The Duck that bumped
the Goose’s Ass
(Father Kardas Bumped the Worcester Catholic Hierarchy)
1993
March
3, 1993
What’s up? I
get a phone call from Auxiliary Bishop George E. Rueger at 1 p.m.
and directly told to report to the Worcester Chancery for 4:30 P.M.
Nothing was told me by Bishop Rueger because I asked for what
reason. He only said to just be there. It is like watching the waves
and suddenly there is a rise in the waves.
When I
entered the building, it was empty. The staff works until 4:00 p.m.
I took the elevator to the second floor to Bishop Rueger’s office.
He greeted me by telling me hang my coat in the hallway. He then led
me into his office and shut the door behind me. What was penetrating
was how the door was unhooked to be closed with a hard sound. It
jolted me. This reminded me of a prison door “clicking”.
When I was
seated, Msgr. Edmond T. Tinsley (Fiscal Affairs Director) entered
the room and sat down. There were three chairs arraigned in a circle
of center of this office Bishop Rueger then occupied the third seat.
Bishop
Rueger threw a hurricane at me. He said that two teenage girls have
accused me of molesting them. I, immediately, denied these
allegations. Rueger most of the talking and questioning. Tinsley sat
with a grin on his face in the whole time with only a few questions.
I was alone in this room.
When they
started questioning me about these accusations and about the two
girls, they both were intense. I am not sure how long the meeting
lasted. One issue that I do recall was that I did speak about my
alcoholism struggle and treatment, which may have been around this
time frame of the two girl’s allegations. Both of these people would
have privy about my treatment in 1977. I do recall Rueger blurting
out that “there will be a lot more people coming out against you.”
(Allegations) It was such a frustrated response on his part that I
only looked at him in resentment. But, when this meeting ended,
Bishop Rueger lead me out the door, Tinsley darted out anther where
Rueger directed me to my coat. He harshly said, "Go get some
dinner."
When I
returned to the rectory, I called a parish staff member and asked
her to come over to the rectory. I only wanted to get a report of
what happened at a parish meeting. She stated to me that I was
“totally gray” and in a “state of shock.” I did not feel this nor
did I think I portrayed these characteristics. It was very peculiar
of this staff member’s description to say the least. It was very
weird when I thought about it later.
Note Bene:
It was not until I received copies of documents from my civil lawyer
that I realized that same day, Sister Paula Kelleher received a
“Second Complaint” concerning me.
This
document has written on top of the page - Second Complaint. Carol
McCormick of 2 Fisher Terrace, Woburn, MA called the Chancery and
spoke with Sister Paula Kelleher at 1:45 p.m. Kelleher write that
“Ted Kardas molested her when she was 12 years old while he was
stationed at St. George’s.” 1.
The
Observation on this form has written” Abby Marshall called Carol.
She had gotten her number from Frank Fitzpatrick. She has been told
that there are others who were abused.” No one else ever came out
with another complaint against me.
The Diocese
was using a one-page form that had caller’s name, address, telephone
number, who received the call, summary of complaint and observation.
I realized
that it was “paint by the numbers” technique of these two girls
making complaints against me.
What I came
to realize this was possibly the beginning of a dragnet going
through the water syndrome. On February 5th, there was an
article in The Catholic Free Press, Worcester Diocese’s
weekly paper, about Msgr. Leo J. Battista of St. Anna’s Parish,
Leominster. He was being placed on Administrative Leave due to
sexual allegations made against him by a religious sister. This
article concerned a letter from Msgr. Battista that was read at all
masses at St. Anna’s. 2
The phone
call I received from Bishop Rueger to come in and other area stories
had me wondering. There may have been so many other matters that I
was thinking about due to what I was attempting to achieve at St.
Edward’s parish with the R.C.I.A. parish renovations, and overall
renewal. I knew there was an undertone going on in the area with a
certain lament of parishioners and area clergy.
March 8, 1993
The Dioceses
received a call from a Carol McCormick of Woburn on March 8, 1993. I
was only told that there were two girls making allegations against
me.
I received a
form the Diocese used for complaints: Date Telephone Call Received,
Summary of Complaint, Telephone Call Received By, Observations.
This copy I
received with “2nd complaint.” I recognized this writing
to be Bishop’s Rueger’s. Sister Paula Kelleher received this call.
She was the Bishop’s Delegate for these matters.
When I read
this, I realized that Abbey Weber called Carol McCormick. I read
“that there are others who were abused.” Bishop Rueger used this
expression towards me in the first meeting at the Chancery.
This form has
additional information in that Abbey Weber received Carol
McCormick’s number from a Frank Fitzpatrick. This Fitzpatrick was in
the media for some time as a sex abuse victim advocating.
After I
received a packet of documents from my civil lawyer, Attorney Carey,
I read the form used when Carol McCormick called the Chancery.
What opened
my eyes was Rueger used on March 3rd a number of points
that were written on summary and observations used in March 8th
- Second Complaint. One specific example was when Rueger said:
“More are going to come out against you.” Kelleher, who received
Carol McCormick’s call at the Chancery, wrote in observations:
“Abby Weber called Carol. She (McCormick) has been told that there
are others who were abused.” I did know that Rueger was previously
in phone communication with Weber was this paint by number
allegations or a certain pattern?
What was
developing was a number of documents used by the lawyers and my
“card box” of correspondence that I had received in previous years.
One such
document sent to me by the Chancery was a birthday card that I had
sent to Abby Marshall. 3. Another copy of a letter that I sent Abbey
Marshal was included. 4. After reading it, one has to realize that
it was written in the contents of the ‘70s.
When I was
mailed this information, I searched my “Letters/Cards” box that I
saved correspondence from previous years.
Oh and behold
was an Easter card from Kay and Paul McCormick of March 15, 1992,
wishing me a Happy Easter and come for a visit. 5 These people were
the adopted parents of Carol McCormick.
Then I found
a note from Abbey Marshall that she wrote when visiting me on March
20, 1984. 6. She was visiting with her mother, sister and niece. I
was on my day-off and was not at the rectory. The note she wrote: Hi
Ted! Sorry we missed you. Happy Easter.” What opened my eyes was I
was always addressed as Father Kardas. I never used my first name in
any of my priestly ministry or otherwise.
March 10, 1993
This morning,
after I celebrated the parish Eucharist, I called my Spiritual
Director, where I discussed a general description of yesterdays
meeting in the Chancery. I then related how one does not realize how
far the Diocese would go with anything like this on me. One has to
remember that Msgr. Francis Manning, Mrs. Grace Talbot, Miss Joan
Talbot, and Bishop Rueger were all part of the group at St. George’s
Parish in Worcester back in the ‘70s. My Sponsor said that what I
said about the two accusations against me was so ridiculous and the
diocese would never push anything like this. I said watch this group
because there is an agenda by the present administration in the
Chancery. This Chancery Group of Bishop Timothy Harrington’s
administration was “the group that gave me a Pearl Harbor.”
March 17, 1993
The annual
parish Confirmation at St. Edward’s was held with Bishop Rueger
presiding. Fr. Rocco M. Piccolomini (Vicar for Clergy) accompanied
him.
The Mass was
proceeding when at the homily, Bishop Rueger was directing his
comments to the candidates saying, "We know that Fr. Kardas has
been demanding on you" I was sitting next to the Lector of this Mass
in the sanctuary and she said: Oh! My God! I reacted with “Oh! Oh!
Then, The Lector said to me: Look at Fr. Piccolomini smiling at
Bishop Rueger. It seemed Piccolomini was starring at Bishop Rueger
with such a peculiar smile during the whole time Bishop Rueger was
preaching. It was very strange. This Lector told me during the Mass
that she was uncomfortable the way Bishop Rueger and Fr. Piccolomini
were acting with each other and their looking at each other.
What I
realized at this particular ceremony was that the Worcester Chancery
was going to develop something against me. 7 The Bishop’s remarks
were a blatant public attack. I was somewhat dumbfounded to say the
least. I knew Bishop Rueger when he was Headmaster at Marian High
School, Worcester and was in residence at St. George’s Rectory,
Worcester. He had a room next to mine on the third floor of the
rectory. I somewhat did know him living at that assignment for five
years. He did this with some direction of things to happen. I was
most concerned with this public particular act because it undermined
my Pastorship. Bishop Harrington appointed me pastor in 1984 to St.
Edward’s, Westminster, which had me in a category of Permanent
Pastor (PP).
This is, for
a priest, a significant pastoral position to be a PP- Permanent
Pastor. The title is reserved in Canon Law to a Bishop may
canonically carry out against a Pastor.
I wondered
at one time why I received a marriage ceremony to record in the
parish baptismal book. The envelope had my name as: Rev. Thaddeus J.
Kardas, PP. This was sent from the Midwest by a pastor who performed
the marriage. I did not think much of this or why it was written
with this title. It had to come from the national directory
published annually. Why no one in Worcester Diocese ever noticed
this or did they?
What I was
able to find out through unofficial sources was that there were a
number of pastors that Bishop Harrington appointed were in this
category of PP. I never was told this by anyone in the diocese. It
was told that Bishop Harrington recede an indult to Canon Law on
this issue of appointing pastor without the PP. What this was that
the bishop with indult grant from Rome might change or alter any
pastor on whatever desire the bishop has decided. The PP was not
under this episcopate decision. I was supposedly protected by my
appointment as pastor. Rumor had it that Bishop Harrington received
the indult counteracting the PP at the end of October. I was
appointed Pastor on October 1, 1985.
A further
development on this issue of PP was that I did not mention it until
one meeting at the temporary Chancery when I was sitting with Fr.
Stephen Pedone. Pedone was very argument with me by saying: “It does
not mean anything, Ted! No way were you one (PP)” What was peculiar
with his reaction was how red faced he became towards me and his
total bluntness. My reaction was wonderment of such an approach on
Pedone’s part. He was the Diocesan Canon Lawyer and chief advisor to
Bishop Harrington in all-canonical matters. But, one has to
understand that my Bishop said things to me that had final results
without any formal process
Previous to
the Confirmation Mass, the clergy were in the Resource Room to
attire for the Mass. Bishop Rueger was speaking in the corner of the
room with the Cantor who was a teenage girl he knew from his
assignment at Our Lady of the Lake in Whalom. I noticed he was
listening to her where she pointed over towards me a number of
times. They seemed to be whispering. It was so strange because, the
other clergy were waiting for Rueger. I did know that this girl was
chosen by the Diocese to represent the diocese at a national
convention. What happened is that she then told me that the parish
was to pick-up the cost of her attending? No one from the diocese
told me that. I mentioned it to the parish Finance Committee and
they recommended that we did not budget anything as such. The
Committee related that we are in a major fund drive for the new
parish center and no spare change was available. This girl was
relating this to Rueger who was heard probing other questions
directed about me.
This added
to what was to come because Rueger constantly, after he became
Bishop, tried to smell my breath whenever he would meet me. It was
so disgusting how close to my face he would try to get in his style
of “Hey! Hey! Hey!” It was so obvious to me what he was dong. One
time he was making his approach, when I extended my hand to shake
and he walked straight into my clinched fist that his stomach
encountered. I recalled that I said "Back-off!" What anyone else
may have thought was nothing that I would have tired to explain. I
termed him as “The Snuffer.”
March 23, 1993
Ms. Weber wrote
Bishop Rueger asking him for details on how the diocese is handling
my particulars and wanted details. Fr. Lynch read a copy of this
letter and suggested to the Worcester Chancery that Weber did not
write this letter. He said that her letter was written by a legal
mind. 7.
April 23, 1993
I didn’t
realize, at this time, that the Diocese was consulting the Diocesan
Civil Lawyer, Attorney James W. Reardon concerning my particulars. A
comment was written that Father Kardas “should get off the job.” 8
May 3, 1993
I received a
phone call, in the morning, from Fr. Piccolomini telling me to
report to Bishop Harrington’s Residence for 1 P.M.
I was hosting
the monthly Deanery Meeting at St. Edward’s Rectory. I had to excuse
myself at the dinner from the brother priest. I recall that I said
that the rectory is open with libations for the priest after their
meal. All were invited and I left. After I was reminded by a few
priests that they sat in the rectory living room with their
libations and cleaned-up before they left the rectory. They were
waiting for me to return but not Fr. Kardas.
When I
arrived at the Bishop’s Residence in Worcester, the housekeeper
escorted me into the kitchen. She departed with me just standing in
a kitchen with all shades drawn tight and a hanging light over the
table. I do recall this is strange because it was a bright sunny
afternoon. It was an atmosphere of a “Stalag #13 interrogation
room.” I felt like I was in a hot house kitchen.
Bishop
Harrington, Bishop Rueger and Msgr. Tinsley entered together. I was
invited to sit on one side of the table with the other three facing
me from the other sides of the table. It then began. I was getting
drilled with questions about these two teenage girls and their
accusations. Then, Bishop Harrington said, “You are guilty till
proven innocent! Ted! Get a civil lawyer.” I just sat in shock
hearing this. This particular interrogation lasted for an hour and
half. With the big light hanging over my head. I was told that they
wanted me to go for an “evaluation” and that Fr. Piccolomini would
make arrangements and get back to me.
At this
period of time, Bishop Harrington portrayed a “bulldog” style of
leadership. This carried the idea of paternalism in his ministry as
Bishop of the Diocese. It was well known between the diocesan priest
that he treated us like children. It was similar to when then
Cardinal Karl Woytala (Pope John Paul II) visited my seminary when I
was a Deacon in 1969. The students greeted him with song at “The
Castle” residence on campus. He spoke a few minutes and told us
students, “Dziecie, macie spac! (Children, go get some sleep!) The
Cardinal and faculty went to a party and we were told to go back to
our rooms. This atmosphere was very prevalent in the Church. Bishop
Harrington carried this on even in 1993.
It was some
time later, when Fr. Tom Lynch, who became my Canon Lawyer in
Hartford, reacted to me after I related the Stalag #13 interrogation
to me saying: Don’t let me go through that again. I need someone to
be with me. I was actually begging at this time because of my
previous experience of this overall tactic of the Diocese. Fr. Lynch
just told me to “just go” when I was to report to the Bishop’s
Residence.”
I asked, at
this meeting, if these two girls that were making allegations
against me were being interrogated in the same manner that I was
being treated? I received no answer. However, I was told by Bishop
Harrington that there were private detectives following me. Bishop
Rueger and Msgr. Tinsley jumped in on this and tried to change the
direction, as we don’t want to go there.
I felt I was
being mistreated and intimidated by a very paternalistic group of
the Worcester Diocesan Chancery.
May 5, 1993
Fr.
Picclomini called me that I was to report to the Institute of Living
in Hartford for a ten-day evaluation. He said, “the girl just wanted
an evaluation.” He then proceeded and told the reason given for my
evaluation was pedophilia. When I tried to protest, Picclomini said
that he didn’t know what else to put, so he put that.
May 10, 1993
I arrived at
the Institute of Living (IOL) in Hartford. When I checked-in, I was
told that I am an Outpatient. Then I was informed that my residence
would be at St. Thomas Seminary, Bloomfield, CT
When I
entered the unit I was told to report to have a locked door that one
had to be “buzzed-in.” It was a locked-down unit. What is going on
here?
This unit was
in the Braceland Building, which had a large center room with
chairs, and couches that had newspapers and magazines on small
tables. This place even had an exercise stationary bike in the
corner. There was conference room around the center of this room.
These doors were completely on metal piece with no windows to look
into a room. Then, there was a cloak room to put your personal
belongings. The conference rooms were in different arrangements
which some had only chairs and other rooms had soft chairs and
couches along the walls for sessions. Lastly, there was a large room
with a huge table with blackboard for “class” sessions. But, one had
to remember that this was locked-in area.
My daily
schedule began at 9:00 A.M. with Start-Up and ended at 2:30 P.M.
with Wrap-Up. Sessions consisted of Team, Wellness, Agenda Group,
Stress Management, Leisure, Ministry, Intimacy Issue, Assertiveness,
Men'’ Group, Work Issues, Conflict Resolution, Relaxation, Spiritual
Awareness, and Self-Esteem.
Every
Tuesday, the first session was Community. We all gathered in the
center hall. Heidi McCloskey, who was a staff counselor, conducted
it. This particular weekly meeting was for anyone that has a
particular issue to talk about that might affect the larger group.
It began with Heidi asking, “does anyone have anything they wish to
talk about?” a number of session silences prevailed for a
significant period of time. I had nothing to bring forth, myself.
But the silence was deafening at times.
But, one
morning Heidi called the whole group together for Community. She
announced that one of the participants committed suicide the
previous evening. I didn’t know the person once a name was given. I
only recall this individual from our gathering in the hall before
our Start-Up session. We were asked to share our feelings. I,
really, did not have much else to say but that I would definitely
remember this individual at my daily Mass.
This all
came about after I left the Stalag #13 interrogation. Fr.
Piccolomini called me to tell me about the arrangement of being sent
to Hartford. He said that the Diocese would take over immediately
the Masses at the parish and report to IOL on Monday.
Without me
knowing it, my last Sunday Masses were on May 2nd. I never returned
for a farewell Mass or anything but to remove my belongings some
time after.
May 10th
began for me at 5 A.M. on the road for Hartford. I did have anxious
feeling on this ride into what I was to encounter. When I entered
IOL, I felt as I was telling my life story what seemed ten times. I
was giving two multiple personality tests to take with me to my
Seminary Residence. I noticed that my shoulders were very tense
around 3:00 P.M.
A few other
priests directed me back to St. Thomas, Bloomfield. I was give a
small “cell” room and told that the priest suites were all
occupied. I felt good doing the test that I was to return the next
day when I returned to IOL.
May 11, 1993
My first
session each morning was Agenda Meeting. My counselor was Barbara
Bugella. This meeting was for each of us to say how we rated
ourselves on a scale of 1 to 10 being the best. Then one had to
explain to the group why we said what we felt and what it meant at
this particular time.
I was
introduced to Dr. Zeman on this day. He asked me if I remembered
being with these two girls? I said that I recall these two girls
somewhat He, immediately, asked me another rapid direct question:
Did I do anything inappropriate to either of these girls. I,
directly, said no!
I did tell
Dr. Zeman that Carol McCormick visited me at St. Edward’s Faith
Community with her daughter about June of 1992. . She told me that
she wanted to get First Communion for her daughter. They lived in
Athol and I mentioned that I would help her by calling the Pastor to
get her registered. I explained to her that she was not a resident
of Westminster and I did not have jurisdiction for her request. She
left with her daughter and I never heard anything. I asked the
Pastor from Athol some time after and he said that no one called or
came for such a request.
Dr. Zeman
informed me that my case was going to be his assignment to write up
“particle” objectives about my case. He was to be my Doctor while I
was to be IOL.
I then
attended the first Ministry Workshop, which was conducted by Fr.
John (Jack) Kiely. Fr. Kiely was on the staff of IOL. This session
was about inappropriate actions. He did address that the IOL first
objective was to get one to take care of oneself.
I did not
know what IOL were doing to me with in this evaluation. I did know
that I must keep myself in perspective by not shaking or jump the
gun with anything in my mind. I recall before I came to IOL that a
staff member told I that I should feel angry and deal with the
“adult child.” This was the atmosphere that was prevalent at this
time. I was more in a state of wanting this over with and return to
my ministry. All of this supposedly occurred when I was drinking
some 20 years ago. Besides, I recalled very little from that period
of time.
