1999 

 January 3, 1999

                When the year begins, I always relate that my year began on the First Sunday of Advent (Church Calendar). Therefore with all the New Years’ resolutions, it had been addressed by me in November and December. But, it is a personal spiritual undertaking in which I don’t mention much to others because most look at me as though I had three heads on my shoulders.

                In the local newspaper, I read Ann Landers of this day “Yet another weird, zany lawsuit story: U. S. A. is not the only lawsuit-happy country. Ann Landers wrote some time back in a column that ”In America, the land of the brave and home  of the free, anybody can sue anybody for anything.” 1. This article was how in Italy is very much similar as this country in suing.

                What came to mind was how Bishop Reilly told me he was not able to assign me because of a suit against me. I recalled how Fr. Peter Inzarello had a suit against him and Reilly assigned him to St. Leo’s as an Associate.  My suites, I believed were thrown out. Then I had to re-evaluate how my civil lawyer, Carey and Canonical lawyer, Fr. Deibel mislead me to believe the I will get on with my life? De. Zeman telling me the the Diocese was “Warehousing” me. I thought that this was with my evaluation and up to this period of time. I was wrong, very wrong. The stinking thinking had me recall Tim Shea’s comment of “getting rid of the bad apples” syndrome. 

January 6, 1999

                I had coffee with Fr. Gamache (Pastor of Immaculate Conception, Winchendon). He spoke about the Deanery meeting where “one of the priest” suggested that they invite a Canon Lawyer especially from outside of the Diocese to speak on the “Rights of a Pastor.” Gamache described the guys “getting jumpy” on a number of issues. The Diocese was conducting a Capital Fund Drive and the priest had questions concerning this and other issues. One of the pastors was speaking with a very explosive attitude on a number of issues.

                But, he then came at me with: “Why don’t they (Diocese) just meet with you and say what they have to say. Be over with it or put you into some type of work (ministry).” What I felt always with Gamache was how he only looked out for himself.  If  the Diocese had me in some ministry then Gamache would have tried to get me to do weekend Masses when he ever was gone for those 12 weeks a year.

                Gamache’s latest verbal outburst in saying that the Diocese “had to sit (meet) with me and tell me what they are gong to do with me.” He was frustrated and saying: “Something must be done (closure) for my particulars.

                What about me? Gamache, I was noticing had church authority having the finally word. Anything they said was finalized. But, I believe I had impute with the Diocese- the issue of collegiality. Was I wrong! 

January 8, 1998

                Then I read in the Diocesan Catholic Free Press entitled “Pope approves extension of law regarding clergy sex abuse.” It says how the Pope approved a 10 year extension of a U. S. modifications in church law making it easier for bishops to impose penalties on clerics who have sexually abused a minor. Penalties may include laicization, which means returning an ordained person to the law state and taking away all clerical rights and privileges.” 2

                It was another one of those things that would get me feeling weak and downtrodden. I say nothing because I hear a different interpretation with each persn that I speak with about this issue.

The first few days of the new year had me wondering about my situation under the perspective of be “set-up” in where Attorney Carey told me I was a “Poster Boy” for the Diocese of Worcester. I was thinking more in the realm of how the Worcester Diocese was “covering-up” for Bishop Harrington, Rueger, Msgr. Manning and a number of other priest that I had to work for.

I found an interesting article by Elizabeth Fernandez of the San Francisco Examiner entitled :Whistle blowing priest sues archdiocese.” The article related “The complaint by Rev. John Conley, whose clash with his his religious superiors occurred while he was serving as parochial vicar of a Burlingame, Calif. Church maintains that Archbishop William Levadea and others in the archdiocese abused their authority and tried to discredit him. His suit, filed in San Francisco Superior Court ask damages for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress.” This stemmed from Conley reporting a Pastor to Diocesan Officials and law enforcement officials.  The article continues: “When it comes to religious personal problems, civil judges often take a ‘hands-off attitude.” wrote (Tim) Unsworht, author and columnist with the National Catholic Reporter. In his suit, Conley  maintained the the archdiocese “took numerous actions…designed to retaliate for plaintiff's fulfilling his legal obligation to report an incident of suspected child abuse.” Then the article went on: “Last year (1998) when Conleyh’s situation was publicized, the archdiocese said he was disciplined not for reporting the wrestling incident but for public displays of anger, for insubordination and disrespectful behavior toward his bishop.” Unsworth said when it comes to religious personnel problems, civil judges of take a “hands-off attitude.” He continued “Judges get uncomfortable with this sort of thing. This is a sticky wicket, a no-win situation for courts. In all likelihood, civil court would return (such a case) to the church. The don’t like to get involved in an internal conflict.” 3

What made me open my eyes after reading this was a phone conversation I had with Attorney Ted Carey. He said to me that I would be able to take my case further by opening it any time I wanted. I was somewhat dumb founded for a couple reasons: 1 Why was this done with my original case at that time. 2 Where was I able to get any money where I never had any funds for a lawyer originally. I never heard from Attorney Carey again.

The I listened to Fr. Gamache about a number of issues. He is a person that when he speaks  about anything, it is his “slanted” viewpoint with diversion talk. One issue that he was brewing-up was the issue of parish weekly collection issue. He talked about how his parishioners would, again, react when he had to tell them that the weekly collection did not even allow him to buy a new refrigerator for the rectory. He had to add that rust was coming through the rectory refrigerator. One has to be aware that he uses this same technique every other year with his parishioners. But, when he at the Chancery on business, he reports to the Building Commission of the Diocese, he reports that his parish in Winchendon received a Grant from a town established grant fund. But, this was all during the time of the Diocesan Capital Fund Drive and Gamache’s “Oh! Poor me!” syndrome. He, also, has a typical packaged deal of presentations- especially one liners on weekly collection, lack of stewardship, poor religious education programs, his retreats during the year and overall 12 weeks a year always from his Pastorship. It is a well thought out techniques and energy that consumes so much of his time.  

January 11, 1999

                What I noticed at this period of time was people were calling or seeing me at different times with: Now, what are you’re future plans? It was interesting talking with people that I knew and how the conversations turned, after the little talk, to what they called about: What are going to do about your particulars and future plans? I responded with a very generic answer: “We don’t know what tomorrow will bring?”

                It was the new year and many different old thoughts were surfacing in my mind. Such as: Why did Rueger say and mean- If one but not two! Why did Rueger want to resign when my case hit the newspaper? How much undermining was played out by Msgr. Collette of Fitchburg and Bob Chatrand of Westminster?

Then, Fr. Pedone (Diocesan Canon Lawyer) going at me with: “You are lucky that the statue of limitations  or you would be in jail!”

But, G. Ronald Leger said: “If they had a case, they would have slammed you. They have no case.” Attorney Carey telling me: “Get out of the priesthood!”

