Maybe some of you have seen this news item:
'Nuns from an Arlington, Texas, Carmelite monastery are suing the Diocese of Fort Worth and the bishop for $1 million for alleged violations of privacy and harming the physical and emotional well-being of the sisters.'
'The lawsuit stems from interactions related to a diocesan investigation of the Reverend Mother Superior Teresa Agnes Gerlach. The diocese has said it was investigating “grave misconduct” based on a report that she “committed sins against the Sixth Commandment and violated her vow of chastity with a priest.”
"Although the diocese alleges that Gerlach admitted to violations of the Sixth Commandment, her attorney Matthew Bobo said in a statement provided to CNA that she was “under heavy medication from a procedure” and does not recall what she admitted."
“They are making it sound like she had some sexual liaison affair with another priest and that did not happen,” Bobo said.
"The lawsuit claims that Bishop Michael Olson and the diocese violated civil law and Catholic canon law during their investigation. The diocese filed a response with the court, which argues that this is an ecclesiastical dispute that has no place in a civil court."
"According to the lawsuit, Olson entered the Monastery of the Most Holy Trinity on April 24 and demanded Gerlach turn over her computer, cellphone, and laptop, which she did. It alleges that he returned the following day and subjected Gerlach and other religious sisters to interrogations."
"...The sisters argue in the lawsuit that neither the bishop nor the diocese had the canonical or the civil authority to make these demands, to take their property, or to seek Gerlach’s dismissal. In addition to seeking $1 million in damages, the sisters are asking the court to order the bishop and the diocese to return all property, halt any surveillance of their technology or communications, and refrain from contacting the sisters."
A few thoughts, though this article doesn't detail Mother Gerlach's health condition, on other sites she is described as being in a wheelchair, having a feeding tube, and a central venous line, indicating that she is seriously ill. Additionally, she had just returned from having a surgical procedure when the bishop proceeded to question and harass her. It doesn't sound as if she was in any kind of physical shape to carry on illicit liasons any time recently.
From my experience, even if you have an outpatient surgical procedure, discharge instructions detail that you shouldn't sign any kind of legal document or carry out financial transactions for at least 24 hours, because drugs are still in your system and you aren't mentally competent to carry out these things.
The diocese is taking the position that this is an eccleciastical dispute that has no place in a civil court. I would remind them that confiscating property (cell phones and electronic devices) without a warrant is most certainly a matter under civil law. So is defamation of character. And it sounds as if information was copied from the devices while they were in the possession of the diocese, and that too is a civil violation.
This situation reminds me of a policy now-Cardinal Dolan tried to implement when he was Archbishop in Milwaukee - it would have allowed archdiocesan officials to enter the home of any priest accused of misconduct and search the premises. Milwaukee has an independent association of priests which raised a ruckus, and Dolan was forced to backtrack.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2005_01_06/2005_04_19_Zahn_DolanBacks.htm
In civil law, police can't enter a home unless the owner gives permission or a judge agrees a threshold is met to authorize a warrant. I am not a canon law expert but I don't think it has these civil protections, which is problematic. In this case, Bishop Olson is both the judge and the police - there are no checks.
Olson seems controversial. If he never is appointed to Chicago, I would not object.
This whole thing is an example of something that has always botheted me about zero tolerance policies. They are basically "guilty until proven innocent", which isn't the way the US legal system is supposed to work. Yes, protect the victim. But it isn't clear that there was a victim here (except for the Carmelite community). If the liason happened at all, wouldn't it have been between consenting adults? If that were the case, the nun might have been asked to leave her religious order. But it seems to have been a big over-reach by the bishop.
DeleteBTW, I don't think there's any chance he'll be Cdl. Cupich's successor!
"This whole thing is an example of something that has always botheted me about zero tolerance policies. They are basically "guilty until proven innocent""
DeleteZero tolerance basically means that a single offense gets you expelled, no exceptions, no room for prudential judgment, gray areas or extenuating circumstances.
