"If I had to make a Top Five list [of predator priests], Donald McGuire would be number one," Patrick Wall, a former Benedictine monk who performs investigations on behalf of abuse victims suing the Catholic Church. "He truly is the Hannibal Lecter of the clerical world. He did more psychological and physical damage to children than anyone else. And what makes it worse is that the Jesuits knew about it, and did nothing." On Feb. 11, 2009, McGuire — an ailing 78-year-old who had already been stripped of priestly office — was sentenced to 25 years in federal prison by U.S. District Court Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer. He had been tried and convicted in the Northern District of Illinois for transporting an adolescent boy across state lines in 2000 for the purpose of sexually abusing him "I want any such person to know the system of justice and this judge personally finds it absolutely abhorrent," Pallmeyer said. McGuire is serving his sentence at the Medical Center for Federal Prisoners in Springfield, Mo., and the Jesuits are facing a lawsuit from multiple victims, spread across the country, who claim the order's negligence enabled his crimes.
Link (here) to the San Francisco Weekly with a lengthy article.
The term "Hell Files" comes from (here)
The term "Hell Files" comes from (here)
26 comments:
Well, well, it seems. the esteemed Fr. Hard on was quite the defender of Don McGuire. Nice. Fessio shows his true colors, as well. What a bunch of sick clowns.
Frs. Hardon and Fessio were ENABLERS to McGuire's sick fetishes, every step of the way.
PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO ADD PRAYER FOR RELIEF
SEEKING PUNITIVE DAMAGES
On April 26, 1993, Fr. Joseph Fessio of the California Province of Jesuits called Fran
Daly, Socius of the Chicago Province (from 1991 to 1997) and informed [of McGuire's perverted behavior. I don't have the stomach to print it].
By October 27, 1993, Fr. Hardon, a Jesuit who was asked to speak to Father McGuire... told Fr. Daly that he had "concluded that Don has grave moral problems".
**Fr. Daly was the then SOCIUS**
As set forth above, at least SIX PROVINCIALS of THE CHICAGO JESUITS --
(1) Fr.FLAHERTY
(2) Fr.KLEIN
(3) Fr.WILD
(4) Fr.SCHAEFFER
(5) Fr.BAUMANN
(6) Fr.SCHMIDT
received specific reports regarding McGuire's abhorrent conduct and/or had access to confidential files ["THE HELL FILES" PRESUMABLY] detailing such misconduct.
AT LEAST TWO CHICAGO JESUITS WHO SERVED AS SOCIUS--
(1) Fr. DALY
(2) Fr. MCGURN
also had considerable notice regarding McGuire's pedophiliac tendencies during their terms in office. Yet none of the Chicago Jesuits who bear responsibility for McGuire's behavior and recklessly endangering the lives of these young men has been punished.
It seems the enablers were the "generals" of the army, not the men under the "generals".
@Maria -- did you even read the SFWeekly article?
Yep.
"...The evidence establishes that the Chicago Jesuits were aware of
McGuire's "problems" with young boys since his ordination in the early 1960's, yet did nothing
to stop his abuse of children, including these three Plaintiffs, despite many specific warnings
regarding McGuire and his pedophilic tendencies.
McGuire is, no doubt, a sick individual who engaged in a pattern of criminal, deviant
behavior that left a trail of devastated victims (these young men and their families). What is
more troubling, however, is that the leadership of the Chicago Jesuits, who presumably are not
sick, permitted McGuire to commit these atrocities time and time again. The evidence
establishes beyond any doubt that the Jesuits had multiple opportunities to stop McGuire, but
instead turned a blind eye to his criminal actions. The more the Jesuits learned about McGuire's
problems, the harder they worked to cover them up...
II. Factual Background
A. The Chicago Jesuits
The Jesuits today form the largest single order of priests and brothers in the Catholic
Church. The Chicago Province is led by a Provincial who is appointed by the leader of the
Jesuits in Rome -- the Superior General -- to serve a six year term. THE PROVINCIAL HAD ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PROVINCE AND ITS ACTIONS. (FLAHERTY DEP., pp. 18-22, attached hereto as Ex.
1). THE PROVINCIAL IS ASSISTED BY A SOCIUS who is SELECTED BY THE PROVINCIAL and APPROVED BY THE SUPERIOR GENERAL. THE SOCIUS is ESSENTIALLY THE "DEPUTY PROVINCIAL" tasked with overseeing the day-to-day operation of the Province.
"While family members considered reporting the abuse to secular authorities, Fessio urged them to stay quiet until he could confer with Jesuit higher-ups." WHY?
"The trail of quiet complicity leads from San Francisco to unexpectedly high levels. Among the revelations in the DOCUMENTS is that John Hardon, a now-deceased Jesuit priest who is being formally considered for sainthood by the Vatican, advocated on McGuire's behalf after he was caught allegedly molesting one Bay Area boy, and sought to downplay the significance of McGuire's sexual abuse. Records suggest Hardon's involvement might have led to McGuire's premature emergence from psychiatric treatment and resumption of ministerial duties."