I had the vocation of the priesthood where I faced a lot of transitions especially in the 60’s and 70’s. Many people were stereo typing me to my vocation. But, I did realize that I pushed the envelope in being myself with the spirit of the Second Vatican Council and renewal. I found personhood that I believed adapted to my personality of: Who am I? Why am I here? These questions were the constant theme during my college and seminary years.  I had an answer.

                Now that Msgr. Collette’s name came up, again, I think about how I should have answered him but didn’t when he said to me “You are too hard on your people.” This encounter occurred in Buckley’s Religious Good Store, Leominster. There were a number of people in the store and we were at the exit with me going out. But, I should have said: “The people of St. Edward’s and myself are aware of who is saying this to you, Richard. But, you and I have the same church procedures to follow for sacraments and Canon Law. We, at St. Edward’s, are implementing the policies with all pastoral sensitivity (safety nets) in place. The sacraments of the Church are being carried out with the church renewal, as  the sacrament of Confirmation (high school candidates) which has prerequisites and follow-up. In Westminster- St. Edward’s- the team is dealing with an ongoing conversion.  St. Edward’s is not a “gas station” church but a faith community. The sacraments are not celebrated, as Tinker Bell of Disney, sprinkling graces and flying back into the castle. We take our liturgy and pastoral duties seriously and not worry about getting Christmas cards (ego). Good day, Father.” Actually, there was another interesting pastoral situation here at that time because Collette was telling Bob Chatrand of Westminster that I was not able to do what I was doing. This was a serious matter of pastoral interference and undermining my parish work. I should have reported this to the Bishop but never did. But, I had to be present at the April, 1993 Confirmation Mass at the parish where auxiliary Bishop Rueger celebrating. He was not the Ordinary (Bishop). But, he was telling the candidates that they “did not have to listen to Fr. Kardas.” Let’s not forget that I was already called in on alleged allegations in March of 1993 and the shredder was working to wipe me out.

January 17, 1999

                I was hearing of fellow priest having experiences of being discouraged, embittered, finally giving up and slipping away into anonymity. These fellow priest were talented, dedicated and just slipped into the woods. 

January 25, 1999

                I had some thoughts about back when Bishop Reuger in 1998 returned for his residence to St. Stephen's Rectory, Worcester from Bishop’s Residence. I connected the dots in that when Bishop Reilly was appointed to Worcester, he moved Rueger into his residency. After he moved Rueger, my case bust into the newspaper. After a period of time, my particulars seemed to cool down and Rueger moved back to St. Stephen’s Rectory.  Was all this calculated with the new Chancery Mob and lawyers?

                The Diocese was toying the media and the media doing likewise with the Diocese. In November of  1998, I read in the National Catholic Reporter that a Bishop relied “too much on Jesus.” This was Bishop William Curlin, when appointed the new Bishop of Charlotte, NC. At his first press conference the first reporter to ask a question: “What about pedophila?” The Bishop replied: “It’s horrible, indescribable. My God, they tell me there ‘s Boy Scout leaders, doctors, lawyers, news media even clergy. What is this world coming to”? The reporter said, “Your play dirty pool.” The Bishop said: “I’m being realistic.”4

                Somehow I sensed this with Reilly coming into Worcester Diocese. The Bishops were using calculated moves by this time that affected the media and the clergy in the sexual abuse issue. In addition I was hearing how at Masses, the Prayer of the Faithful at some parishes was- For those victims of sexual abuse by clergy, their families and all Catholic people affected by these sandals. 

January 26, 1999

                I heard a very strange story from Westminster that Pamela Swedberg was telling people that a Pharmacist in Leominster told her that his son said in the 80’s that Fr. Kardas hit kids with his fist.  I was stationed in Leominster in the 70’s and was friends with a Pharmacist that was divorced. He had two sons that knew that we were friends. One wonders how certain individuals were creating scenarios for whatever reasons they say fit. It was like open season on my character. Never would I have touched anyone. Yet, the exaggerations that were being created was hurtful to me in hearing them being spread as rumors. 

January 28, 1999

                I didn’t enjoy Christmas with any nature of celebration. So, I figured that I would develop a “posstion statement” to respond to  character assignations or slanderous rumors being throw at my character. I wrote a “statement of purpose” for my personhood in the priesthood.

What was peculiar was how I recalled Rueger telling me in 1993, in one of those “hot house kitchen interrogations” that the only place for me to go was a monastery. I was in one sense living that by being in “the cave” of the Worcester Diocese. One interesting aspect was if I took any type of employment, the Diocese would have taken my priesthood away from me by saying that I was on my own.

The fact was that the Worcester Diocese had already snatched enough from me. They were constantly turning the ‘screw” on my back. I did have the initial “fear” of going outside the circle. But, I had gone through my whole life supporting myself. I was an individual that would not “crawl” to survive. I, still, had my personal dignity.

If the Diocese tried to take my priesthood, I always had the opinion of going to Rome . What was happening during this period of time was compiling my papers of being a Pastor.

So a “Statemenet of Purpose” would have been M-P-S-F-L-M-C (Monastery, Priesthood, Screwed enough, “Fear”, Like doing  what I was ordained for, Make money for a trip,  and Compiling my Personal Pastorship Papers). This was how I summarized my thoughts for my homilies or any type of presentation that I had to make.

But, I did realize that I was dealing with anxiety, not anymore expected that others would take my hand in my case and doing it on my own. I, also, realized that I was not only saying word to Doctor Zeman but clear thinking. Fear was not freezing me. I wouldn’t have to cover my face anymore to being recognized. I had clearer thoughts on issues of the bigger picture of what was happening in the Church. I had different reactions to get out of the “comforatble cave” that at times was a prison. I knew all along that I wanted to get going with life. I, only, had to help myself. I knew enough pain through loneliness. The orphan image had me realize that I was being kicked-around enough. I knew that I had to face-up to the two article that appeared in the median and any questions any reporter or otherwise would have thrown at me. Happy New Year! Thaddeus! 

February 1, 1999

                I had lunch with Fr. Gamache this day. The conversation had me somewhat taken back in his discussion. He spoke about ‘bad apples” in the priesthood. He told me how he heard this description from the Bishops of the Diocese in that they had to get rid of the “bad apples.” The Bishops (Harrington and Rueger) had to clean-out all the problems with priest in our Diocese.

                He was adamant towards me in telling me that” If you resigned your Pastorship, you would not have had to face the wrath of Rueger and the Chancery. But, you refused. So, this is why you are outside the circle and in your cave.”

