http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/89250112.html
Vatican defends decision
A scandal reached Benedict's office when he was cardinal.
By Nicole Winfield
Associated Press
VATICAN CITY - The Vatican yesterday strongly defended its decision not to defrock an American priest accused of molesting some 200 deaf boys in Wisconsin and denounced what it called a campaign to smear Pope Benedict XVI and his aides. Church and Vatican documents showed that in the mid-1990s, two Wisconsin bishops urged the Vatican office led by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger - now the pope - to let them hold a church trial against the Rev. Lawrence Murphy. The bishops acknowledged that the abuse had allegedly happened years before, but they argued that the deaf community in Milwaukee was demanding justice from the church.
Despite the extensive and grave allegations against Murphy, Ratzinger's deputy at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith ruled that the allegations of abuse were made far too late and that Murphy - then ailing and elderly - should instead repent and be restricted from celebrating Mass outside his diocese.
The official, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone - now the Vatican secretary of state - ordered the church trial halted after Murphy wrote Ratzinger a letter saying he was ill, infirm, and simply wanted "to live out the time that I have left in the dignity of my priesthood."
The New York Times broke the story yesterday, adding fuel to a swirling scandal about the way the Vatican in general and Benedict in particular have handled reports of priests sexually abusing children over the years. Questions have also arisen about abuse cases in Benedict's home country of Germany while he had direct supervision over such cases.
Yesterday, the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano said there was no cover-up and denounced what it said was a "clear and despicable intention" to strike at Benedict "at any cost."
A Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, issued a statement noting that the Murphy case had reached the Vatican only in 1996, some 20 years after the diocese learned of the allegations. He also said that Murphy died in 1998 and that there was nothing in the church's handling of the matter that precluded any civil action against him.
Police investigated the allegations at the time and never proceeded with a case, Lombardi noted. He said in the statement that a lack of more recent allegations was a factor in the decision not to defrock Murphy and noted that "the Code of Canon Law does not envision automatic penalties."
Murphy worked at the former St. John's School for the Deaf in St. Francis, Wis., from 1950 to 1975.
'I have repented'
Church and Vatican documents obtained by two lawyers who have filed suits alleging the Archdiocese of Milwaukee did not take sufficient action against Murphy show that as many as 200 deaf students had accused him of molesting them, including in the confessional, while he ran the school. Though the documents are remarkable given church officials' repeated desire to keep the case secret, they suggest an increasingly determined effort by bishops, albeit 20 years later, to heed the despair of the deaf community in bringing a canonical trial against Murphy.
Bertone shut the process down after Murphy wrote Ratzinger a letter saying he had repented, was old and ailing, and that the statute of limitations had run out.
"I have just recently suffered another stroke which has left me in a weakened state," he wrote Ratzinger. "I have repented of any of my past transgressions.. . . I simply want to live out the time that I have left in the dignity of my priesthood."
"I ask your kind assistance in this matter," he wrote.
The New York Times also reported yesterday that Ratzinger was kept more closely apprised of a sexual-abuse case in Germany than previous church statements have suggested, raising fresh questions about his handling of a scandal unfolding under his direct supervision before he rose to the top of the church hierarchy.
Ratzinger was copied on a memo telling him that a priest he had approved for therapy in 1980 to overcome pedophilia would be returned to pastoral work within days of beginning psychiatric treatment. The priest was later convicted of molesting boys in another parish.
An initial statement on the matter issued earlier this month by the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising put full responsibility for the decision to allow the priest to resume his duties on Ratzinger's deputy, the Rev. Gerhard Gruber.
But the memo, which was confirmed by two church officials, shows that the future pope not only led a meeting Jan. 15, 1980, approving the transfer of the priest, but was also kept informed about the priest's reassignment.
What part he played in the decision-making, and how much interest he showed in the case of the troubled priest, who had molested a number of boys in his previous job, remains unclear.
The case of the German priest, the Rev. Peter Hullermann, has acquired fresh relevance because it unfolded at a time when Ratzinger, who was later put in charge of handling thousands of abuse cases on behalf of the Vatican, was in a position to refer the priest for prosecution, or at least to stop him from contact with children.
The German Archdiocese has acknowledged that "bad mistakes" were made in the handling of Hullermann, though it attributed those mistakes to people reporting to Ratzinger rather than to the cardinal himself.
Church officials defend Benedict by saying the memo was routine and was "unlikely to have landed on the archbishop's desk," according to the Rev. Lorenz Wolf, judicial vicar at the Munich Archdiocese. But Wolf said he could not rule out that Ratzinger had read it.
According to Wolf, Gruber, the former vicar-general, said that he could not remember having a detailed conversation with Ratzinger about Hullermann but that Gruber refused to rule out that "the name had come up."
Benedict was well-known for handling priestly abuse cases in the Vatican before he became pope. Though some have criticized his role in adjudicating such cases over the last two decades, he has also won praise from victims' advocates.
The future pope's time in Munich has until now been viewed mostly as a stepping-stone on the road to the Vatican. But that period in his career has recently come under scrutiny - particularly six decisive weeks from December 1979 to February 1980.
A potential 'danger'
In that span, a review of letters, meeting minutes, and documents from personnel files shows, Hullermann went from disgrace and suspension from his duties in Essen to working without restrictions as a priest in Munich, despite the fact that he was described in the letter requesting his transfer as a potential "danger." The key meeting was on Jan. 15, 1980. Ratzinger presided over the session of the diocesan council.
The minutes have no references to the actual discussion that day but simply say that a priest from Essen in need of psychiatric care required room and board in a Munich congregation. "The request is granted," read the minutes, stipulating that Hullermann would live at St. John the Baptist Church in the northern part of the city.
Five days later, Ratzinger's office received a copy of the memo from his vicar-general, Gruber, returning Hullermann to full duties, a spokesman for the archdiocese confirmed.
Hullermann resumed parish work practically on arrival in Munich, on Feb. 1, 1980. He was convicted in 1986 of molesting boys at another Bavarian parish.