MINNESOTA
Canonical Consultation
01/14/2015
Jennifer Haselberger
When I first started working as a canon lawyer for Catholic dioceses, a priest told me that for years bishops and religious superiors had sent letters of introduction (the precursor to Testimonials of Suitability) for offending priests that were typed using double spacing- an indication to the receiving bishop that he should ‘read between the lines’. I was never able to verify if this was true, but the idea has always intrigued me. Indeed, the ability to understand what is not contained in the documentation belonging to a particular priest is, at times, more important than identifying what is. This is an important fact to keep in mind as we anticipate the release of additional files of priests of the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis, and perhaps in particular with the release of the file of Father Joseph Gallatin.
In June of 2014, the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis announced that it would be restricting Father Gallatin’s ministry so that he would not have ‘any role in a parish setting or any other setting in which he will have vocational responsibilities that involve minors’. This decision was the result, according to the Archdiocese, of a ‘1998 action and recent evaluations of Rev. Gallatin’ that the Review Board determined were ‘concerning enough’ to warrant such restrictions.
When and if the Gallatin file is released, we are unlikely to see any of the psychological evaluations of Father Gallatin, and we are also unlikely to see any firsthand reports of what occurred in 1998. The former is, perhaps, appropriate. Father Gallatin, who has not been convicted of any crime, has the same rights as anyone else, including the right to have his private medical information remain confidential. The latter is likely, once again, attributable to negligence on the part of the Archdiocese. I may be wrong about this but I honestly can’t remember seeing a firsthand account of what had transpired in 1998 from the point of view of the victim, or even his name.
If released, what the file will most likely contain are descriptions of what occurred, written in the form of memos, that change both over time and depending on the person writing the report. We may also see some summaries of psychological evaluations and reports, but these again will have been compiled by various individuals and reflect the authors’ interests and biases, rather than being an accurate summation of the conclusions of the person who conducted the evaluation. By now, I hope everyone can agree that such summaries, especially when written by Father Kevin McDonough, are basically worthless. The only value in reading them in this case, as I see it, is for amusement. The extent to which so many adults seem confused about basic human anatomy (shoulder? chest? abdomen?) should at least cause you to chuckle.
Note: This is an Abuse Tracker excerpt. Click the title to view the full text of the original article. If the original article is no longer available, see our News Archive.