                Gamache was coming from somewhere during the holidays that he spoke  with Fr. Francis Roberge who was at one time- Administrator at St. Edwards. Gamache did play the “french” card in his ministry. So, another French priest issue was him stalking to get more information which was in plain English- gossip. He even pushed the issue that because I did resign as Pastor of St. Edward’s when I first was “removed” from the parish that Fr. Roberge “never did get St. Edward’s.” He was watching me for any reaction or what I would say next. He, actually, was “red faced” talking to me. He seemed to say in a finishing question: If ever again what would you have done differently?” I responded: I would have gone to Rome with my particulars- especially being a Permanent Pastor. (PP). This title had canonical ramifications at that time. But, it was not true any more according to ongoing Canon Law. I have to realize that this was what I was told through clerical sources like Fr. Pedone of the Worcester Chancery Office. But, it was never answered by Rome or a national Canon Lawyer.

                This lunch had me somewhat puzzled about Gamache. Something had to have happened to him with some other priest in talking or something else, I really never did see him in this light- form of arrogance and red faced. It was an experience. I usually had a phrase to describe of what to next: Down periscope!

                This same day, I met the Parish Music Director at the supermarket. She related to me that “the Diocese had closed it’s book on you.” This, with Gamache, had me wondering what was stirring in the church circle? Something, definitely, was happening in the gossip circles. I know that the Music Director is not in the gossip circle type and would only hear things from the rectory. The guy that is the Pastor, at this time at St. Edward’s,  has answers to questions that even haven’t been asked. So, when I heard that “the book has been closed on you” had me targeted to that certain priest. But, one has not to forget that I’m still a person- priest. But, I was not into the “clergy talk” circle. 

February 2, 1999

                I had a very peculiar experience when I was told that Fr. Jim Gill, S.H. was gong to speak at IOL, Hartford. I was told that if I wanted to attend a talk that I should call. I did. When I called, the receptionist, after I told who I was, said: “Hi! A blast from the past!” meaning me. I was somewhat taken back by the comment. I was not sure how to react to that comment. Then , the head of the unit came to the phone and said that they were “overfilled” for fr. Gill’s talk. She said that when he heard that I was on the phone that she came out of a meeting to speak with me. But, I was welcomed if I wanted to attend Gill’s talk. I didn’t go. But, I was somewhat taken back by the reaction. I was not sure in how I was being perceived by them?

                Then I had the Today show of NBC on my TV with Matt Lauyer saying: “We have a rule here (Today show) to jump on any bandwagon that there is.” I felt that the church situation was getting it with the media. I, always, believed and loved the Church. It was not a good time. I was listening too much to comments that I heard. A case of point was Walter Payton- football star needed a liver transplant because of a rare disease saying in an interview: “And to those who are going to say what they want to say- God Bless them! It is not a drinking issue, drugs, Aids or anything as such.” I was able to relate to his statement. This was how I felt many times to say to others. But, I did not. I, actually, made no comments to comments that different people did say to me. I remained silent when people I knew tried to get a response from me. What I did was change the topic. 

February 4, 1999

                Now, it had been more than 5 years since the initial call for me to come to the Worcester Chancery Building in March, 1993 and uncomfortable with different experiences.

                Specially, was this day which was a Thursday. Mrs. Pamela Swedberg of Westminster drove my street- 40 Comee Street, Gardner. She drove by very slow and looked at my car and house. I was working at my desk which had a direct view to the street. I observed Sweberg going slow down the street and staring at my place. I wondered because my street was a side street that had only local traffic and it was 9:40 a.m. The neighborhood was especially quiet at this time of day.  I, also, wondered because I had not heard from her for some period of time since I moved into my studio apartment. Again, another case of wonderment especially with certain individuals that worked with me in the parish and who had not contacted me at all and there she was.

                I recalled how Mrs. Connie Rivard wrote a note that I saw to Gail Robinson saying: “It’s been along time for all of us. I hope he (Fr. Kardas) finds a solution.” I was beginning to sense a fatalism on the part of certain people that walked with me through 1993 and up to this time. Yogi Berra phrase was in my mind: “It’s not over until it’s over.” But, I believed in that and wondered how many others did likewise.

                I realized that I had long time ago come to term with who I was with my ordination to the priesthood. I did have the thought, at this time, of being pulled through enough. But, I realized what my priesthood, faith, and Church were at the core of my being. Yet, I had to realize what Fr. Lynch told me about my case” “The duck (Kardas) that bumped the gooses ass (Bishop Harrington). 

February 14, 1999

                I was thinking of how the Worcester Diocese exercise to give me a deaf ear to me. I was living in a studio apartment, no contact with my Bishop. Was there a certain technique by the Diocese that was what I recalled in my reading that the Church is one that you have to keep pleasing and pleasing. This thought I read from the period of Modernism in the Church of the early 1900’s.  Did pleasing mean that I was expected to “fold my tent” and leave? Why I thought as such was the only contact I had with anything Church was attending my scheduled appointments with Dr. Zeman in Hartford. 

February 18, 1999

                I had a interesting experience when I researched in the Worcester Public Library the article “Unholy Acts” by Paul Wilkes in  The New Yorker. This article was written in June of 1993. I was at that time going through my evaluation at the IOL, Hartford. I was told about the article by another priest with me at IOL. I found another article this date (1999) because I was not able to find it in my personal file cabinet. I found it after searching Periodical Index at the Worcester Public Library in Vol. 69, Pages 62-72 of the June 7, 1993 issue. When I saw the article I recalled how I bought this issue in 1993 and put it in my personal file in my rectory room. I filed it under “Church” at that time. I never saw this article again in my file. In 1999, when I removed my personal file cabinet and what remained, from St. Edward’s Rectory. This article was not to be seen. It had me wondering of what else might have been missing. I found that my folder for “Passport” had been removed. Then, going through my file on documents, my original and copies of my birth certificate were missing. Someone had surgical removed  certain items from my persona file cabinet. These items, which I knew existed, were stolen. One things that I was very specific and accurate, was keeping a very orderly file system. Therefore, this items were not misfiled or anything but removed by someone that was not me. It did give me a very peculiar feeling. This was only part of my other personal items that were not in the rectory when I went to pick-up my personal belongings.

                After I read and made a copy of “Unholy Acts” for my file, I began wondering how this article, with the Diocese of Worcester, was being painted on me. Was this article a prelude of what Bishop Harrington and his Chancery Gang strategy against me since I volunteered to go to I.O.L, Hartford for an evaluation? Was this  the behavior of Worcester Diocese treatment of me in being able to show the media and others how they handle any allegations : “Look what we’re doing (done) to Kardas!” The Worcester’s Poster Boy label immediately came to my mind. 

