

"We hope he is found and we hope he is brought to justice," McAleer said.