Rocky Mountain Lies - Colorado's Catholic Archbishop Charles Chaput Keeps 'Em Coming

According to child advocates: "We have to be honest about the fact that....it's poor public policy to send a message to child rapists that they can someday stop looking over their shoulders." "The arguments in support of SOL repeal are clear and convincing. The choice must be children over their offenders - legal accountability over legal loopholes." The choice for Archbishop Charles Chaput was also clear: justice for victims of child sex abuse or protecting his assets, keeping horrendous records of pedophile priests from being exposed in court, and pandering to fears of religious persecution.

As late as April 2010, "the archbishop continued to say that it is 'irrefutable' that the Church in the United States acted 'vigorously' in dealing with past sex abuse cases and that 'sexual abuse of minors is equally prevalent in public schools and institutions.'" OK, so let's "refute."

In response to the outrage generated by reports in all the major newspapers of the systematic rape and sodomy of children by Catholic priests aided and abetted by their bishops, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) issued a series of recommended but voluntary reforms in June 2002 for all US dioceses. One of these was annual audits whereby the number of priests who had admitted these crimes or had credible accusations would be counted along with the number of their victims, how much each diocese had paid to compensate their victims, and whether steps had been taken to prevent sexual abuse of minors in the future. The information was furnished by the bishops themselves to the auditors with no verification as to the veracity or completeness of the information. No victims were interviewed or consulted. Like the Dick Cheney/Karl Rove practice of leaking information to the New York Times or the Washington Post and then quoting the newspapers as their sources, the bishops reported the information to the auditors and then quoted the auditors' reports trumpeting their compliance with the process.

In January 2004, the USCCB released the results for the Archdiocese of Denver’s first audit. The report granted the Denver archdiocese a "Commendation" for their "outreach program designed to provide immediate pastoral care to victims/survivors and their families" without noting that the person hired by Chaput to provide "immediate care," Nancy Walla, was an attorney with "international corporate experience"  and employed by Chaput to defend his legal interests. (Walla was also former president of the Catholic Foundation for the Archdiocese of Denver.) The archdiocese was praised for a "communications policy reflecting the archbishop’s pledge to be open and transparent on issues regarding the sexual abuse of children" although Chaput refused to disclose the names of the members of the review board he had chosen to consider whether allegations of sexual abuse were credible, the names of the priests who were already admitted abusers or with credible accusations against them or the locations and approximate dates of these crimes.

The next month, Chaput announced that between 1950 and 2002, there had been seven priests in the Archdiocese of Denver who either admitted to, or had credible accusations of, sexually abusing 21 minors, and that the $997,730 spent so far on counseling and settlement costs had been entirely covered by insurers. After Chaput’s announcement, members of the Colorado Chapter of the Survivors Network of the Abused by Priests (SNAP),

"during a tearful press conference in Boulder, called the numbers laughable and told their own stories - many of them for the first time publicly - to illustrate what they call an incomplete picture of the problem’s scope."

"This is a voluntary, self-survey, so they can say whatever they want," said Marnie Williams, 50, a Boulder woman who says she was abused by a priest during her college years in Hays, Kan. She said many survivors have yet to come forward, others’ allegations were never recorded, and many were not abused by priests at all.

Carol Kobel, 54, of Boulder County, said she was 14 and studying to be a nun when she was sexually abused by two nuns at a Catholic high school in Colorado Springs. She kept it to herself for years, she said, and attempted suicide twice.