"O'Hara saw Hardon's presence as an obstacle to McGuire's treatment. "Despite what John [Hardon] said about psychotherapy, he does not believe in it ... and does not see Don in need of this kind of treatment," O'Hara reported. "He sees Don more as a victim, which ... fed Don's denial." He described Hardon as an "advocate" for his troubled fellow priest. An internal summary of McGuire's history later created by the Jesuits describes a November 1993 letter Hardon wrote to the Chicago Province in which he "downplayed Don's very real sexual problems."
"Fessio defends his actions, saying the report of the suspicious guardianship arrangement did not involve specific suggestions of sexual abuse. "It was not even an allegation; it was only that Father McGuire was in New England claiming that he was adopting this person," he says. "There was no abuse there. I just thought it should be looked into."
"There was abuse there, even if Fessio was unaware of its existence or extent. McGuire had, in fact, tried to represent himself as Dominick's legal guardian on an application to a parochial school. And if anyone had looked into the situation, McGuire's sexual molestation of the boy — which included the priest's hallmark pornographic seminars, as well as invasive massages in which he inserted his fingers in Dominick's anus — might have been revealed."
Seriously? Knowing what he knew about McGuire, Fessio didn't think there was molestation going on when McGuire tried to ADOPT A BOY AS A CATHOLIC PRIEST?!?!?!?!?!?
Maria! How many more bullets are you willing to take for these clowns?
To be fair to the Jesuits, the Catholic Church has long had the tradition that it kept allegations of abuse in house. This dated back to times when the church had its own courts and to times in the Middle Ages and thereafter when giving (highly corrupt) civil authorities jurisdiction over churchmen would have meant rampant abuses and injustices. Until the abuse scandal broke, it was generally accepted in the US that the Roman church kept its tribunals in house and didn't involve the civil authorities. Without this tradition the abuse scandal wouldn't have attained the proportions it did.
at least SIX PROVINCIALS of THE CHICAGO JESUITS --
(1) Fr.FLAHERTY
(2) Fr.KLEIN
(3) Fr.WILD
(4) Fr.SCHAEFFER
(5) Fr.BAUMANN
(6) Fr.SCHMIDT
received specific reports regarding McGuire's abhorrent conduct
AT LEAST TWO CHICAGO JESUITS WHO SERVED AS SOCIUS--
(1) Fr. DALY
(2) Fr. MCGURN
also had considerable notice
You seem to have selective outrage.
@Maria -- I'm mad at them all! It's you who is selectively defensive of two of them.
(1) advocated on McGuire's behalf after he was caught allegedly molesting one Bay Area boy, and sought to downplay the significance of McGuire's sexual abuse. Records suggest Hardon's involvement might have led to McGuire's premature emergence from psychiatric treatment and resumption of ministerial duties.
"Advocated" on his behalf?
"Records"?
WHERE ARE THE FACTS?
THIS SOUNDS LIKE A CONCLUSION, NOT FACTS. NOWHERE DOES THE MOTION MAKE THIS CLAIM.
"FR. HARDON WAS ASKED TO SPEAK TO FATHER MCCGUIRE" BY THE JESUITS WHO KNEW WHAT MCGUIRE WAS DOING.
***********************************
An internal summary of McGuire's history later created by the Jesuits describes a November 1993 letter Hardon wrote to the Chicago Province in which he "downplayed Don's very real sexual problems."
WHERE IS THIS "INTERNAL SUMMARY" ?WHERE IS THE REFERENCE?
***********************************
"Fessio defends his actions, saying the report of the suspicious guardianship arrangement did not involve specific suggestions of sexual abuse. "It was not even an allegation; it was only that Father McGuire was in New England claiming that he was adopting this person," he says. "There was no abuse there. I just thought it should be looked into."
HERE IS THE MEMO RE THIS INCIDENT:
June 1, 2000
Concerning Donald J. McGuire SJ
From: Fr. Richard McGurn, SOCIUS
Fr. Al Naucke, SOCIUS of the California Province, phone this morning. He told me that Fr. Joseph Fessio, S.J., has recently related the following account to the PROVINCIAL l, Fr. THOMAS SMOLICH SJ.
A 14 year old minor [blank], the son of a conservative family in Arizona, is currently residing in the home of the [blank] familyin Massachusetts, while attending a learning disabled program.
Mr. [blabk] has told Fr. Fessio that Don McGuire is [blank's ] legal guardian, and that [blank] is going to live with Fr. McGuire.
I have not previously heard of the surnames [blank] and [blank]. In regard to Fr. McGuire, Fr. Fessio was similarly involved in the complaint about Don from the [blank] family in 1993. WSe have correspondence from the [blank] attorney to us, which never proceed to legal action; Fr. Fessio received copies of this lawyer's letter to the Chicago province. It was after this incident that Fr. McGuire was sent for treatment at St. John Vianney Hospital in Downington, PA.
It would appear that Fr. Fessio was the only one doing any "reporting". A few more facts, and less speculation, might bolster the writer's claims.
List of American Servants of God
Servant of God Frederic Baraga
Servant of God Mary Magdalen Bentivoglio
Servant of God Simon Bruté
Servant of God Vincent Robert Capodanno
Servant of God Walter Cizek
Servant of God Gwen Coniker[2]
Servant of God Terence Cooke
Servant of God Dorothy Day
Servant of God Lukas Etlin, O.S.B.[3]
Servant of God Theodore Foley
Servant of God Demetrius Augustine Gallitzin
SERVANT OF GOD JOH HARDON SJ*****
Servant of God Isaac Hecker
Servant of God Emil Kapaun
Servant of God Mary Elizabeth Lange
Servant of God Rose Hawthorne Lathrop
Servant of God Francis J. Parater
Servant of God Patrick Peyton
Servant of God Bernard J. Quinn
Servant of God Fulton J. Sheen
Servant of God Augustine Tolton
Servant of God Félix Varela, activist for human rights in Cuba.
I didn't see any of these names:
SIX PROVINCIALS of THE CHICAGO JESUITS --
(1) Fr.FLAHERTY
(2) Fr.KLEIN
(3) Fr.WILD
(4) Fr.SCHAEFFER
(5) Fr.BAUMANN
(6) Fr.SCHMIDT
AT LEAST TWO CHICAGO JESUITS WHO SERVED AS SOCIUS--
(1) Fr. DALY
(2) Fr. MCGURN
@Maria,
I was responding to the criticisms that Frs. Fessio and Hardon didn't go to the cops. Going out of the chain of command would have gotten them into hot water and this parallel jurisdiction, which so clearly failed, was not controversial at the time.
Here are the cops:
SIX PROVINCIALS of THE CHICAGO JESUITS --
(1) Fr.FLAHERTY
(2) Fr.KLEIN
(3) Fr.WILD
(4) Fr.SCHAEFFER
(5) Fr.BAUMANN
(6) Fr.SCHMIDT
AT LEAST TWO CHICAGO JESUITS WHO SERVED AS SOCIUS--
(1) Fr. DALY
(2) Fr. MCGURN
@Maria
Cops= police
Jesuit chain of command= Socius
If you read the evidence presented and available at bishopaccountability, you see just how much the Jesuits did try to do. Is it not obvious to people that this man was a psychopath protected by important people along the way -- the Jesuits were obviously constrained in what they could do.
It is also obvious that those commenting on Frs. Hardon and Fessio haven't read the evidence. They, too, within their abilities tried to rein in the man.
I really cannot understand how people can comment so readily after reading just how much evidence there is on how superiors tried to stop this disobedient man.
Disobedient? How about criminal? I'm sure every pedophile and criminal would love to have their friends investigate and punish them. Especially when they have a vested interest in keeping the matter quiet.
Don't bother calling the police or an authority who actually knows how to investigate claims. Just do what Flaherty did (who's known McGuire since seminary) keep it quiet, forget everything you've seen and heard, write some checks and give McGuire an unlimited credit card to take underage boys around the world to stay in five star hotels. And if he gets caught write another check and send him for a vacation to Club-Perv for some rest until he remembers to be obedient.
That's a great way to stop abuse. Don't call the police. I'm sure that's what Jesus would do.
1960, 1962, 1969, 1970, 1981, 1984, 1991, 1993, 1995, 1998, 2003 ... The one we know about...
@Anon 1:56 The idea behind church autonomy is that in some countries, such as the former Communist countries, false allegations of abuse and the like were deliberately used to screw the innocent. To my mind, this is legitimate.
The problem was not the system per se, but that the system didn't work.
Maria, could you please contact the Father John A. Hardon S.J. Archive and Guild (www.hardonsj.org)? You could call at 314.373.8260, or email at hardonarchive@yahoo.com. We would like to touch base with you about this matter. Thanks.
Anon@12:25: Fair point. I think your history is on point. There are examples in Nazi era Germany of allegations being used to weaken the church. I think we also agree the system didn't work. My point is that a system which doesn't take into account independent investigation or enforcement is never going to be seen as legitimate. The sheer volume of accusations should have led to McGuire being handed unto "Caesar". I think after maybe the second time of trying to handle the situation "in house" and having that fail even a Jesuit should be able to rationalize picking up the phone and calling the police. If they really want to embrace their Christian values, then they should realize the inherent problems in acting as the investigator, prosecutor, judge, jury and jailer. If they want to assume those roles, which as a society we have delegated to civil authorities, and you fail consistently in those roles don't come back and simply shrug your shoulders and say he was disobedient, we tried.
If they tried "within their abilities" and that failed, they should be prepared to have "their abilities", if not their judgment, questioned when it leads to devastating results. Also be prepared to be liable for the damage you cause.
@Anon 3:41
I think you'll agree with me that when institutions fail, and fail miserably, rectification almost always comes from sources outside the institution.
I was in the SII at the same time that Fessio and MCGuire were there.
To have heard Fessio rail against peccata mundi while back pedaling on McGuire's actions is repugnant.
Needless to say, the experience has made me a hardened liberal.
The Jesuit Provincials are responsible, but Fathers Hardon, Fessio and Buckley should have dealt with the situation more forcefully.
There is only ONE(1) GOOD JESUIT:
a dead one.
Post a Comment