Richmond Diocese "Not Fully Complying" with Reforms to Prevent Clergy Sex Abuse [Richmond VA]
January 6, 2004

The Catholic Diocese of Richmond is among 20 dioceses identified by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' Office of Child and Youth Protection as failing to fully comply with a policy adopted to prevent sexual abuse by priests.

On August 11, 2003, two auditors came to the Diocese of Richmond. At that time, then Bishop Walter Sullivan said, ?I am glad to have the audit take place because we are so very proud of our Review Board and the thorough and effective way we?ve been addressing the tragedy of sexual abuse.?

Two weeks after that, on the heels of the US Bishops meeting in Dallas, the Diocese announced it had a newly- established diocesan sexual abuse Review Board.

Three priests in the Richmond Diocese were forced to retire from the clergy in the wake of the sex abuse scandal that rocked the Catholic Church.

The first to resign was Father Julian Goodman. He stepped down in early August. The abuse happened between 1976-1979, when he was a student at St. John Vianney Seminary in Goochland and later at St. Ann Parish in Colonial Heights. Goodman became pastor there in June of 1978.

Just days later, on August 9, Father John Blankenship was removed as Catholic Chaplain at the Petersburg Federal Correctional Center and from active priestly ministry. In 1982, while serving as pastor of Sacred Heart Parish in New Bohemia, Father Blankenship sexually abused a 14- year-old male parishioner.

Father Eugene Teslovic was removed from active ministry as a priest effective September 24. An investigation found that Teslovic had been involved in several incidents of sexual misconduct with minors in the late 1970s and mid-1980s.

Nationally, the prelates commissioned the report from the Gavin Group of Boston, a firm led by former FBI official William Gavin, and the investigation was overseen by Kathleen McChesney, a former top FBI agent and head of the bishops' watchdog Office of Child and Youth Protection.

Victim advocates said bishops had too much control of how the audit was conducted, so it should be viewed skeptically.

The bishops recommended whom the auditors should interview. And according to the report, auditors were unable to view personnel files that would verify whether bishops were complying with the policy's ban on transferring offenders from one diocese to another.

"This is the bishops grading themselves based on a test they devised," said Peter Isely, of the Midwest chapter of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests. "I don't think anyone is going to be too surprised that after years of chronic failure they are now going to tell us they have miraculously become star performers."

However, Gavin insisted the audits were comprehensive and accurate. Investigators did not view personnel records because of "sensitivity to laws and privacy violations that may occur." Otherwise, he said, "we had free rein."

To check on the effort to carry out the reforms, the auditors -- mostly former FBI agents or investigators -- traveled the country from June to October in small teams, interviewing bishops, diocesan personnel, victims, abusive priests, prosecutors and lay people. The audit is part of the church's plan to prevent abuse.

The review was meant to help enforce the reforms and will be conducted annually. However, there is no mechanism to sanction those who don't comply. Under church law, each diocese is autonomous and bishops answer to the Vatican, not each other.

The bishops adopted the reforms in June 2002, at the height of the scandal, which began two years ago this week with revelations about a single predatory priest in the Archdiocese of Boston. The files showed church officials let the priest serve even after repeated allegations of abuse.

The crisis spread to every American diocese. Since then, thousands of new abuse claims have been made against dioceses across the country.

The policy not only requires bishops to bar guilty clergy from all public church-related work, but put safeguards in place to prevent molestation, such as conducting background checks on all diocesan priests and lay workers and training them to identify abuse.

The most common violations were a failure to implement programs to protect children and establish codes of conduct for and conduct background checks on diocesan workers.

"For the most part, it was not a refusal to adhere to the policies it was a lack of understanding of how to do so," Gavin said.

The auditors also concluded the bishops needed to improve their outreach to victims, required under the policy, by doing a better job of contacting and meeting with victims.

"We have a long way to go in that area," McChesney said.

A second and potentially more important study, also commissioned by the bishops, is scheduled to be released Feb. 27. It will attempt to tally every church abuse case in the country since 1950.

Here is the list of dioceses identified by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' Office of Child and Youth Protection as failing to fully comply with a policy adopted to prevent sexual abuse by priests. Those identified as eparchies are geographic districts for Catholics who accept the authority of the pope, but follow different rituals.

--Archdiocese of Anchorage, Alaska

--Archdiocese of New York

--Archdiocese of Omaha, Neb.

--Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Passaic, N.J.

--Diocese of Alexandria, La.

--Diocese of Arlington, Va.

--Diocese of Bismarck, N.D.

--Diocese of Honolulu


Any original material on these pages is copyright © 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.