If we look at a few cases of known northern Colorado pedophiles, the reason for the archbishop's secrecy as well as his monumental fight against legislation which would amend or revoke statues of limitations becomes evident. Victims often believe that they alone were sexually assaulted. When names become public, other victims come forward and more details are revealed. For example:

Fr. Mark Matson, a well-known priest in Denver, was director of a national Catholic youth program and had arranged for Mother Teresa of Calcutta to speak at an assembly of Colorado youth in 1986. Two teenage boys came forward with charges the priest had sexually abused them in December 1987. Jefferson County prosecutors dismissed the case over what they thought were discrepancies in the boys’ stories. In 1989, Matson was accused of abusing a child in Santa Rosa, California. A jury acquitted Matson. Finally, a 13-year-old boy in Hawaii related how he was sexually abused by Matson in a way similar to the allegations in the Colorado case. In 2000, a judge sentenced Matson to 20 years in prison for attempted assault and five years for third-degree sexual assault. Another Colorado victim came forward in 2005 to allege abuse by Matson in 1982.

Fr. Marshall Gourley was accused in a suit brought in 1997 of child sexual abuse which had occurred in the early 1980s. The case was dismissed in 1998 due to the statutes of limitations. Even though the suit was barred on a technicality of the law and not on its merits, Chaput stated, "My sincere hope is that the hardship Fr. Gourley has endured as a result of these accusations will now begin to relent."[1]

In July 2005, the first victim of Denver priest, Fr. Harold Robert White, came forward to the the press. The 49-year-old resident of California said that he was sexually abused by White in Minturn, Colorado, in the 1970s and had contacted the archdiocese. Initially he said he only wanted an apology. According to the victim, Walla refused to give him information regarding White's other parish assignments, where he was now and whether he had left the priesthood of his own accord. She offered an apology by White via telephone, not face-to-face as the Californian requested. In response, the archdiocese contacted the police about White as was required by a 2002 state law. According to the victim, however, when making the police report, the archdioces omitted White's full name, date of birth and last known address. According to Fran Maier, Chaput's right-hand-man, they didn't know White's address although the Denver Post was able to contact White for an interview. Maier also refused to to say if While had other charges against him.

The victim sued the archdiocese because he wanted full disclosure of what the archdiocese knew about White and when. Although barred from suing because of the sex abuse, he brought suit based on the fact he discovered only in 2005 that the archdiocese was negligent in its supervision of White. By December 2005, a total of 13 lawsuits involving Fr. White - including White’s godson, a man dying of AIDS - had been filed against the archdiocese on the same basis. Harold White died of an apparent heart attack while vacationing in Cancun in November 2006. White was in Mexico with the Fr. Edward Poehlmann, a Denver priest and seminary classmate.

In September 2005, three men accused Fr. Leonard Abercrombie of abusing them from the 1950s to the 1970s. One of them, a 46-year-old law enforcement officer, brought suit against the Denver archdiocese the same month. Another alleged Abercrombie victim said that in 2002 he had privately approached the archdiocese - recipient of a 2003 "Commendation" for their outstanding care of victims. He related, "They just told me they didn’t have the money - that they’d pay for therapy but not a cash amount for damages." Chaput reported $132,338,783 in archdiocesan (excluding parishes and their schools, Catholic Charities and Archdiocesan Housing) net assets ( $105,428,563 in investments) in his 2002 Archdiocesan Annual Report.  Abercrombie had a total of nine accusers.

Chaput announced in February 2005 that in the previous year allegations were made against eight additional priests but he declined to release their names or the approximate dates of the abuse and locations. Chaput said that most cases reported were decades-old and that no priest in active ministry had been credibly accused of sexually abusing a child, technically true because Fr. Timothy Joseph Evans had already been removed from his parish in 2003.

A father informed the archbishop in 2003 that his son had been sexually abused by Evans in 1996 at Spirit of Christ parish in Arvada. Although reported to the Arvada police, the father refused to file charges because he thought the archdiocese would handle the situation correctly. Evans had been transferred to Our Lady of Fatima in Lakewood where another victim waited until 2003 to report sexual abuse to the archdiocese and Vicar General Msgr. Thomas Fryar said he reported this to the Lakewood police. On March 30, 2004, Msgr. Fryar contacted Fort Collins police about another allegation which ultimately led to Evan’s arrest. Nick Gerber said Evans sexually assaulted him between September 1998 and May 1999 at St. Elizabeth Ann Seton parish in Fort Collins. The Fort Collins police had to discover through their own investigation that there were other allegations against Evans. Dana Rotkovich, a former youth minister, told the police Evans had offered to be his spiritual adviser and groped him in 2000. An affidavit stated he reported Evans to the archdiocese in May 2002 but because Rotkovich was not a minor, the archdiocese did not report this charge to the police. The following month, the affidavit states, Evans called another of his victims, told him he was being investigated and then offered to give him money or "anything else he wanted" in return for making "it all go away." [2]