February 19, 1999

                I was having lunch in Worcester when Monsignor Frank Scollen of St. Peter’s parish, Worcester came over to my table send his regards. He asked me how I was? Then he spoke how the Diocese was asking the pastors to put “flier” about sex abuse in the pews of the churches.  He made the comment that with these printed fliers from the Diocese that they would possibly give other people ideas with certain mindsets. I never did see this printed flier. But, when Scollen mentioned certain “mindset”, this had me sit up straight in my chair. There is a certain type of personality that would feed their agenda with the Catholic Church or priest of the Church. But, there never was an opportunity to cross-examine the individuals that made allegations against priest as myself. I had the thought that certain people were learning to ‘paint by the numbers” a picture that was only in their mind. But, hearing enough, these certain people were drawing-up certain scenarios. Then, you add a certain type of lawyer and you have a new painted picture. Fr. Tom Lynch described to me this peculiar scenario by describing it as a dragnet going through the water- good and bad are getting caught-up. 

February 26, 1999

                It was announced in The Catholic Free Press officially that on March 1^st a Permanent Deacon was being assigned by the Bishop. This was a first. It was an end of an era of the Lay Ministry at St. Edward’s. There was this gradual resurging clericalism for a number of years in the Worcester Diocese. The whole aspect of having lay people doing their baptismal call had been diminishing for the past few years. It was now being called- the Apostolate of the second string (sports analogy). The Lay Apostolate in a Clerical Church had become the status quo.

                When at the parish, I worked with a vision that proposed  parishioners shared responsibilities with a clergy/staff equality and ministerial ownership. I tried by having accountability to St. Edward’s Faith Community by a mission statement. It was written at a general parish meeting. It was developed with a goal of having parishioners  motivated to be efficient, collaborative and nurturing.

                Well, March 1^st  at St. Edward's was re-establishing a Pre-Vatican II model of a Clerical Church. When sacramental leadership is combined with administrative power, what is left for an energetic, competent lay person seeking to serve in a parish? Useful priorities such as efficiency, team building and visionary leadership do not hold a place of priority in how the church is run.

                The Mission Statement developed by the parishioners at St. Edward the Confessor in 1985 read: We the people of St. Edwards the Confessor Faith Community, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, are called to proclaim the mission message, and love of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Brother. We recognize in this call an opportunity and obligation to reach out from our Westminster Community and extend ourselves for the Kingdom of God on Earth, through our Bishop, Diocesan Mission Statement and the Universal Church. We are a Eucharistic People who celebrate our heritage of Faith. We rejoice in the diversity of our giftedness and work together as a Faith Community to discover and further develop our gifts. We dedicate ourselves to ongoing Christian Formation, with an awareness of our responsibilities to one another and for one another. We affirm our call to uphold the dignity of all persons, we commit ourselves to an active concern and love for the poor and powerless: We pledge to work for a just and peaceful society founded on the Gospel Values, conscious of our human weakness, but empowered by the presence of the Holy Spirit among us. We pledge ourselves to this, the Mission of Jesus Christ.

                The “we” was very significant. In 1998 when the new pastor was appointed, the parish Mission statement disappeared from the parish bulletin and existence. This new pastor was telling St. Edward’s parishioners that the book was closed on me. I believe he was trying to relate his interpretation of the silence of the Diocese. The tactics of resurging clericalism and existing group of clergy were sealing themselves as candle wax.   

March 3, 1999

                There was a deafness on the part of the Worcester Diocese and my particulars. I was not hearing anything. Do I dare play this out?  It had to do with my personhood as a priest.  The Diocese kept me meeting with Dr. Zeman and that was all I heard in any connection with the Diocese.

I went over my blood pressure records for a previous few year. They were: 1994 (158/110), 1995 (180/112) and 1998 (139/90). This made me open my eyes about personal health issues and overall what was happening. I did follow my medical doctor to get this under control which I somewhat successful to get it to 120/80 with medication.

I felt I was being used as a pawn. I was wondering when I would be able to get and tell my story to the proper church authorities. It was about time to be my turn. I figured that by going to I.O. L. with Dr. Zeman that an opportunity for me to clear my name was available. Reading my daily personal journal since 1993 and watching the general atmosphere of what was happening to the American Church, I still had hope to have my name cleared of any allegation.  

March 7, 1999

                I was going through some personal papers that had me reflecting on Bishop Harrington and some thoughts on some of things that happened in my particulars. It came to mind how Bishop Harrington showed up at I.O.L. with Tinsley to get my resignation. It had me remembering how he acted in what was called the “library room.” This was where he made the comment to Dr. Zeman that he could get another doctor to say the I was a pedophile.

                I then recalled how I was asking how the initial article made it to the local newspaper in 1995. Fr. Bowen, who I asked to represent me as a Canon Lawyer, made the remark to me that the comments that the Diocese made about me “helped me in the media.” I was somewhat dumbfounded. How in the world did anything the Diocese said at that time to the media help me in any way. He, only, went on with a few rambling comments. Then, Fr. Pedona, the Diocesan Canon Lawyer, said as much when I was at a meeting in the Chancery.  Pedone told me that the local newspaper faxed my story to media outlets. .What was most peculiar was that these two guys were saying the same thing- as they talked about this before my question.  Bingo! What then came to mind was how Bishop Rueger was reported in the newspaper article on me in 1995 that I was “odd.” Would this be connected with Attorney Carey remark : “You can open your case any time you want.” Was there more in the “odd” label than I ever believed as defamation of character?  Was there more previous discussion by that Chancery Gang who needed a “Poster Boy” (Carey) for the Diocese. I, always, felt there was a sub-culture operating in the Worcester Diocese. Yet, this Gang did a job on me in their interviewing techniques especially with the Bishop’s Residence- Hot House Kitchen interrogation. It did have Bishop Reilly asking me: “What did they (Gang) do to you here (Bishop’s Residence?”

                The damage, already, done to my reputation, emotional distress and a loss of my privacy was not being addressed. 

March 18, 1999

                I had a scheduled meeting with Dr. Zeman this day. He began this session by asking me if I wanted any “anti-depressant”? I said that I didn’t want anything. He asked me why I didn’t want anything? I explained what I did take something (alcohol) before and did not want to be in such a situation, again. Dr. Zeman then said: “But, you’re depressed and can not move on.” Did meaning depressed on the Doctor’s part mean that I was not cooperating by leaving the priesthood? I’m sorry for any system that uses the medical world to push their agenda or the medical world allowing such a thing to even think of happening. I guess I would never know.

Then, Dr. Zeman asked me to get a medical report to him from my general practitioner (Dr. Veno) which I said I would. But, when I did ask Dr. Veno to do this, he was not in favor of sending my records to Zeman. But, I insisted and Dr. Veno said he would. I didn’t want to be considered as uncooperative. I had nothing to hide.     

Dr. Zeman then talked about how I didn’t want to return to I.O.L. for continuing group meetings. I responded with some anger in that I was doing my best. I realized about this time that “moving on” was the code words for leaving the priesthood. I was following Bishop Reilly’s verbal directive to me to “keep seeing Dr. Zeman. He is a fine doctor.”