Even for that single accusation, there should be an investigation by an independent review board; and the accused has some rights under canon law, such as the right to appeal.
BTW Jim, do you have any thoughts on the latest expansion of the list of offenders in the Chicago archdiocese? It sounds to me like just another chapter of Groundhog Day. They're shaking the bushes clear back to 1950, and including religious orders, which aren't under the jurisdiction of the archdiocese. It's doubtful if many perpetrators that far back are still alive, or if the allegations were found to be credible in all cases. Sounds like Crdl. Cupich was left out of the loop.
ReplyDeleteCatholic Church in California grapples with more than 3,000 lawsuits, alleging child sex abuse
DeleteAdvocates have been left stunned by the number of cases that surfaced during this revival window.
https://religionnews.com/2023/05/26/catholic-church-in-california-grapples-with-more-than-3000-lawsuits-alleging-child-sex-abuse/
At least a third of the 12 Roman Catholic dioceses in California have either filed for bankruptcy or are contemplating doing so to deal with an influx of lawsuits filed by survivors of childhood sexual abuse after a state law opened a three-year window in which cases were exempted from age limits.
More than 3,000 lawsuits have been filed against the Catholic Church in California under a 2019 state law that allowed alleged victims to sue up to the age of 40.
Of course the incidence should be zero. But statistically the incidence in other religious denominations is about the same as in the Catholic church. But you don't hear about these 60 or 70 year old cases being brought out. Pretty sure the organizational structure has a lot to do with it. In order to sue there has to be something or someone to sue. "Follow the money" sounds cynical, but no one can tell me that it isn't a factor.
DeleteBankruptcy actually sounds more just, because the money gets divided up among the plaintiffs, rather than some getting a lottery-sized payout, and others getting very little.
Not so sure about all this, Katherine. Many dioceses played games, manipulating who owns parishes etc before declaring bankruptcy. They moved assets around to minimize payouts. And it’s highly likely that many victims never came forward. A friend of mine was abused by her pastor between age 11-13. She told me this after the Globe broke the story. I asked her if she would report it. She said no because the priest was in his 90 s and was not a threat anymore and she didn’t want to subject herself to what she would have to go through if she reported it. She suspected that he abused other girls in the parish - pre- pubescent only. The bishops kept most church properties safe. Also, the abuse rate in the Catholic Church was considerably higher than the church claimed after the first audit following Boston Globe revelations. Coincidentally the John Jay Report (the investigators were not given access to the files. They were given whatever each bishop allowed to be given to them ) was just the same as other churches. Amazing. But, whenever the prosecutors managed to get hold of the records via subpoena ( Boston, Philadelphia etc);the abuse rates were consistently double that reported by the John Jay investigators. As you may recall, the first two people appointed to lead the inestigation quit after a year each, with one saying that dealing with the bishops was much like dealing with the Mafia. Most sex abuse in other churches has involved male pastors abusing women, not minors.
Delete"BTW Jim, do you have any thoughts on the latest expansion of the list of offenders in the Chicago archdiocese"
DeleteChicago clergy have been instructed not to comment on social media about it, so I can't talk about it here. If the media asks any of us for comment, we're to refer the reporter to the archdiocesan communications team.
Looks like the Archdiocese is circling the wagons. Limit communication to the public media, limit communications on social media. Sounds like the legal team is calling the shots; avoid anything that would increase legal liability.
DeleteFrom a public relations standpoint this is a disaster. Makes the Archdiocese look as guilty as all the public and corporation officials who employ the same tactics. Paints a big guilty as charged sign on their backs and foreheads.
Jean, if you are lurking, I wrote a comment on your comment in the Commissioned to go forth thread
ReplyDeleteStanley, if you're reading this, I see that we both commented on the America article on immortality/transhumanism by Kevin Clarke. So far the moderators left the comments stay.
ReplyDeleteYes, Katherine. And I won't post another in that thread.
DeleteAnd I liked your comment. I would imagine that extending lifetime to 200 years could open up to maladies we never heard of, like the brain filling up with information.
Delete