On November 22, 2005, Fr. Evans turned himself over to the police and was released on bond. Evans was charged with two counts of sexual assault on a child by a person in a position of trust and one count of contributing to the delinquency of minor, all felonies. In the "comments section" following a news report on The Coloradoan website, a parishioner wrote:

.....I was also very disturbed to find out that Father Larry [Fr. Lawrence Christensen, pastor at St. Elizabeth’s] was not completely cooperating with the investigation, which the Archbishop claims the Archdiocese is committed to. This is such a huge scandal which has caused a great deal of hurt, and for some, sadly, I suspect a loss of faith in our Church, and her leaders. The buck should stop with Chaput. Has he been to SEAS [St. Elizabeth Ann Seton] to address the flock there? Somehow, I doubt it. It all still comes across as the "good old boys club."

Was it and is it wise to leave Father Larry in charge of a flock who had already been duped and damaged, when the relationship between himself and Father Tim is at the very least suspect?....MANY people in Fort Collins have been directly affected by it!

Another reader wrote in the same comments section:

I was both saddened by this case and furious at the Archdiocese and more importantly Archbishop Chaput at how this was handled at SEAS. I think that the good and loyal people at SEAS have a right to know why they were not told of the investigation that was ongoing while Fr. Tim was on "retreat" for all that time. Perhaps, had people known, the investigation would have turned up even more evidence.

Evans was convicted in two separate criminal trials for "sexual assault on a child by a person in a position of trust and a pattern of abuse."

After both convictions, Gerber announced  in April 2007 he was suing:

Through the course of the criminal process I learned that Father Tim wasn’t the only one responsible for the abuse, but that the Archdiocese of Denver was also responsible.

I am taking action today because I was deceived by the Archdiocese of Denver. I went to the Archdiocese to report Father Tim. I asked whether I should have an attorney when I met with the Archdiocese. They told me that I shouldn't have an attorney and that the Archdiocese doesn’t bring attorneys to these meetings so they encourage victims not to bring attorneys. When I got to the meeting with the Archdiocese, Nancy Wailer [sic] introduced everyone there. Nancy told me that one of the people was an attorney. I questioned why an attorney was present when I was told there would be none and I was told not to bring one. Nancy also told me at this point that she was an attorney. Both of them said that they were not acting on a legal behalf during the meeting. I found out during the criminal trial that the other attorney at that meeting was Charles Goldberg, the attorney for Archbishop Chaput and the Archdiocese.
The Archdiocese told me that what Father Tim did was not a crime but they were still going to report it. The Archdiocese never told me that they had other reports of Evans molesting children, even though it came out in the criminal trial that they did have other reports before I reported Evans.

I don’t want any other children to be abused, but also don’t want any other children to be mistreated like I was by the Archdiocese and Archbishop Chaput. I feel that they should be accountable for their actions just like anyone else

From Evans’ arrest, through his sentencing and trials, until his conviction, there were numerous statements from various archdiocesan officials congratulating themselves for following the letter of the law by reporting each accusation against Evans by a minor to the police.[2]

Chaput fights back

Chaput supported legislation introduced in the 2001 Colorado General Assembly known as a "no fiduciary duty" bill. This legislation would have made the archdiocese immune from damage awards for an employee’s sexual abuse of children. Child advocates were able to keep the bill from passing.