May 12, 1993
This was my
third day at IOL. I was given a full physical. I measured in at 5’ 7
½ “ and that I my weight was 178 lbs. The physician told me that I
should lose between 5 and 10 lbs. and that everything else was O.K.
I recall that my sleeping was irregular. One issue that extremely
worried me was that I was constantly sweating during the night. I
would change the tops of my pajamas at least two or three time a
night. I used to toss and turn most of the night.
Part of the
weekly schedule was an Agenda Meeting. This particular session was
“evaluation time” I shared that I should put myself first I said
that I didn’t have anything planned for that evening when I returned
to the seminary room. One of the staff members, Bridget, reacted
very strongly by questioning me again. I realized that I was
expected to have a very definite agenda to follow.
I had
another meeting with Fr. Kiely. I recall talking with Fr. Kiely and
he would say, “Don’t rush it.” I was told by him to enjoy my parish
ministry concepts and to give myself some time for myself and use
it. He said to let the process work itself and don’t rush it. He
stressed to forget the parish because it was Fr. Picclomini’s
problem. He said that is what Picclomini is getting paid for. I
wasn’t sure what he meant by this. I never expected anything but a
two-week evaluation.
I had
another appointment with Fr. Kiely. He said that I should be
attending AA meetings. It was on the top of his list for me to do
for myself. He shared that I should keep myself anxious to return to
the parish. He told me that I was at the IOL for legal
documentation. It was a safety net for me. I had to see that I was
being defined as having adolescent behavior and recovering alcoholic
with a lot of positive things in my life. My evaluation was a
document against these two girls and not any head-issues. Kiley did
say the Bishops wouldn’t let this issue go.
I realized
that I acted anxious and wanted to stay busy which I did in my
ministry. It was told me by a number of parishioners that I worked
25 hours a day with dedication. Was this misplaced anxiety and
anger? I think not.
One of the
guys with us in the group was a Bishop from Barbados. I talked with
him for some time one afternoon at the seminary. I felt as though I
had spilled my guts out describing my ministry in Worcester Diocese.
He was a very sympathetic and kind person who was well like by the
guys in the group.
The
atmosphere was somewhat explained to me by an article in the
National Catholic Reporter entitled “priests face abuse
outcomes.” 9
May 13, 1993
Today’s daily
session consisted of the unconscious action of a person. There was
information discussed that the unconscious gives signals. Also
discussed was intimacy.
I noticed
that I was coming to a “critical session.” The staff discussed the
label pedophilia very frequently. I felt scared being here at IOL
and angry. I told this to Kiely who kept saying to me not to rush
the evaluation (treatment was the word the newspaper would use).
I tried to
adjust with insight that I was overreacting. In this mornings Agenda
session, I related that I had a lot of concern with a lot of food
for thought, my mind was working like a sponge. I shared that I am
trying to meet my personal needs by more discussion, which gave me
different insights on personal directives of my life. In addition,
I was trying to focus on qualities that I like about myself. It was
a direction of achieving deeper levels of which I am now.
I was
getting angry because I knew I was not a pedophile and wanted
closure. This issue of pedophilia was a total topic of everything
that was happening at the group discussions and presentations.
I was
getting bored at the sessions. This was not my label and I was
uncomfortable with a stereo typecasting. I wanted to apply my energy
to other areas specially alcoholism.
Dr. Zeman
shared with me that I can only say that I don’t know if I did or did
not do anything. I was angry with this. I know that I did not do
anything in appropriate or to be ashamed. What I was facing was
false allegations. I do not recall any of what I being at IOL for
evaluation.
May 14, 1993
This was my
fifth day at IOL. There was a Men’s Group meeting this day. These
sessions and overall program was a mixed group of females and males.
This Men’s Group was supposed to discuss anything that we felt may
have been inappropriate with women present. I felt it was a continuo
agenda that was no different than the mixed group that I attended
during the week. I was told that one might want to express feelings
and what they mean more openly in a male group.
I was
thinking about my next Agenda Meeting on Monday and that I had
appointments with Kiley and Zeman on Tuesday.
The Agenda
meeting that I began to address was that what I was alleged with was
not my character and I didn’t do what was proposed. I didn’t realize
the IOL Evaluation was on pedophilia. I thought it was on
alcoholism. It was a lot different with what I heard at the sessions
and program for the past week. I was addressing issues that were
back over 17 years ago, which was not even fuzzy.
The way
things were going, for the first time I began thinking of obtaining
legal counsel plus a Canon Lawyer when I was told that this
evaluation might be longer than two weeks.
I did tell
the Diocese that I wanted to clear my name. One can not forget that
Bishop Harrington told me I am guilty till proven innocent.
I had to
realize that I had to do everything to protect myself. The Diocese
had me in the same treatment, according to my evaluation, as a
guilty party.
Therefore, I
had to believe in myself and continue a feeling of confidence in my
mind. An example would be if I think defeat, you will be defeated.
But, practice the thought of making it does become a dominating
habit. You are then able to develop conveyance to overcome any
negative feelings. These feelings of confidence should actually
induce increased strength.
I continued
to reaffirm that what I told Bishop Harrington on May 16th:
I want to clear my name and address my rights after being told that
I am guilty till proven innocent.
I would have
nothing else but the adult that I addressed at Beech Hill, Dublin,
New Hampshire in 1977 where I went for alcoholism issue.
It was at
this time that I was told that the Bishop does not want to put me
back in the parish. I asked on what grounds? I, then, made the
statement: I want to talk with a Canon Lawyer because I was a
Permanent Pastor (PP). I thought I had certain rights and options,
which proved to be false thinking. One has to realize that I agreed
to come to IOL to clear my name.
I was told,
at this time, that the Diocese received a letter from Maine (Abby
Marshall) who wanted me removed from the parish. This information
was related to my by Fr. Picclomini, I asked how can she make this
determination. I said that I wanted to be back with my people at St.
Edward’s Faith Community and continue working with the parishioners
and parish staff. (I found out later that Abby Marshall was married
and living in Maine. She was a board member of the state of Maine
Pro-Abortion Committee.)
May 17, 1993
This was the
beginning of the second week of my original two-week evaluation.
This was what the Diocese told me originally to get me into
Hartford. But, after the hurricane I experienced at the Chancery,
the waves are again becoming larger and the fog is thickening.
I tried with
my Agenda Meeting to approach it by putting away my anxiety and
stimulate a positive direction. I talked about my goal to restore
myself in a positive direction of self and building my heath issue
especially with diet and exercise. I have tried to develop a
direction of letting things go that I don’t need or don’t belong.
The other
sessions this day covered the area of celibacy that I choose to
function for my better self. Then the issue of priesthood was to
give my life for the love of the Church.
May 18, 1993
The morning’s
first session of Agenda meeting format was where you are called to
tell how you feel with a number of between one and ten. I, usually,
was near a 7 ½. Today I wanted to use my feeling with a lot of
energy and put it into a vision perspective. The issue of
self-esteem to was act as an adult especially on my emotions. I was
feeling better about myself, relaxed, and used my skills as tools to
affirm myself.
I felt that I
was content on issues directed at me because I did not do them. This
whole thing was a raw deal. I believe there was no disorder or
anything disorientated. I believe I had a check and balance of my
life. This is why I established a 9 ½ with my anticipation and
vision going back to parish ministry.
I prepared a
statement for the Diocese of being a whole, happy, energetic person.
I have goals in place that is in conjunction with the Church’s
teaching and my vocation. I would participate in AA weekly meeting.
After
listening and talking with a number of priests at IOL, I realized
that I needed legal counsel and canonical representation. My issue
was alcoholism and I realized this was not my group at IOL-
pedophilia. My issue, according to what I thought I was here for, of
alcoholism where I felt isolated, alienated I wondered why my
character and disposition did not count? I wanted my name cleared
and this was the reason of participating with the Diocese and IOL.
What about
my issue of alcoholism? I sought treatment in 1977 by attending
Beech Hill, New Hampshire for a 21-day program. I was ordained in
1970 and the surroundings induced me to drink. It was in 1977 that I
realized that I was “powerless” over alcoholism. I was physically
and emotionally drained. I was 17 years sober when these two
allegations were directed towards me.
I attended AA
for a short period of time after I was discharged from Beech Hill. I
did not continue attending meetings but I remained sober. When I
entered IOL, Kiley suggested that I renew myself with AA. I did so
with Tuesday and Thursdays AA meeting in nearby Newington, CT.
These
meetings were at a Catholic Grammar School Auditorium which were
speakers meeting. The auditorium had AA slogan “cards” placed on the
stage, literature table, and long table with podium for the
chairperson. Elderly gentlemen who pointed for people to speak from
their seats conducted the meeting.
I didn’t
speak with anyone but I did raise my hand when it was asked if there
are any new people attending and introduced myself. There was a loud
“Hello Ted” from the group of about 150 people. This was May 11th.
The process
was somewhat foggy to me. I agreed to May 10 thru 21st.
But talking with a number of priests at IOL, it became clear that
the last guy was five to six weeks. I did relate this concern to
Barbara, who was my immediate referral person. Dr. Zeman told me
that I may leave anytime I want, but will be issued an incomplete
evaluation. I said that this period of time was what Bishop
Harrington told me. Barbara said that I would have to do another
evaluation and that I should forget what the Bishop told me.
When a
person is leaving the unit, it is the custom to buy the donuts for
their departure. I have bought the donuts and had them in the trunk
of my car. I was expected to report to Dr. Zeman’s Office at 7:00
A.M. He told me that they decided to retain me. They called the
Bishop and spoke with Fr. Picclomini. Who supposedly told Barbara
that this would change things? This phone conversation occurred on
Thursday evening.
The question
that was most paramount was “Is this going to put me back into my
parish?
May 24, 1993
Other
questions that came to mind was why didn’t Fr. Picclomini support me
on my release in Thursday nights telephone call to the diocese. I
have to realize that I had to stay in control. I was not on any
medication. Dr. Zeman did say to me that he would be able to deepen
an anti-depressant if I wished to have it. I did believe in who I
am. I did talk in private sessions that I was human with weakness of
alcohol. I didn’t know any rights that I may have either personal or
ecclesial. What’s going on next? What are they going to do next to
me here at IOL or Diocese?
When I had to
re-enter my group I said that I was a 7 ½ because I felt challenged
by my recovery. I said that I was very busy to let alcohol come in
between my ministry.
I tired to
put things into proper perspective and be spiritual about my
experience at AA. I did want a full evaluation
I did recall
working a PIII program for myself P=Personal, I=Impersonal,
I=Intentional, I=Inexperienced This, I tried to unwrap in my overall
approach to my time of the evaluation.
Another
letter was sent by Abbey Marshall Weber, dated May 24, 1993,
thanking Bishop Rueger for letting her know that “Father Kardas will
be at the Institute of Living in Hartford, CT another 4 – 6 weeks…”
10
May 25, 1993
This evening,
I was feeling my body with a stress backache. I did report that I
was feeling a 7 ½ at the morning session and the conflict resolution
session had my questioning myself of what I possibly may be able to
do.
I received a
phone call at the seminary from Fr. Piccolomini. He asked how things
were going? I explained that I was keeping in contact with Mike
Quarrella at the parish. Rocco (Fr. Picclomini’s first name) said
“Something else had come-up!” He didn’t explain but he told me he
has spoken with Barbara. I, actually, never found out directly what
this matter was.
I recall
telling Rocco that I had a scheduled weeding on June 5th and he
would have to get someone to do the Mass.
I had a
scheduled appointment with Dr. Leslie Lothstein. He was director of
the institute of psychology department. This appointment was about
my test results that I initially did when I entered the institute.
This session was that I was in denial. I realized, according to this
test, that I was denying allegations. But I realized that everything
in the 70’s for me was under the umbrella of alcoholism. I, only,
remember what I remember and never did anything that I was alleged
about as inappropriate. We discussed intimacy, my comfort with
myself and what I believed other individuals were in relation to my
personhood. I recall that I was directed in that IOL is trying to
identify my mental health, what I am doing with my life today, and
what my responsibilities, as an adult must be. This was all in an
atmosphere of adult talking to an adult. It was very different from
what I experienced in the Worcester Chancery.
I received
and read “Bread Rising: Bishop urges humility in clergy sex
scandal.” This article plus a number of other publications were
giving me more insight of what were happening with me and the Church
in general. 11
Here I was in
Hartford and I received a statement from the Bishops’ Fund Office
for my payment on my pledge. Business as normal seemed the approach
by the Diocese with me. 12.
May 26, 1993
Dr. Mucha,
head of the department of IOL, came to me and asked me to speak with
him privately in the Library Room. He told me that there is a letter
of legal ramifications written by a lawyer. He then asked me: How
are you doing?
Then Dr.
Zeman spoke about this letter in our next session. The letter was
saying, according to him, that the two girls wanted me kicked-out as
a form of discipline.
My
caseworker, Barbara Buggala, told me next, “something else came up.”
She did not explain anything more. She did say that I have to “own
all the pieces.” I realized that I only own what is mine. The
charges are not mine. I did say to her that I was angry. She
responded that I was an alcoholic.