                After this, Dr. Zeman asked me ”Why didn’t you keep chasing Fr. James Gill (I.O.L. Staff)? I said that I called him once and I was not interested in “chasing” him for an appointment to talk about my particulars. I would have told him that I was and am dealing with a vocation- the priesthood and not a job.

Next in this meeting, I mentioned how I completed my funeral arrangements. It was the wrong time to say this. Dr. Zeman, immediately asked: “Why?” I responded that it was a standard reminder by the Diocese to made and update any and all personal funeral arrangements. It was a standard procedure for a priest in the Diocese and only that. I, personally, thought that I wanted something in place before the Chancery Gang would have through by akses into the Blackstone River in Worcester if I didn't have something in legal writing.

                Dr. Zeman directed his next comments with force that I would never be doing priestly functions again. He said that the Diocese will never let me do any ministry. I, still, had not my turn to tell my story or version. He continued to tell me that the media was “vicious” with priest stories and that the next 5 years would be the same. He did stress that I build on my self-esteem which I was constantly doing by reading , discussions with other people besides my spiritual director and working my AA program. 

                So, an insight evolves that possibly I had to follow the Bishop’s orders to keep seeing Dr. Zeman and keep going to my AA meetings was to do what? Was this to monitor me concerning my past alcohol issue? Was it to see how much time before I said “enough” with this and walk away by quitting this being under the microscope?

                I sat in this appointment with Dr. Zeman and had my previous thoughts confirmed: I was getting  this attention to get me to leave the priesthood. The Diocese was spending the money to get me to not only resign my parish but to resign my priesthood. This was where I drew my line in the sand- I would not resign from the priesthood. If anything, it would have to be the Diocese going to Rome to remove my priesthood. Yet, in the Diocese of Worcester, how many of the other alleged priest were under the same scrutiny as me. Was there as sub-group in which I was not part of? Was I “black listed” by the Diocese a long, long time before the 1993 allegations? Possibly since my ordination in 1970?

                When I was leaving my appointment I recalled how in July 1993 sitting in our section lobby of I.O.L. before the start of a session  and watching two men in black pants and sport shirts and black briefcase walking quickly in a stoic fashion, eyes forward to the Library Room. One of the priest sitting in our circle was called into the room with his counselor- case worker. This had the other priest in the group  reading newspapers, magazines or staring on the floor. No one said a word in the group. Who was next?

What was happening frequently, was that Diocesan personal were arriving at the I.O.L. to have priest signing papers to be removed from the ministry, priesthood or both.

                The Church has  self-protective procedures, which do take into account, in its long calendar of history, the pain suffered on any particular day. This was happening in front of my eyes on a daily occurrence.  

March 20, 1999

                There was talk going around my area that Fr. Andy Guinette was going around questioning the  “Forward in Faith” (Diocesan special fund drive) money being using to pay for priest suits against priest. Even I heard that my home parish St. Stanislaw Parish Council, West Warren, MA according to my cousins wife- Magi Bish asked the pastor: “How much money was going to be used to pay for suits against priest?.” This atmosphere was swirling because of the special collection in the Diocese. No money was over appropriated from this fund. The Diocese was telling people that it was their insurance company covering the suits.

                Another rumored story circulating was how a professional accountant in the neighboring city was saying that the Diocese had to be careful of lawsuit by priest against the Diocese and others on alleged allegations.

                Oh! My classmate,  Fr. Peter Inzarello of  St. Anthony’s Parish, Fitchburg, who was also alleged in 1993. still had his “stuff”in the rectory. I mention this because Rueger was constantly on my case to have my “stuff” out of St. Edward’s Rectory while I was still pastor. I guess different strokes for different folks was playing by George Rueger- the leader of the boys in the band.

                In America magazine of this date, there was an article written by Donald Cozzens entitled “Priesthood emerges from a dark night.” The Rev. Donald B. Cozzens was the president-rector of Saint Mary Seminary and Graduate School of Theology in Wickliffe, Ohio. He wrote “ As the present dark night begins to lift and the questions become more insistent, the first steps into the light might be take simply by listening before we struggle to formulate answers. Purified and enlightened amid the shadows of our dark night, we understand that further healing and purification await us. We turn from the questions and challenges only at our own peril. If we fail, a different unholy darkness awaits us.”5

                This was a 1 page article. But, Cozzens wrote”…., the purification following upon the priesthood’s dark night reveals the need for further purification and healing as the church moves into the 21^st century.”6 

April 2, 1999

                The media was reporting James Porter, again. TV News with Channel 5 reporting that he was asking for parole after serving 6 years in prison. This report stated that he was being held in Greenfield but appeared at  Gardner State Prison for this hearing. Channel 5 interviewed Frank Fitzpatrick. This name had me turn my head towards the TV because he was been one that incorporated the microphone at any time that there was a camera and microphone. Fitzpatrick talked with phrases that were exactly what I read in Weber’s deposition in 1995 against me.  I was wondering why she made certain statements against me in that she knew that I would say in response to allegations. The TV reporter said that Porter would never say that he was sorry for what he was accused off and convicted, I, also, learned for this report that Porter was married with four children. Then Fitzpatrick said that the Church still had not done enough for the victims of sexual abuse. I wondered how Fitzpatrick and Weber were on the same page with memorized script in their approach to explaining the abuse syndrome. It is what I explain- painting by the numbers by being.

                The Worcester Telegram & Gazette carried this story the next day- April 3, 1999 entitled “Parole denied for ex-priest in jail for molesting children,” by AP. This was reported from Gardner, Massachusetts. The article reported” Fitzpatrick and other victims of the former priests had requested opportunities to speak at the parole hearing, but were denied because state law allows only family members of homicide victims to testify then a prisoner seeks parole. Fitzpatrick said he and other survivors of sex abuse intend to lobby for a change in the law.”7 

April 2, 1999

                 I wrote a letter to  State Representative Harold Lane- First Worcester District of Holden. I had worked with Rep. Lane in Holden when I was stationed at St. George's Parish, Worcester at Wachusett Regional High School,. This followed a phone conversation I had with him concerning my particulars and asking him if there was a information he would be able to give me about a legal case about a Cape Cod Veterinarian suing for defamation of character. I sent him a number of articles that mentioned my name as an overview.8

                We met at Friendly’s for breakfast to talk about this matter on May 25th. He told me a story of how he, representing Wachusett in front of a board of a game against St. John’s High School of Shrewsbury. It seemed that Brother Cronin of St. John’s told the board that he had to remain silent on the matter because of his Vow of Silence and had to remain silent. Lane lost the appeal and had to return with that news to his school. But, he said he did like Bishop Reilly. I explained that there were no charges against me and the case was dropped by hearing nothing. Lane asked me why I don’t contact Bishop Reilly with this story from Cape Cod. I said that I would want to first read the court statement  I said that I did not want to get into personalities. He told me that he would take my information and see what he was able to discover. After, a month or so, he called me to say that  he was not able to find anything in the courts and he did not see any direction in the State House concerning a defamation of character law. It was a “sorry” call. I told him I appreciated his effort. I was searching for an avenue to unearth something for my case to be heard. I didn’t have the finances to get my own lawyer. Therefore, I reached out to a person I knew from previous parish work.