After the initial 15 lawsuits involving Frs. White and Abercrombie were filed in 2005, Chaput’s tried to move the venue from state court to federal court. In 1998, a federal court judge had found the First Amendment precludes court reviews of how religious groups hire and supervise clergy. Chaput’s position was that the US Constitution not only allows the Church to regulate its internal affairs without any accountability and under its own rules without interference from civil authorities - including assigning and disciplining of priests - but he would also argue that being forced to provide archdiocesan records breached the First Amendment guarantee of separation of church and state. In early 2006, US District Judge Lewis Babcock ruled against Chaput.

Three SOL bills were introduced in the 2006 Colorado General Assembly. House Bill 1090 removed any caps on civil damages and made not only the guilty person liable for those damages, but also their employer if the crimes occurred during the course of the perpetrator’s work. House Bill 1088 called for sex abuse crimes against children to be prosecuted without time limits. The US Supreme Court had ruled in Stogner v. California that criminal statutes cannot be retroactively eliminated or amended, so Senate Bill 143 was introduced to open a two-year window for victims to file civil lawsuits regardless of when the abuse occurred. SB 143 would allow these civil suits to flush out previously protected perpetrators. When a person is accused of a crime, the police first check the record for previous arrests and convictions. Many child abusers would have no such record due to SOLs. Since this type of criminal gravitates to jobs where they have contact with children - teachers, coaches, scout-masters, day-care workers - identifying them in court would prevent them from gaining access to children in the future.

While the proposed Colorado legislation made no distinction between public and private organizations, by separate statute Coloradoans have only 180 days to file an intent-to-sue notice and their damages are capped at $150,000 when the defendant is an agency or department of the government. This type of restriction is known as "sovereign immunity," a judicial doctrine which prevents the government from being sued without its consent. All levels of government have used this defense to some extent based on the premise that since it is taxpayers who ultimately pay the monetary judgments, a plaintiff’s fellow citizens actually bare the punishment and not the responsible person(s). Over the years, judicial decisions and legislative measures agreed that government employees - including police and fire department services, and public education - should be held accountable and anyone who suffered damages should be compensated. Sovereign immunity laws, however, still vary widely by state and locality.

Chaput hired a public relations firm, Phase Line Strategies, and a powerful lobbying firm with ties to Gov. Bill Owens. [3] The bishops' usual lobbyist, the Colorado Catholic Conference, was also fully engaged as well as Chaput's own media outlets and Republican-friendly secular media. Their strategy was to fallaciously claim the proposed legislation was an attack against only private institutions, specifically the Catholic Church, and at the same time promote increased demand for Catholic schools.

While assuring all of his heartfelt support for children subjected to the most perverse forms of sexual gratification by clergy and religious, Chaput lied in a letter to be read throughout the archdiocese at every weekend Mass in early February 2006. Supporters of the bills repeatedly stated nothing in the legislation was anti-Catholic or anti-religion and would protect all victims of child sexual abuse. Yet Chaput announced,

[T]he results of these bills [would be] unfair, unequal and prejudicial in the legal and financial liability they place on Catholics, because Catholics make up a disproportionate share of Colorado non-profit organizations and institutions, and legislators know it.

The Church now deals with hostility every day from certain lawmakers, simply because we ask that all institutions and persons - both public and private - be treated equally under the law for matters as serious as the sexual abuse of minors.

....Every one of these bills unfairly burdens religious and private organizations and unfairly ignores sexual abuse in public schools and institutions. This is bad public policy and bad law.

Amending an arbitrary time limit on when prosecutions or lawsuits can be initiated does not change the fact that a case still has to proved before a disinterested judge and/or jury with the same rules of evidence. Regardless, Chaput again lied in an interview with the Rocky Mountain News:

"Why would anyone want to take away the ability of a jury to analyze whether the defense is legitimate or not? That seems unfair even of itself."

Chaput is disturbed that [Senate Bill 143] would subject the Church to ancient cases, but not allow it to argue in court that its treatment of sexual predators was considered appropriate for those times.

(To this day, the Vatican and Catholic prelates around the world still use this defense in one form or another - "We didn’t know how seriously children were affected" and/or "We were acting on advice of our psychologists." Their critics have responded by asking when did they not know that raping and sodomizing a child was a crime or how could they have been so devoid of common human decency as to have no empathy with their victims.)

A week after his letter was read to all parishioners, Chaput produced a list of 85 Colorado Department of Education reports issued after 1997 where the state had revoked or denied teaching licenses for reasons involving sexual misconduct with minors. He said, "We want to be treated like everyone else, and we want children to be protected everywhere, not just in private institutions. If everybody had a stake in the bill, it would be amended to be fair and equitable. What I'm really calling for is a broad discussion of the issue, not one aimed at the Catholic Church." The archbishop could be confidant that his followers would see no contradiction that, unlike his own organization, 1. these records were readily available, 2. the Department of Education had taken action to remove these teachers and 3. there is a difference between sexual misconduct (which could mean inappropriate language in front of a teenage) and the felony of sexual assault.

A Denver Post editorial dated February 13, 2006, responded:

The numbers game is a blatant effort by the Church to divert attention from its responsibility to compensate priests’ victims. The fact is, the Church is under pressure because officials knew that priests were abusing children in their own flock yet covered it up, quietly moving the priests from parish to parish. In Colorado...the number of victims might be even bigger, but their day in court has long ago passed, thanks to the statute of limitations that some lawmakers want to relax or eliminate for future cases.

The statute of limitation is the same for bringing a suit against a school or other public entity under governmental immunity laws....Governmental immunity doesn’t shield public employees from "willful and wanton" conduct. A school also could be sued under the Federal Civil Rights Act.

Colorado Rep. Gwyn Green (D-Golden) - who received a Master’s degree in social work from the University of Denver and a Bachelor’s degree from St. Mary’s College in Notre Dame, Indiana, and was honored as "Legislator of the Year" in 2006 by groups including the Colorado Public Health Association, the National Association of Social Work, and the Colorado Society of Clinical Social Workers for her support on the SOL legislation - summed it up best:

They’ve been molesting children, and now they say, everybody does it? It’s morally repugnant....When I was in Catholic school if I did something wrong and then said, ‘Well, Johnny did it, too,’ I would be very firmly informed that pointing fingers at others is not an acceptable response.

The archbishop also averted to his usual posture of "victimhood." From a March 2006 interview: "[T]here is a 'new and peculiar kind of anti-Catholicism at work' in many efforts to change statute of limitation laws, Chaput said. It involves 'angry, disaffected Catholics....Sexual abuse can become a convenient cover for a lot of unrelated hostility.'" And finally, "Our concern for victims is heartfelt. We want them to come forward."

"Of course, circumstances between the Catholic Church in Germany in 1937 and the Catholic Church in Colorado today are vastly different. In many ways, there’s no comparison. What’s similar, though, is that certain media and public officials resent the Catholic Church’s involvement in social and political issues....And they’d like to silence her," wrote Christopher Rose, director of the Colorado Catholic Conference, in the Denver Catholic Register (DCR).

Chaput claimed the Church was being unjustly targeted and the goal of lawmakers was "the systematic dismantling and pillaging of the Catholic community."

Chaput thinks the Church is being singled out in "an attempt to silence and punish her" for the Church's stands on abortion, traditional marriage and other values issues....

[Colorado Senate President Joan] Fitz-Gerald said Chaput’s analysis "doesn’t play." She insists her bill is neutral. That said, "I don't know who else may have a sex-abuse problem, but I think they (the Church) has a problem." Fitz-Gerald added, "I grew up strong and strict. I understand the power of the Church. And when I talk to victims I understand some of these lives are pretty much ruined."

Fitz-Gerald insisted she wasn’t targeting Catholics, but added: "The Catholic Church may not be the entire universe on this but if the shoe fits, wear it." She added, "There are victims out there and we’re finding it may take them many years to come forward."

The archbishop admitted child sex abuse was an integral part of the Church’s living memory. "Should plaintiffs be able to bring lawsuits 80 years back?" he questioned. Actually the first documents on child sexual abuse in the Catholic Church date from the fourth century and continue at intervals for the next 1600 years.  

Chaput had the author of a study of public schools, begun under the Bush Department of Education after clerical sex abuse had made headlines, testify before the Colorado General Assembly. Charol Shakeshaft, a Hofstra University scholar on educational administration, stated in the draft report that solid national data was unavailable. "None of these studies - either singly or as a group - answer all of the reasonable questions that parents, students, educators, and the public ask about educator sexual misconduct. And they certainly do not provide information at a level of reliability and validity appropriate to the gravity of these offenses."

Nevertheless, based on her extrapolation of data from the existing material, Shakeshaft "the physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests."

Shakeshaft made no effort to contextualize the frequency or severity of public school abuse either by comparing the number of children attending public school with the number of children having contact with priests in a private setting, nor did she differentiate between a teacher's use of a vulgar word and priests raping even infants as was reported by the John Jay study.

Even Department of Education Deputy Secretary, Eugene W. Hickok, noted in his preface to the Shakeshaft report:

It is important to note some of the Department's reservations about the findings in the literature review. Specifically, the author focuses in large measure on a broad set of inappropriate behaviors designated as "sexual misconduct," rather than "sexual abuse," which is the term used in the statute....The author’s use of the two words interchangeably throughout the report is potentially confusing to the reader

.  
Kathleen Lyons, a spokeswoman for the National Education Association, called the Shakeshaft report "a misuse of the data to imply that public schools and the Catholic Church have experienced the same level of abuse cases. I take great umbrage at that suggestion," she said in an interview. "That just seems like someone is reaching conclusions based on half the data that’s needed."

At no time did Chaput and his media supporters differentiate between the expectation of moral behavior between teachers and priests. Unlike a public school teacher, "a priest acts in persona Christi capitis - that is, in the place of Christ, the Head...through the indelible mark conferred by the Sacrament of Orders, which leaves him forever configured to the celibate Christ," Chaput wrote. Furthermore, "Every priest is called to be the ‘living image’ of Jesus, and therefore should seek to reflect in himself, as far as possible, the human perfection which shines forth in the incarnate Son of God." Not exactly the employee handbook for the Department of Education.

The Colorado Catholic Conference launched ad hominem attacks against the two female legislators who originated the legislation. [4]

Rep. Green was "appalled by the viciousness of the personal attacks" the Church made against her. "They read letters denouncing me from the pulpit...and what they said was totally untrue." They also made it clear to her they would throw their resources into defeating her in the next election.

Fitz-Gerald described how difficult it was to sit through Mass while the work she and other legislators were doing to protect children was thoroughly libeled. "This was about children...who were shamed by the acts done to them," protested Fitz-Gerald. "They went through life wondering what they did to deserve either rape or sodomy or both."

Regardless of the protection and compensation these bills would provide to Colorado’s children, "David Clohessy of SNAP said the most vigorous effort to block proposed get-tough measures has come here in Colorado. 'Archbishop Chaput attacks relentlessly,' he said."

Joined by the Greek Orthodox metropolis of Denver, a number of evangelical Protestant leaders, insurance companies, the municipal league, some counties and "thousands of calls, emails, and letters," only an amended HB 1088 which removed the criminal statute of limitations for prosecuting future sex crimes against children passed into law.

Chaput pays up

Catholics were repeatedly warned that the legislation is "about punishing the Catholic community." Patrick McIlheran, opinion columnist for the neoconservative and now defunct newspaper, The New York Sun, congratulated Chaput for making "a distinction between the obligation to help the abused and opening the vault.

"If (my client) could go back in time and erase what occurred, he wouldn’t take any amount of money for that," responded a plaintiff's attorney.

"The effort to change the rules on the statutes of limitations is the most blatant attack yet on the Church and Catholic community. It is time to start getting angry," the March 1, 2006, issue of the Denver Catholic Register (DCR)stated. "Unless Catholics wake up right now and push back on behalf of their Church, their parishes and the religious future of their children, the pillaging will continue," Chaput declared "We have an equally serious obligation to the people of the Catholic community in northern Colorado. They have rights, too. Many of them weren’t even born when these incidents happened. They’re innocent. As a bishop, I have a duty to protect them and their resources. Justice must respect the rights and needs of all the parties involved," noted Chaput in a December DCR.

Apparently there are Catholics who not know that every single paper clip and brick, every bank account and investment instrument in the Denver archdiocese is owned by Charles Chaput or by a corporation controlled by his appointees and that very little is done with their welfare in mind.

Chaput hired the Judicial Arbiter Group (JAG) in May 2006 to broker financial settlements with the now 30 plaintiffs who had filed lawsuits against the archdiocese. The Group’s fee was $350 per hour. Chaput said, "We want to speak to them (the accusers) ourselves, directly, and this is the best way to do that," meaning outside of court. The purpose of mediation was threefold: first to keep his records from being disclosed in court, second to prevent himself and other officials from having to testify, and third to offer victims in need of money a hasty settlement.

In January 2007, the archdiocese announced that in November and December of 2006 a total of fifteen victims had accepted a settlement of more than $1.6 million (approximately $100,000 each) through mediation. Three victims who had not filed lawsuits settled with the archdiocese for an undisclosed sum. According to Chaput, all the monies paid so far had come directly from the archdiocese’s funds which included donations (other than from the parishes which was $5,218,846 in 2006) and investment and interest income which in 2006 was $18,509,484 and $15,395,422 respectively. He assured his followers, "None of the funding for litigation or settlements came from contributions to the Archbishop’s Catholic Appeal [$6,137,059 in 2006]." Chaput said he was pleased with the outcome so far.

In the 2007 Annual Report, Chaput affirmed that "Resolution of those remaining cases will require the use of the Archdiocese’s assets and the resources it stewards, however, we will continue to use the money from the Archbishop’s Catholic Appeal strictly for the purposes designated and not for litigation-related payments or legal defense costs." Monies collected for the Archbishop's Catholic Appeal are shown as revenue to the chancery (diocesan headquarters) along with parish collections, donations and investment and interest income. As is usual, it is not indicated on the expense side of the annual report which source of income is paying for which expense.

After the 2008 settlements noted below, one representative of the archdiocese told the press the cost of the settlements would adversely impact the charitable work of the Church, but Chaput said that while Catholic schools could be affected, Catholic Charities would not. He also stated the latest settlement would be paid from archdiocesan assets ($212,459,521 net assets in 2008) and he would not have to sell any property ($61,690,581 in 2008) to compensate the victims.[5]
If any Catholic schools were affected, it could only be at the direction of Chaput. In addition to tuition, the two archdiocesan high schools were partially funded by private foundations and this source of revenue would dry up only at the archbishop's request. The elementary schools were supported by their parishes and an archdiocesan charity known as Seeds of Hope. The annual reports don't show how much Chaput gives to Catholic Charities, but the amount is included in the expense for "Social Development and World Peace" which was $1,646,376 in 2008. Also included in that expense category - "for funding costs associated with social concerns facing the Church" - would be such other programs as a "Get Out the Vote" campaign, and anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage programs. Also noted in the 2008 Annual Report was $3.3 million transfered from the chancery to the department which writes the settlement checks (the Risk Management Trust) "to rebuild the cash reserves of the Trust and fund the costs associated with the settlement of the 18 claims announced in July 2008."

In March 2007, Denver District Judge John McMullen denied Chaput’s motions to dismiss three lawsuits accusing the archdiocese of "negligent supervision" of Fr. White. In April, Judge Robert Hyatt rejected Chaput’s attempt to bar another 12 lawsuits involving Frs. White and Abercrombie. Chaput took his case to the Colorado Supreme Court which rejected the Church’s appeal in September 2007, clearing the way for 15 lawsuits to proceed. [5]

In April 2008, the Archdiocese of Denver settled with Nick Gerber for $300,000. Gerber’s attorney, Jeff Anderson, announced the archdiocese would also write letters of apology. "They should've been more vigilant in the hiring and retention of [Fr. Tim Evans]," Anderson said. A written statement by Gerber concluded, "This has been a painful chapter in my life, one which has affected me every day since it happened, but it is my sincere hope that no other kids are abused and have their trust betrayed like I did."

In July 2008, Chaput settled with 18 victims (16 plaintiffs and 2 others) of Frs. St. Peter (the priest was administrator of the Denver archdiocese between Archbishop James Casey’s death and the selection of Archbishop Francis Stafford three months later in 1986), White, and Abercrombie for $5.5 million without going to trial. (The number of White’s victims willing to go public had risen to 29 men and women.)

Except for one complaint involving Abercrombie and another concerning Msgr. Thomas Barry (a woman filed a lawsuit against the archdiocese in 2007 alleging the late Msgr. Barry sexually assaulted her when she was an adolescent living with him) still outstanding, as of July 2008, the amount of the 42 settlements totaled more than $8.2 million according to the archdiocese - more a drop in the bucket than a "pillaging."  

Chaput had blamed the falling numbers of Mass attendees on a "fluid, weak, and unreliable ‘American Catholic identity’" brought about by Catholic leaders "deeply naive about the congeniality of American culture toward Catholic belief." However, after the July 2008 settlement was announced, Chaput acknowledged: "That this could happen in the Church seems impossible in the minds of so many of our people. There’s anger about that and disappointment and discouragement....Some people have stopped going to church because of this."

This concludes the series on Charles Chaput. Parts I, II, III are available.

(Betty Clermont is author of The Neo-Catholics - Implementing Christian Nationalism in America.)

1. "Judge dismisses lawsuit against priest, archdiocese" Denver Catholic Register, July 22, 1998 p. 9

2.Mike McPhee and Eric Gorski, "Charges against Priest Detailed" Denver Post March 14, 2006 http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_35...
and
"Alleged Victim Claims Priest Bribed Him to Drop Sex Abuse Charges" The DenverChannel.com March 14, 2006 http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news... Provided by BishopAccountability.org http://www.bishop-accountability.org...
and
"Priest Indicted for Alleged Sex Assault on Child" TheDenverChannel.com August 29, 2006
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news...
and
"Former Priest in Court on Sex Assault Charges" TheDenverChannel.com
October 19, 2006 http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news... Provided by BishopAccoutability.org http://www.bishop-accountability.org...
and
Sara Reed, "Former Priest Convicted of Sex Abuse in March" The ColoradoanDecember 24, 2007
http://www.coloradoan.com/apps/pbcs.... Provided by BishopAccountability.org
http://www.bishop-accountability.org...
and
J. P. Eichmiller, "Victims of priest’s abuse seek accountability from church" The Coloradoan June 17, 2007
http://cache.zoominfo.com/CachedPage...

1. Marci Hamilton, Justice Denied: What America Must Do to Protect Its Children Cambridge University Press 2008 p 87 Provided by Google Books

1. Ibid p 89-90

5.TaRhonda Thomas, "Suits alleging abuse by Colorado priests settled" KUSA*TV http://www.9news.com/rss/article.asp...
and
Dan Frosch, "Denver Archdiocese to Pay $5.5 Million in Abuse Suits" New York Times July 2, 2008 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us...
and
Berny Morson and Jean Torkelson, "Archdiocese to pay $5.5 million to erase ‘stain’ of sex abuse" Rocky Mountain News July 2, 2008 The Associated Press contributed to this report.
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/new...

www.streetprophets.com/storyonly/2010/10/14/91126/858