In my next
Agenda Meeting, I said I was a #7. My reason for it was that I
thought it was lucky. I stated that “I’m an alcoholic. I’m in
recovery.”
The day
followed with a Relaxation Session. This session had has us picking
a comfortable position and listened to a tape of mood music with
background comments to relax. I chose to lie on my back on the floor
for this session and had my eyes closed.
I was told
that I would need a civil lawyer. I did not feel that I was ready
for one at this particular junction.
I was able to
realize that I was going through this evaluation so I was able to
know where I was that day. I had taken responsibility of my behavior
for back then and owner only of what is mine.
May 27, 1993
I began the
day with saying that I felt I was a #7. I maintained my recovery by
smelling the fresh air and sleeping much better. This time I said
that I did not hear the birds in the early morning and notice my
eating was much better.
When I
related my story of being an alcoholic and experience of my Bishop
of “guilty till proven innocent” comment, one of the guys outside
said to me: “Poor Teddy.” I reacted negatively to this comment. I
realized that I accepted myself as I was, accepted the past as it
was and would work with it. I adapted my lifestyle of personal self.
Dr. Lotherson
called me in for a session where he said: “have a good weekend even
if things are difficult.”
May 28, 1993
The morning
session began for me with a 7 ½ - 8. I was following the motto: One
day at a time.
At the Men’s
Group, I spoke about accepting the past as it was, work with it and
adapt as life style of being compassionate, loving myself and
helping others. This was my basic core self as a person.
May 31, 1993
Fr.
Picclomini called me at IOL. He began by asking me where the parish
checkbook was. I knew with this question that matters of my
Pastorship were changing. The Diocese doing this was taking
different step but not explaining anything to me.
This phone
conversation with Picclomini had me relating that I was giving all I
was able to do, Dr. Zeman had two appointments with me this week of
Tuesday and Friday, Touched base with Mike Quarrella about parish
appointments. I tried to share an overall positive attitude, which
was definitely in my outlook with hope.
June 1, 1993
I began this
day with saying I was a 7 ½
The copy of
the letter that I read from Abbey Marshal Weber in front of Dr.
Zeman was not describing me. I read it as being unbelievable what
she was saying. My first insight was that I didn’t even know her
when I first was assigned to St. George’s in 1970-71. Everything
else that was written in the letter was like a shock going through
me. This letter is slander.
I wanted to
return to my parish and continue my ministry as pastor. My time at
IOL, I believe strengthened me, built-up my healing, comfortable in
where I was, put things in proper perspective, and overall being
O.K.
I attended a
session by Fr. Jim Gill, M.D., today. It was very warm in a
conference room. He asked in his presentation to the group as a
‘homework” of what initiates you. Then, he related that one has to
develop a technique to deal with it. He had a style of being very up
lifting and others spoke very highly of his conferences.
Fr. Gill was
a Jesuit priest (S.J.) with M.D. credentials on the staff of IOL.
He, also, was editor of Human Sexuality, which was a
quarterly publication on present day psychological issues.
June 2, 1993
It was very
painful for me to not remember back in what really happened in the
70’s It was such a long time ago and that was a period of time that
I was drinking very heavily. Back then, I socialized a lot with
parishioners that served alcohol and never wanted to go back to my
Lonnie room. I was described in a letter to Weber from Bishop Rueger
as being immature and had an alcohol problem back in the 70’s.
This had me
wondering about immaturity, focusing on loneliness. Emptiness,
clowning behavior, physical headaches, nausea, and the physical
shakes. I slept a lot and weighed 220 pounds with blood pressure
problems. I drank to fall asleep at night and most likely
experienced some significant periods of “blackout.”
I owned a
trail motorcycle, rubber river raft and canoe. All these items I
owned but I used very infrequently for my days of in the parish. I
tried but the bike was most dangerous with my condition back in the
‘70’s.
A few friends
that I had were implying that I was avoiding my past and never did
deal with my mother’s death or my home environment. This approach of
dealing with the unconscious or past events was even more baffling.
They seemed to be taking me back into my childhood and I was trying
to deal with “Reality Therapy” approach more than anything else
does. I realized that I had periods of ‘blackouts’ in my drinking
when I tried to connect any thoughts of some twenty years past,
there were things that I just did not remember. A blackout is
defined as a chemically induced period of amnesia. It is not to be
confused with “passing out” or drinking to the point of losing
consciousness. To the contrary, during blackout victims most often
go on functioning as if they were aware of what is going on around
them and would remember everything that happened. Actually, they
remember none of it ever again. In any case, after blackouts the
victim is haunted by questions. Most often than not, there is a
complete silence around these episodes. The victim is so frightened
or embarrassed by this loss of memory that one tries to suppress the
realization of it. “I have to forget that I can’t remember.” One
good example is that I traveled to Europe for 3 weeks. I don’t
remember very much. I kept a diary of the trip but I never have read
it since I returned from the trip. I practically never spoke about
it after I returned. The reason being is I didn’t recall very much
about going on this trip.
Fr. Kiely has
me in for an appointment and said that I should let the diocesan
officials know that my time at IOL was not the Club Med (Caribbean
vacation resort) He told me that the emphases in Weber’s letter was
very graphic and detailed. I wondered even more. I reiterate, again
to Kiley that I want to clear my name.
I attended a
Music Session. This had me, with my group, listen to music tapes and
then describe how the body and mind reacted to this experience.
The point of
“Drinking Ted” had me wondering even more where I was not able to
make connections. There was developing a more complex picture of
why I was at IOL for the evaluation and addressing the allegations.
June 3, 1993
I said that I
related about myself at a #5 today because I felt in the middle of
the road with everything that was happening to and around me.
I was
realizing things as a nightmare that issues that was not mine were
not mine. I was trying to be good to myself instead of a beat-up
underrating. I did have to realize that what I was alleged about was
not in my make-up. I can’t justify what was being alleged about. So
I tried to empty it out and respond with a stronger “No! I did not
do anything that I was alleged about.”
June 4, 1993
I gave myself
a #6 rating this day. Overall, I was between a #5 and 7 ½ during the
time of my evaluation. This day I had appointment with Barbara who
said that I was not talking about feelings and Dr. Zeman asking me
how I was doing?
I had some
notion that I was completing my evaluation at this time. I had hoped
to be restored on my parish. I stated that I couldn’t tell if I did
or didn’t do the allegations against me and would agree to continue
an outpatient therapy. Later, I realized that I never did these
actions that the two girls alleged against me.
I was told
that there would be a Conference Call with the Diocese in the five
or six week time frame of evaluation.
I continued
attending AA meetings. I was not sure how to handle myself at these
meeting if I met someone that personally knew me and what I did in
my ministry.