                In my research and reading, I came across a number of stories about bishops and their priests. The one that caught my attention was the story Amarillo, Texas new bishop, John W. Yanta. Yanta removed Fr. Philip, who refused to resign or follow Yanta’s orders to undergo psychological evaluation at the Institute of Living in Hartford, Conn. Before he was removed, Lindley got a ruging against Yanta from Cardinal Dario Castrillon, perfect of the Congregational for Clergy in Rome. In a letter to Yanta, dated Oct. 8, 1998, Castrillon wrote “It is the consistent teaching of the magisterium that investigation of the intimate psychological and moral status of the interior life of any member of the Christian faithful cannot be carried on except with the consent of the one to undergo such evaluation.”9 Lindley was looking for a job. He won the battle and lost the war.

                Dr. Zeman did ask me at one time if I came for treatment against my will. I followed my obedience to the Bishop to go for the evaluation in Hartford. Did I do it because of my free will? The answer was “no.” But, I told Dr. Zeman that I came to get my name cleared and be returned to my Pastorship.

                This brought to mind my experiences with Bishop Harrington, again. I voluntarily went to Hartford. I cooperated in every aspect and had to hear from Harrington “You’re guilty till proven innocent.” I was told “We (Chancery) will call you.” It was the expression of being put out to pasture. There was enough written about Bishop Harrington closing St. Joseph’s Parish, Worcester and media coverage that showed the type of personality that I had as my Bishop. It was an experience that I would wish on anyone. It was scary. Yet, there was the Hierarchy of the Catholic Church that was similar to the “good boys club.” Fr. Andrew Greeley would use the term “lower clergy” for priest that were not ordained to the Episcopacy. I used the term “local soda jerks” in the parish to make the distinction of bishops and priest.  A few of us priest in the Diocese, actually, spoke to each other about avoiding the bishop and the Worcester Chancery as much as possible.   

April 6, 1999

                It has been 6 years since I was sent by the Diocese to Hartford. I was feeling that my case was being whitewashed. I felt that Bishop Harrington was at me with ”You’ve got something on me, I’m going to wipe you out.” However, Harrington kept reiterating at me in meetings: “You’re guilty till proven innocent.”

                My meeting at Weston in Cambridge with Msgr. Jim Mangelizzo had me recalling him saying that priest need compassionate friends and other friends to give priest civil jobs He, also, related that things are bad for certain priest in 1993.

                I had to recall how my civil lawyer- Attorney Carey said to me that after meeting Fr. Bowen with me in Boston and walking out of Carey’s office saying to me that Bowen  was not defending me. He commented that I need to get another canon lawyer. The ride back with Bowen to Worcester was a long ride in that not much was spoken.

                I wondered how my story got into the newspaper where Bowen said that the reporters got it from the courthouse. Then I began wondering in how I was becoming Worcester’s (Diovse) Poster Boy for priest allegated.  Then, how I recall some of my friends from Leominster were saying that their son-in-law concert classes was told by the “Monsignor” that the Church was getting rid of the “bad apples.”

                I, also, wondered about the statement of Attorney Carey: “You can open your case anytime you want.”

Then, it came to mind about people were defaming my character with personal comment and media publication. A prime example was Ralph Delmonico of St. Edward’s, Westminster literally going up and down main street of town saying that embezzled parish money in the amount of $40,000. This guy had a number of people telling me a similar story of this money situation which was a total lie. Actually, the parish owed me monies because I was not  taking my total approved stipends that were due me because we were paying off the debt. This debt was down to $40,000 dollars in May of 1993 with 20 more weeks of $2,000 payment. I never was given the opportunity to “burn” the mortgage- 10 weeks.

What came to mind at this time was how did my name get into the newspaper and media. I realized that most likely, the reporter from the local newspaper was checking the courthouse for this type of information. But, what was interesting was when I raised this question at the Chancery with Fr. Pedone, Fr. Bowen- my acting Canon Lawyer, and anyone else that was working my case, there was a double talk answer given to me. It had me wonder that these people didn’t know themselves most likely. Possibly, they didn't know and were as uncomfortable as I was. I did realize that the Worcester Chancery people were know to leak information. The people in my case were most likely looking over their shoulders in this situation with wonderment. There was a sad view of the Worcester Chancery Gang in that a number of us priest talked: If you have a problem, don’t go into the Chancery with it because everyone in the Diocese will know in a short period of time. Great atmosphere to do your ministry in! 

April 8, 1999

                The Worcester Telegram & Gazette carried a story “Priest sued on sexual child abuse charges” on this date. It was allegation in a civil lawsuit by a 49-year-old Robert King. It seemed to carry the same information that became standard newspaper writing and legal language. This is where I developed the “paint-by-the-numbers” scenario.

                The paper stated that “the 16-page suit- against O’Donoghue-included claims of “negligence, negligent hiring, intentional or reckless infliction of emotional distress, assault and battery and conspiracy.” The suit continued to say that “thye (Diocese) transferred him (O’Donoghue) 12 times during his first 15 years in the Diocese ‘in an effort to hide the sexual predator.’ “ This 12 in 15 number sounded deceiving with labeling . But, I was wondering how many times this priest was transferred. Let’s not forget, O’Donoghue was the guy that bumped me out of Northboro to Westminster. Then the newspaper continued on that in 1994, Edward L. Gagne of Spencer filed a civil suit against O’Donoghue, Worcester Diocese, and Rev. Peter J. Inzerillo. Inzarillo was Vocations Director for the Diocese in 1985 when Gagne was “considering entering the priesthood.” 10

                I keep reading and wonder why a lot that I read and hear is the same language- painting-by-the-numbers.

                These days had me wondering about how the American Catholic Church was acting to what I knew abbot the old Soviet Union (Russia): If questioned about anything or any dissent was like the old Soviet Union who sent so many people to “psychiatric hospitals.” These people supposedly were locked-up or sent away with no more mention of the issue or person, again. I was feeling a vigilante atmosphere in my life. I realized how jump I was overall especially when I walked into my area of the studio apartment and saw a letter taped on my door. It was a letter from the landlord informing me that the building I was living in was being sold. I, also, kept a low profile with people in my building and neighborhood. If I met anyone that knew me and when asked what I was doing at this time, I answered that that I was developing a “newsletter” and I would make sure that they would get a copy. I did get better with my self-esteem and overall living of life in a more positive light.

                What I wondered was if the “wave” of suits was over with. I felt I was caught up in this “wave.”  There was nothing in the newspapers or local Boston TV stations on allegations against priest. I struggled with this because Rueger was constantly saying to me whenever I had meeting in Worcester that “more is going to come out on you, Ted!” It did not help. But, I realized that there was nothing originally. So, nothing times nothing is nothing. I, never, verbally reacted to Rueger about this. I, only, gave him a stare meaning get a life. But, I realized that I was living with my insecurities which I immediately tired to address with some form of a positive direction.  

April 14, 1999

                What I was sensing because of what I heard from priest, visiting Hartford, and reading was that 1994 was going to be a “big” year for the international Catholic Church “dragnet” on sexual abuse allegations. One specific example was a Church policy statement on sexual abuse.

                What, also, added to this thinking was that I had no advocacy or any contact by the Diocese. I realized that I was living with my insecurities. It was a constant undertaking for me to develop self-esteem and reinforce a positive outlook for my particulars. I kept remembering the phrase: The challenge is now! 

April 24, 1999

                I found and read The Craft of Writing by Anne Lamott. The author approaches writing in the mindset of psychic musicals of solitaire isolation and mediation in “turtle time” which is not our society thinking. She develops that concept should be visionary, rejuvenating with an animating spirit. She suggests that one should just tell their little stories even if one gets banished from the tribe by telling the truth.

                This was satisfying to read because I was sensing this banishing feeling if I wrote and told my story. But, I realized that I had to take one step at a time to get myself to the other side. Just write was my manta. What is truth worth? It may direct one to realize the world does get turned upside down at times The real world has a lot of deals struck in very peculiar  situations. What I mean is don’t be surprised by anything where we live in such a litigation happy society of plea bargains. The lifestyle of this society offers options where people expect to have maximum individual freedom, yet minimum personal responsibility. Different times have given me insights that I most likely heard about and now see in action. Yet, I don’t believe this comes with age. I keep getting my eyes opened. 

April 25, 1999

                What came to mind this day was a conversation that I had with Fr. Paul O’Connell during a workshop in Worcester by the Canon Law Office in 1992. O’Connell was in charge of the Tribunal and had a very good personality and style to talk with. He was a priest that conducted himself with class and when he spoke, I know that I listened in his talks and advise. So, at this workshop, during the lunch break  outside, he made it a point to catch up to me and walk and talk. It was a overall general conversation about parish work and how I was doing. As I mentioned before, this was surprising to me because he never singled me out before besides a casual hello. This happened about one year before my Pearl Harbor and Rueger’s breath smelling whenever he was able to get near me. I was not able to figure this at that time but now in retrospect should have realized something was coming down on me by the Worcester Chancery- March 3, 1993. It was another of those- remember when situations that was puzzling. The dots got connected very fast. 

April 30, 1999

                I had a interesting phone call from my cousin, John Bish. He asked what I was doing with myself? I responded that I was doing a lot of leave raking for people that I knew. He stated telling me that the the media has destroyed me with the Diocese and any reputation that I may have had. He said that Rueger was named as “co-conscritor in my case. He tried to impress me with statements as saying the Diocese had become more vulnerable as my case goes on. I responded that the Diocese wanted me to just go away. He continued by saying that my approach has to be that I didn’t do it (allegations). The Diocese had to prove it- against me. I shared with him how Doctor Zeman told me that he was not able to abandon me, even if I had no money or the money stops from the Diocese. I talked with John somewhat about this. But, I didn’t get into detail of what I was actually thinking.  This I found to be a pattern of where I was “abandoned” so may times in my life as losing my father, being thrown out of the house by my stepfather, and what the Diocese did to me. Obviously, the Doctor knew this from my evaluation.  I did not view life’s process with this aspect of thinking of being abandoned. I wanted to have my case on the table and have a opportunity to tell my side of the story. I was off the radar screen of the Diocese. This was one of the most insidious weapons used by the Diocese against me- isolation. John was pushing the concept that I had to get my story into the media. This I was very uncomfortable with doing or having done on my story. This was mainly because the media would do itself the cause and not be concerned about my real story.

                I was speculating that Rueger was the front man to open the flood gates of cleaning out the Diocese for the new bishop- Bishop Reilly.  Rueger possibly was doing the backdoor work on Harrington’s behalf to be portrayed as a bishop that used the “dranet” method to clean out his diocese and have a national image of being this type of bishop on his retirement.

May 4, 1999

                There was an interesting article in The Boston Globe today entitled “On SJC’s plate: child abuse and ‘hysteria.” The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts was dealing with a child abuse case from 1984. The atmosphere was curing to read this article “Some worry that continuing research on children’s suggestibility may cause children claims of abuse to be viewed with undue skepticism.” 11 This was the atmosphere of the  local media in the Massachusetts area for some time. The atmosphere kept building through the media on “sexaul abuse” for some time.

                There even was an article ”Pastors need a lawyer at their side Guardian angel no longer enough,” which tells the atmosphere being so liturgical that “(Attorney) Coyne told priests (Phildelphia) to regard lawyers as their friends and to ‘call your lawyer even before you call the chancery or your insurer.’ “ 12 This article was printed in The National Catholic Reporter which is a national publication. So, one has to realize, litigation is not only an issue in Massachusetts but is on the national level.  

May 23, 1999

                This was my “29^th Anniversary” of my ordination. I was somewhat taken back because I did not receive the usual anniversary congratulation from the bishop. I speculated that this was where “the clock was ticking” on me to be removed from the priesthood.

                This day I recalled where in one conference with Dr. Zeman that he said “You decided to stay in the priesthood?” I recalled how I immediately thought “Where did I give the impression that I was leaving?”

                I noticed that I was gaining weight- 198 lbs. There was where I was not paying attention to my physical condition as much as I should have been.  

May 28, 1999

                The media was carrying story after story sexual abuse by priest. From Jeannette Batz in the National Catholic Report was a story stating “Be leery of anyone who weld prayers as a spiritual weapon: A year later a young man, call him Tim, told me he’s been sexually abuse as a teenager by a priest  in our archdiocese. Furious to learn that this priest was dong pastoral work again. Tim demanded an audience with the Archbishop. When it was finally granted, Tim said the Archbishop began the tense confirmation with a pointed statement, quoted a scripture passage about adultery and forgiveness and urged Tim to pray about this, in lieu of action.” 13

                Another story I heard on the radio was that a Honduras boy- edwin Sabillon told media that he looking for his father in N.Y. City which had the mayor going all out to him. Finally, the boy tells authorities that made up the whole story. This boy was 13 years old who told a very stomaching story that was fabricated.

                I bring this story out because whenever I hear the age element, as this case of age of 13, I immediately open my eyes because this was the age that was used against me in the civil suits. The issue of any form of discernment in our society has much to be desired.  

June 1, 1999

                I was making substantial cut backs in professional subscriptions at this time. I was realizing that I wasn’t going back to parish work. Therefore, a large number of my subscriptions were beyond my budget, especially at this time. What the Diocese was allowing me monthly was a substantial difference from what I earned being pastor. My bills were of a small household. Even my car insurance jumped $200 a year by the fact of living in the next town from the parish and a distance of 3 miles. So, this with the other factors made me radically cut this area. I was educated to read articles and newspapers of the right and left viewpoints. This was why I had a substantial number of subscriptions. Besides all this, I made trips to the Catholic College libraries in Worcester to try to keep some bearing on what was being published on Catholic issues. It was in my blood to find answers or attempt to find different viewpoints on moral, social, and other issues because of many different versions one encounters in this day and age but certain people and groups make absolute.  

June 8, 1999

                I used a daily calendar- Life’s Little Instruction Calendar- Vol. IV. This day’s phrase: Measure your wealth by what you'd have left if you lose all your money. This phrase was gospel orientated in many ways. But, then the doubt comes into play and the mind gets going to many directions. The brain gets scrambling and I have to realize “easy does it.” Besides the gospel message, I do reach into the “AA’s tool box.” 

June 10, 1999

                One of my friends lent me a copy of Whores of the Court: The Fraud of Psychiatric Testimony and the Rape of American Justice by Margaret A. Hagan, Ph.D. There were a number of quotes and my paraphrases that I made note of in this reading that opened my eyes in many ways. This work had strong statements. But, the author wrote “everyone has their hands in the pie,” /“experts” don’t/can’t know things any better that you and I./ Why tolerate the farce? /Pouring out personal opinions/involuntary independence includes the formation and function of the mind is only personal opinion/chutzpah characterization/ wrong string in psychological tangle/displace the blame/weighted expert opinion sufficiently/theory works one third by chance/the actual casual events/producing behavior are unknowable/witch doctor fallacy/unhappiness is a problem/large lobby- alcohol as a disease/horrible life experiences are just horrible/life is a complex series of highly varied events to be dealt with DSM-IV (Diagnostic I Statis Manuel/psychic political insight of ones job/Take psychological facts and fake people out/legal standards/junk psychology/400 ways to avoid responsibility/There are no objective criteria for most mental diagnosis./No one can tell a true memory from a mistaken memory./Accept the whole elaborate tissues of life's/The picture shifts drastically./Forensic psychological clinicians have ther agendal: missionary, political, and financial./Populist believers accept psychological experts./We hear what we expect to hear and we accept it as truth./There are no innocent bystander./The system is a nightmare of misrepresentation and an injustice of fantasies and distortions./The playing field is not level for all./”Throw out the whores.” 14  This last phrase was the last line of this work. When I wrote this notes, I realize they are taken out of context. But, I wanted to express phrases that concepts that were foreign to me especially coming from a philosophy, theory and some psychology background. This book was different. But, it did express another viewpoint to all that I was hearing since 1993.  

June 12, 1999

                A number of my friends kept asking me, time in and time again, of what was going on with my “case.” I had a number of people that were walking along with me as Mrs. Mary DiRusso asking over and over , again “What has the Diocese done for you?” I really didn’t give her an answer. What was I going to say: I was walking alone in the dark valley of life and the Church only had me contacting Dr. Zeman in Hartford. The Diocese used the expression:” We’ll get a hold of you.” 

June 13, 1999

                I was noticing that working since the beginning of the 90’s that there was a resurging clericalism with my brother priest. Fr. Gamache and myself were talking about The General Directory for Catechist (1997). Gamache says it is nice but everything had to done on the parish level. Bang! Here is the “resurging clericalism” issue meaning Father decides everything. Any document or otherwise is only “suggestions.” I thought that this was AA talk. No, it was the attitude of a pastor. Again, what he is indirectly saying is that he will do whatever he wants to have done.

                Street talk in Westminster of late was that the individuals that went on a pilgrimage to Majorgoire (Yougolsavia) and who had something wrong with themselves and unable to diagnose. But, they were physically “sick.,” I knew some of these people. A few needed constant attention               and limelight, especially where they didn’t have the stage at the parish. There was talk that while on the trip, they caught a virus over there. People will be people, but these few individuals were predictable to come-up with such a scenario. Next! 

June 15, 1999

                I watched Eric Clapton on the Today Show, who I enjoy listening too his music, gave an interview. He talked about how he heard about his son’s death with shock and being “disassociated.” He said he spoke at a AA meeting about this. He related that some good came out of losing his only son. He had a strong determination  that things were not as bad as it seemed. “This can happen,” he said, “and  you will not drink.”  A person came up to him at this AA meeting and said to Clapton: “You just took away my last reason to drink.” Others have said about Clapton that was the end of him on losing his son and that he would be gone. He wrote “Tears In Heaven” which had his message of knowing how to balance life.

                I was constantly being challenged from my journey by some people saying to me: “You mean you haven’t drank, yet?” No! Clapton’s message in this song “Tear In Heaven” was mine- I’m balancing my life.  

June 17, 1999

                I was asked today for the first time: “How is it being retired?” In a follow-up to this question the comment was added that “They (Diocese) cut you head-off.” This sounded like the 1885 play Sullivan & Gilbert being played out. There is a lot more to my story and all that we haven’t addresses or even began to address. I would retire at the age of 75- mandatory for priest.  

June 18, 1999

                In my reading, I came across an short article in “Breifs” of National Catholic Reporter entitled “Former Florida bishop returns to ministry in Michigan.” This opened my eyes in what is reported: “former Palm Beach, Fla., Bishop J. Keith Symons, who admitted in June of last year that he had molested five altar boys early in hi 40-year pastoral career, has returned to ministering in Michigan.” The article went on to say that the Bishop of Lansing gave him permission to lead spiritual retreats for adults. No comment was made by a spokeswomen for the National Conference of Catholic Bishops would not confirm whether Symons was required to seek approval from the Vatican Congregation fro Bishops to work at a retreat center. The article continued to say that “Symons was leader of the Palm Beach diocese for nearly eight years before his admission, after which he resigned and went to an undisclosed location from treatment for pedophilia.”15

                What had me immediately interested was that I was indirectly told to just go away and “we (Diocese) will get a hold of you.” There has been nothing from the Diocese. What I also heard was that the word was that any priest allegated would not be back in any ministry. Yet, I read this and forget that this is a “bishop” that inner circle that Fr. