The Cathedral of Saint Peter in Kansas City, Kansas, located in the Diocese of Kansas City, which was one of the four dioceses named in the state’s clergy abuse investigation. / Mwkruse|Wikimedia|CC BY-SA 4.0
Boston, Mass., Jan 11, 2023 / 10:35 am (CNA).
Kansas authorities investigating clerical sex abuse have identified 188 Catholic and Society of St. Pius X clergy members who are suspected of committing various crimes, according to a report released following a four-year-long investigation.
No charges have resulted from the investigation because the statute of limitations on the cases has expired or the accused priests are deceased.
The Society of St. Pius X, commonly referred to as the SSPX, is a traditionalist group, founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in 1970, which has an irregular canonical status. The group is not overseen by the Catholic Church or any diocese within the Catholic Church.
The identities of the priests were not revealed in the report, which said that the investigation’s scope spanned from 1950–2022. It is not clear how many of the accused were Catholic clergy and how many were SSPX clergy.
Melissa Underwood, communications director for the Kansas Bureau of Investigation (KBI) told CNA she did not have information on the division of allegations.
The report says that 125 criminal cases were initiated and 30 charging affidavits were distributed to prosecutors. A charging affidavit lays out the essential facts of the alleged offense by the perpetrator.
However, no prosecutor has filed charges against a clergy member as of Jan. 10, Underwood said.
“In nearly all cases involving those offending priests, the statute of limitations had expired or the priest was no longer living. Both situations prevented prosecution of the offending priests,” the report says.
The report said that the 30 charging affidavits involved 14 priests. Clergy sexual abuse occurred in all four Catholic dioceses of Kansas, which includes the Archdiocese of Kansas City, the Diocese of Salina, the Diocese of Wichita, and the Diocese of Dodge City.
Allegations were also brought against the SSPX, which was added to the investigation in 2019, as well as a Capuchin order of priests that operates within Kansas dioceses. The report did not name the Capuchin province.
The report did, however, mention an encounter at a Colorado ranch run by the Franciscan Capuchin province “where multiple offender priests reside.”
“Our agents were met by staff who informed the priests why the KBI was there. The priests declined to meet with the KBI agents. Therefore, there was no access to those priests for questioning,” the report said.
The report found “many of the same issues reported by the 2018 Pennsylvania grand jury investigation that related to the Church’s handling of abuse allegations were, in general, identified and documented in the KBI investigation as well.”
Certain Church practices and circumstances “served to obscure the truth about both the allegations of child abuse and sexual assault and their handling of such allegations,” the report said.
The report gave nine examples of challenges that the KBI faced in its investigation.
-
Some victims had signed nondisclosure agreements with the Church in a civil lawsuit and “were reluctant” to provide information.
-
The priests or victims had died in many cases.
-
Church officials would often use euphemisms to minimize the severity of sexual abuse by clergy.
-
Allegations of sexual abuse would sometimes not be reported to law enforcement by Church officials.
-
Parishioners were not offered transparency from the Church on sexual abuse.
-
Dioceses did not practice good record-keeping. The deletion of documents related to sexual abuse, whether intentional or unintentional, resulted.
-
Diocesan investigations into past sex abuse allegations were insufficient.
-
Each diocese failed to follow its own policy on sex abuse allegations of the clergy.
-
Church officials “frequently attempted to avoid scandal” and would not take action against offending clergy. The Church would move offending priests to different assignments, continue its financial support of the priest, fail to laicize the priest, and fail to monitor the priest.
The report said that the “investigation found a common thread regarding the prevalence of sexual abuse at the hands of clergy within a particular diocese in that it appears to be directly related to the degree of tolerance allowed by the bishop.”
The bishop was made aware of sex abuse allegations “to at least some degree” in most cases, the report said.
“Some bishops handled the allegations appropriately, but many others facilitated further abuse of minors by concealing the crimes or reassigning the priest to a new parish,” the report said.
The report said that priests would often use their position of authority to discourage the victim from reporting them.
“Several victims relayed accounts of being told that what was happening to them was okay because he was a priest. At least one victim reported being told by his offender that if he told anyone he would go to hell,” the report said.
The long-term effect of the abuse on the victims was also detailed in the report.
“Throughout the investigation, our team heard from many victims who attributed their alcohol or drug abuse, or their ‘wrecked lives,’ to the sexual abuse they endured,” the report said.
The report said that a few of the victims interviewed were in prison and partly attributed their incarceration to their abuse from the clergy. In certain cases where the victims of sexual abuse had committed suicide, the family of the victims said that they believed the victim’s death was directly correlated to the abuse.
“Our agents witnessed men, now in their 60s and 70s, break down in tears as they reported their sexual abuse to our team,” the report said.
According to the report, the SSPX investigation will continue.
The investigation began in November 2018 at the request of Archbishop Joseph Naumann of the Archdiocese of Kansas City.
A Jan. 7 statement from the Archdiocese of Kansas City said: “The archbishop expressed his gratitude to the Kansas attorney general for the professionalism and thoroughness he and the Kansas Bureau of Investigation brought to the study.”
Naumann said in the statement: “You cannot read this report without your heart breaking.”
“Like other dioceses across the country, the dioceses in Kansas have for some 20+ years implemented programs to protect children and vulnerable adults in its parishes and schools, and the report indicates a steep decline in allegations in recent decades,” the statement said.
“But the most significant change Archbishop Naumann has introduced locally has been adopting a victim-centered approach using restorative principles to address the grave harm of abuse. He prays these efforts will be successful and provide a new avenue to bring healing to victims in the future,” the statement said.
The full statement can be read here.
If you are aware of abuse or neglect, a report can be made to the Kansas Protection Report Center at 800-922-5330. If you are aware of abuse by a cleric or someone employed by the archdiocese, regardless of when the abuse happened, the archdiocese has a confidential report line that can be contacted at 913-647-3051.
One can also make a report online using this link.
[…]
Looking forward to the reporting of the sinicization of Scripture & Catechism….only then will Rome truely know the fruits of their agreement.
Oh we have already had that. In their version, after rescuing the adulteress from stoning, Christ personally beat her to death. Soon that will be the nihil obstat version.
It’s quite dangerous because it prepares and conveys an accommodating, heretical Marxist Catholicism to a world becoming more egalitarian and socialist. And who might we fault with this if not the Vatican [Isn’t the Church itself moving in similar direction?].
“Catholic” Chinese “patriotic” bishops take the oath to support the State in everything.
This is wrong in itself and never was a part of the Church or her witness; nor was it ever a part of her juridical accommodations with States. In addition her children accepted martyrdom in order NOT to fall in with such schemes.
The problem can exist in other countries but informally; where it can transpire that it is not addressed but effectively lived. Meanwhile the current Pontificate decries formalism, intellectualism, legalism, etc., that deflect from problem-areas such as this one and can never address them squarely.
Whether formal or informal, it’s not her mission and can not be accommodated to the mission on account of the things just identified.
In the case of China, what they are swearing to support is already wholly contrary to faith.
But in the lesser “notarized” circumstances, where things are “at large” and not acknowledged explicitly, yet on-going, what is contrary to faith seeps in and then is accepted and upheld “informally”. Then there is a lot of hush over and hush-hush as well as some easy-going jokes and counsels about how to get along smartly.
In the Pope’s actual message he wants to lend an authority to these by referencing “Time is greater than space”. But the wandering preacher is not a rolling stone and not all situations are about wandering.
On the one hand these are not supported in the passages from Acts and St. Paul -whether the ones that are cited or other ones; nor, for that matter in the Gospels.
On the other hand there are already some very clear instances where they would not add up, in the first place, to “the working of the Spirit”; so that adding the “craft of community” to it or upon it, can not do anything for it and make it what it is not.
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/252106/pope-francis-warns-about-arbitrary-and-ideological-adaptations-to-church-ministries
https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/it/messages/pont-messages/2022/documents/20220815-messaggio-ministeria-quaedam.html
‘ The same Peter who confessed Jesus Christ, says, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. I will follow you, but let us not speak of the Cross. This has nothing to do with it.” He says, “I’ll follow you on other ways, that do not include the Cross.” When we walk without the Cross, when we build without the Cross, and when we profess Christ without the Cross, we are not disciples of the Lord. We are worldly, we are bishops, priests, cardinals, Popes, but not disciples of the Lord. ‘
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2013/03/14/full-text-pope-francis-first-homily-as-pontiff/
The Catholic Church in China aligned with the Patriotic Association embracing sinicization of the Chinese Communist Party is comparable to half of the white Catholics of the Catholic Church in the U.S. embracing Trumpism of the GOP.
James D, this comment is ignorant and offensive. There is no apt comparison between the atheist CCP and the GOP. It is sad that “trolls” infect even CWR.
Not sure what it all means but that the church will be brought in line with Marxism in China are only parallel to its having been brought in line with (full list of western social and economic nonsense) in UK USA etc…
China ain’t no worse than the rest of them
John Doe, I have to disagree. We’ve all seen how the CCP treats Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang, in part due to the CCP’s view that acts of political dissent, protest and cultural expression are forms of terrorism. Half a world away, we see another dictator, Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, referring to the country’s Catholic bishops as “terrorists”, and subsequently arresting Bishop Alvarez and imprisoning priests and seminarians.
Is there “western social nonsense” to which bishops in the US and other Western countries have subscribed? Yes. But falling in line with a government that will treat you as a terrorist for daring to dissent from party orthodoxy is a clear difference…one of kind, not of degree.
Francis is thrilled. And ecstatic that he has enough votes in the conclave now to be confident that after he is gone, the next people will continue the ministry of sinicizing the entire Catholic Church.
Praise You Jesus Christ.
Why is the Provisional Agreement called that and is it also some kind of suzerainty pact?
If it is that the Provisional Agreement is a shared acknowledgement between China and Rome, that the oath is made “provisionally” on certain conditions, then, the conditions are laid out in some fashion. The argument would be that for either side and for the sake of the arrangement, the conditions legitimize swearing such an oath. The conclusions that would ensue are:
1. If the patriotic bishops swear this oath to the State it involves a suzerainty pact and is apostate.
2. If the patriotic bishops swear the oath to God it is sacrilegious and abominable.
3. No matter what the conditions are or could be, either way it is NOT saved by having it in one’s heart or the Pope’s heart that it is “sworn provisionally”; nor is it excused or excusable.
4. For those bishops who have been legitimated by the Rome, they, by this China oath, become schismatic in the same instant, with the Pope.
5. All who knowingly support it, even those not party to it, are schismatic.
6 This visitation would reveal that it is also a Papal secret; and as such is the active secret propagation and secret nuancing of heresy by the very author of the heresy and his counselors, of heretical words, deeds, attitudes and formulations.
7. The alleged justification of being well-attuned in some “facts” and “norms” and “sensibilities” of “unity, reality, wholeness and time”, is simultaneously falsehood and heresy -in the case. In this instance it serves apostasy and schism and secreted heretical formulations in variety.
‘ The new leaders’ statement also highlighted the need for the Catholic Church to implement the spirit of the National Conference on Religious Affairs held last December and fulfill the requirement of the Communist Party’s Central Committee for the Catholic Church in China. During that conference Dec. 3-4, Xi stressed the strict implementation of Marxist policies, increased online surveillance and tightening control of religion to ensure national security.