This day was
a Friday. It was afternoon recreation, if we wished. I participated
in volleyball game in the gym. I was asked what I would be doing
this weekend? I was visiting my relatives to get some rest.
June 6, 1993
I realized
that I was going to do what needed to be done to get through this
evaluation.
In my meeting
with Dr. Zeman, the issue of celibacy was discussed. I explained
that I saw no change in Church Law on this matter. I said that I was
ordained with the idea of celibacy. If this ever changed, I would
need a nurse instead of a wife.
Dr. Zeman,
then, asked me if I was in any relationship with anyone. I was not.
I, also,
realized that I had a very hard time to trust people. I was able to
see that this factor was going into a direction of being put in
psychological therapy for some time. I did issue with trusting. Why
should I be surprised?
This matter
connected with my Agenda Session. I did relate that I am working on
building trust and didn’t have a lot of trust in myself. I explained
that I was working on building trust, didn’t have a lot of
confidence in myself which maybe a reason for loving to act as a
clown, felt betrayed of trust which I felt to be very painful.
I rated
myself in a category of 7 ½ and 8. I felt that I wanted to do for
myself, time was of essence, thankful for letter and cards of
support, and realize this as new beginnings in my outlook on life.
Finally this
day at Wrap-Up, I shared the building trust issue, going to AA, and
being an adult. I was becoming stronger in believing in myself.
June 7, 1993
A very
extensive article appeared in The New Yorker about a
Worcester Diocesan priest - Fr. Ronald Provost. It was written by a
parishioner where Provost was Pastor. The author of the article was
Paul Wilkes and parishioner of St. Augustine’s Mission, Wheelwright,
Massachusetts. The article was extensive and carried the title-
Unholy Acts. It had written: “At a small parish in Massachusetts,
parents have been forced to confront a pastor’s abuse of their
faith.” 12a
June 8, 1993
I was
sensitive to an adult posture of my overall character. I was not
slaphappy; acting immature which may have syntax of my loneliness. I
realized that my ministry was out of respect for others and love of
my service. I was not able to justify any out of control behavior on
my part. I realized that I had to strongly deny those allegations
and challenge them.
Fr. Kiely
suggested that I read The New Yorker article “Out of Control
in Worcester.” It was about the closing of St. Joseph’s parish in
Worcester. This article could have re-directed about Bishop
Harrington. The article was “Unholy Acts,” in the June 7, 1993 issue
of The New Yorker. It was written by Paul Wilkes, which
began, about a ordination classmate of mine- Fr. Ronald Provost and
Bishop Harrington. I mentioned this article in the previous days
writing.
Fr. Kiely
appointment had him questioning and talking about who this girl
Abbey is. I, really, was struggling describing her. I asked if there
is an evaluation about her. Kiely asked, again, Why was she so
graphic and detailed? I had no idea. I reverted to ask: “What about
an full evaluation of Weber?” There was never any question of
Weber’s motives as being vindictive or other reasons.
This same day
I had another appointment with Dr. Zeman. He said that I should
continue attending AA meetings He said this day that “that letter”
from Weber weighs very heavily in my case. He said he didn’t know
what Weber would do when she finds out that I was in active
ministry. I replied that I do not know what Weber is looking for.
He, also, said that he did not know what the diocese would do.
Dr. Zeman
said that he did not give me any medicine to deal with my situation.
He had concern if I was O.K. He asked me, again, if I wanted any
medication to take to deal with my circumstances. He did ask this of
me a number of times previously. I refused. I said that I took
another form of “medication” (alcohol) before and I don’t want to go
back through that route.
I reported a
#7 rating at this day. I felt stable, having unused energy and being
to somewhat understand my experience. This experience since March
had been very traumatic for me. I felt exhausted and was tired of
the routine. I needed more physical exercise. I was focusing on how
people helped me and felt good of the help of the people at IOL. My
personal experience of all of this would show confidence building.
The tired feeling of my routine at IOL did have me wondering of
future confrontations. I was dizzy of this perspective. I was
longing for my home that was my parish (St. Edward the Confessor,
Westminster, Mass.).
June 9, 1993
I began by
rating myself at #6. I was exhausted from the past day, which was
very taxing on my overall personhood.
In Agenda, I
shared the continuing issue of building trust, having more
confidence in myself, which is my self-esteem.
The AA
attendance had me hearing and reading about different topics:
Unbelievable thoughts in the program, keeping it simple, controlled
drinking, blackouts, drunk driving, and scheduling ones drinking.
These topics raise my interest because I really didn’t speak very
often with others these areas.
I began to
use the phrase: Getting that worried bucket emptied, now.
June 10, 1993
I began my
day with a #7 rating. I felt good with no headache this morning. I
was having stress headaches for a few days.
Last night I
had a good AA meeting. I was feeling like the book title of I is
O.K, Your O.K.
Somehow I
picked-up rumor of “closure” for my stay here at IOL. What would
happen? I heard from fellow priest at IOL that one might have to
find a bishop to take in at their diocese, go on a medical leave of
absence with pay, do nursing home work with a low profile or go back
to the parish, which was considered very risky.
Dr. Zeman
reiterated that you couldn’t tell if you did or didn’t do it. I was
realizing that the scenario at IOL concerning me was that they were
covering themselves.
So, the issue
was coming of what the hospital (IOL) and Worcester Chancery wanted
me to address my parishioners to possibly help me transition back to
the parish, will do. I, even, spoke with my counselor, Barbara,
about a transition letter to go back to my parish. I said that I
wanted to put in writing of my situation and a Canon Lawyer to
advise me.
I, also,
spoke with my Spiritual Director on this whole situation coming to a
climax. It was said that I am a trusting person. I trusted everyone
where I should have trusted the “right” people in this evaluation I
should have learned from my experience in 1977 when I went to Beech
Hill for treatment of alcoholism. I told a few people in the parish
where I should have zipped-up totally. I trusted Bishop Harrington
in that I wanted to clear my name from all this that was thrown at
me. I was now fighting for my profession life as a priest and my
personhood.
I was asked
by the Chancery to write a letter to the parishioners of St.
Edward’s explaining my absence. I wrote the letter with the
beginning sentence “While on vacation, personal business has come up
which has caused me to take more time than expected.” This was
rejected by the Chancery in that they would not accept this
statement. 13 I did have vacation time coming to me and that’s how I
said I would go for an evaluation in May. Here the Chancery gang
nullified this agreement.
This same
day, Attorney James G. Reardon wrote Bishop Rueger about “should get
(Fr. Kardas) off the job.” Reardon wrote Rueger that he would be
very careful what he says to “this young lady.” He goes on to say
that the letter “allegedly written by her, had input by some other
person.” 14
June 11, 1993
I mailed a
letter to Msgr. Tinsley saying that I authorized IOL to send my
medical records to the Worcester Diocese. 15
I began my
day at IOL with a rating of 7-½ -8 because I saw a direction and
confidence building. When I attended Agenda, I spoke of my
self-esteem building with trust towards others. Dr. Zeman spoke, as
I understood, about the “Drunk Ted” who was pre-judged by Worcester.
He expressed a good luck and one day at a time. I felt the Dr.
Zeman; my case counselor and IOL gave me wings to depart with.
This was
contrary to the Bishop Harrington model that for 23 years was
playing the father in a patriarchal role. The promise of obedience
was an issue because of this particular bishop’s approach of acting
very erratically. I never had an opportunity of checks and balances
with this administration.
Then, it
happened, again! I experienced another hurricane type of feeling.
It was
during the afternoon session of this Friday that I was told that my
Bishop and Msgr. Tinsley were in the Library Room.
I had no
idea of what was happening. Here I was in an evaluation and my
bishop is here to see me. I was told to wait for Dr. Zeman and my
counselor, Barbara.
We entered
the Libretto together to meet Bishop Harrington and Msgr. Tinsley.
It was strange because Bishop Harrington forgot his hearing aid and
Msgr. Tinsley sitting in the corner with his grin.
Bishop
Harrington said he was here to get my “resignation.” I didn’t
understand what he meant. He said my resignation as Pastor and “find
a shoe that fits!” He continued that the diocese has to face a
Fitzpatrick and a lawyer in RI named Lavery. He was using the same
approach of seven weeks previous in the Stalag #13 kitchen
interrogation. Bishop Harrington reached into his suite pocket and
tried to hand me a green piece of paper that was exactly like a
Denny’s placenta with a cut boarder.
Dr. Zeman,
immediately, intervened by saying we have to have a “time-out’ for
consultation. Dr. Zeman led me out to another empty room. He called
Fr. Kiely at his rectory and said, “We have a crisis here.” They
spoke for a few moments and we returned to the Library Room.
Dr. Zeman
told Bishop Harrington that I would not be signing anything. Bishop
Harrington said, “You’re against me, Ted!” He then told me “I don’t
want you to say (public) Mass.”
I walked
both Bishop Harrington and Msgr. Tinsley to the elevator. We had to
wait for what seemed a very long time. Bishop Harrington had to sit
down while we were waiting. He had an ash face look with a stare at
the wall. He would not look at me at all. No one spoke a word while
we waited. I walked them out to the Bishop’s car. Msgr. Tinsley said
to me to “Hold on.” They were gone. The storm subsided for the
moment.
When I
returned back into Braceland, Dr. Zeman sat with me and said that
they have contacted Fr. Thomas Lynch, a Canon Lawyer, who would
assist me in my case Fr. Lynch assisted, as a consultant, to IOL,
pastor of St. Mary’s, Newington, CT, and past president of CLSA.
One thing,
which was very peculiar of this visit from Bishop Harrington, was it
possibly was a spur of the moment decision to do. I, only, speculate
but there may have been a phone conference with IOL and the
Worcester Chancery. The Chancery Gang didn’t like what they heard
about my evaluation. A typical reaction of Harrington would be to do
what he did. He had Tinsely pick him-up at the Bishop’s Residence
and down Rt. # 84 to Hartford. (Bishop Harrington was doing most of
his work from his residence at this time.) In all of his rushing,
Bishop Harrington even forgot his hearing aide They, most likely,
stopped at a Denny’s in Vernon CT for a bit to eat and Harrington
took a paper place mat of the table, folder it and tried to have my
write my resignation on it.
When I was
sitting in the Library Room with Bishop Harrington, my mind was
reacting to the previous January morning when I stopped at Bob’s Hot
Dog Truck in West Boylston. I was returning from visiting
parishioners that were patients at St. Vincent Hospital and U-Mass.
Hospital
I, always,
stopped to say “hi” to Bob O’Brien. I entered the truck and there
was a gentleman wearing a baseball cap sitting in the driver’s seat.
I closed the door behind myself and Bob was signaling me from the
other end of the truck to be careful about the guy sitting in the
driver’s seat. After a few minutes and a couple of hot dogs, the
guy, who was wearing a baseball cap asked me if I was a Catholic
priest. I answered “Yes!” He then proceeded to ask me what I thought
about Bishop Harrington. I recall that that this was a peculiar
question. I said that the Bishop had a very difficult job in his
role as head of the diocese. Then, this guy said that Bishop
Harrington was in an automobile accident that involved his daughter
who was serially hurt and Bishop Harrington was driving drunk when
he crashed into his daughter’s car. I, immediately, said I would
pray for his daughter’s recovery. This guy’s name was Fred Palmer.
It was a
week later that I stopped at Bob’s Hot Dog Truck. Bob proceeded to
inform me about this Fred Palmer and other details that Bob knew
about this accident. It seemed that the police rushed Bishop
Harrington from the scene of the accident in the very few moments
after it happened. There never was any newspaper story or any
charges made public. It was, also, told me that Francis McGraw -
Retired Worcester City Manger, was involved in suppressing any
information of this accident. Bob then told me that Fred Palmer was
telling this story to others. Palmer, according to Bob, used my name
in telling the Chancery that he has told other priest and I was one
of those priests. My reaction was Oh Boy! The Palmer Case was never,
again, heard of or mentioned. But, I did think of this with the
Bishop sitting in the Library Room at IOL the whole scene was so out
of form for the hierarchy to operate.
I was
getting the Snuffer (Bishop Rueger) coming up to me at any church
gathering and putting himself so close to my face that I realized
this Gang (Chancery) was trying to collapse my tent because of my
previous drinking encounter some twenty years ago.
I knew at
this time from the Church perspective that I would not be able to
change the wind, I would only be able to adjust my sail.
June 14, 1993
It was
something for me to go to this Monday Start-Up because I was
planning departure to my parish the previous Friday. I had purchased
the donuts for the Common Room that morning. It was the custom that
when one was leaving that that person would purchase the donuts for
all to share. Those donuts remained in the trunk of my car that
Friday morning. I was not being discharged.
I was very
qualified for not being discharged to the Start-Up Group and other
sessions that I was attending. I, even reported at Agenda that I
rated this Monday as #8- 8 ½ and spoke about confidence.
Dr. Zeman’s
appointment had him addressing the question to me: “What do you
think of this now!” I said that I was now more scared. I, also,
related that m | 