The bishops said it was “necessary to unite and lead the priests, elders and faithful to follow Xi Jinping’s thought on socialism with Chinese characteristics for a ‘new era’; continue to hold high patriotism and love for religion; (and) adhere to the principles of independent and self-run churches,” the bishops’ statement said. ‘
https://cruxnow.com/cns/2022/08/new-chinese-catholic-leaders-say-theyll-follow-communist-party-principles
The congregation of chalk agrees to proceed with the cheesification of the white cliffs of Dover.
Charlotte Evans, pay attention, in your reporting above, an important element that would be in the source material, got omitted, which is, the reference to the Chinese word for “thought”. This word is one and the same with Xi Jinping’s “sinicization” of China and it is important to grasp its position.
See my comment above, August 29, 2022 at 4:58 am.
China is already Chinese, it does not need to be “sino-ized”; so that in fact what they are doing is trying to mutate the natural culture of thousands of years into a collectivism in communism.
See my discussion in the comments in the first link “Pope Francis hopes the China deal will be renewed”; where I point out the difference, in Chinese communism, between “thought” and “theory”- CWR.
I find the statement from the Chinese Bishops at this time particularly striking as they coincide with the publicized reflections given in the consistory, among them:
– Pope Francis stressed “discernment qualities” as well as the meaning of “root” for liturgy
– cardinals are reminded they share “joint responsibilities” for the Church
– the Order of Malta got the assurance it will be conformed to its “original inspiration” and “foundational context”.
These Chinese Bishops have declared for the “thought” line from Mao Zedong and are stating openly how it is engaged with them.
In a related affair, my bishop is promoting the modernist Jean Gebser and the idea of collective consciousness while proclaiming that China is already way ahead in achieving what the Church should become eventually. The world supposedly has “gone past post-modernism” and the Church supposedly is lagging.
With China, the line from “thought” comes down from Mao Zedong. The term “theory” is ascribed to Deng Xiaoping. What has happened to Deng Xiaoping is quite strange.
Back in contemporary times Deng Xiaoping was regarded differently and has the nickname Xixian, meaning, “admired for virtue”, “precious character” and even “boundary”. This has the sense of a true popularity.
With Xi Jinping the situation is really that “admiring” him is a requirement imposed from on high and entails certain strains of a demand for adulation.
The Chinese communists are very skilled in the language business. You can get another angle on it through the discussion of the 1992 Consensus issue.
What is indisputable is that Sinicization, which to begin with disrespects true Chinese culture, is, also -: “Xi Jinping thought”.
The quotation is from the last link, THE BOSTON PILOT, “New Chinese Catholic leaders say they’ll follow Communist principles”.
‘ The new leaders issued a statement to commit themselves to engaging priests, religious, and laypeople across the country for pastoral evangelization and further promotion of sinicization for “truth, pragmatism and inspiration” to move ahead toward a “bright future.”
The new leaders’ statement also highlighted the need for the Catholic Church to implement the spirit of the National Conference on Religious Affairs held last December and fulfill the requirement of the Communist Party’s Central Committee for the Catholic Church in China. During that conference Dec. 3-4, Xi stressed the strict implementation of Marxist policies, increased online surveillance and tightening control of religion to ensure national security.
The bishops said it was “necessary to unite and lead the priests, elders and faithful to follow Xi Jinping’s thought on socialism with Chinese characteristics for a ‘new era’; continue to hold high patriotism and love for religion; (and) adhere to the principles of independent and self-run churches,” the bishops’ statement said.
The church leaders said they find it is important to adhere to the direction of sinicization of Catholicism in China to “vigorously strengthen the building of patriotic forces” to realize “the dream of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.” ‘
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2022/07/05/pope-francis-says-he-hopes-vatican-china-deal-will-be-renewed/
“thought”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maoism
“thought”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xi_Jinping_Thought
“theory”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deng_Xiaoping_Theory
“Xixian”
https://chinese.yabla.com/chinese-english-pinyin-dictionary.php?define=%E5%B8%8C%E8%B4%A4
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Consensus
https://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.php?ID=193035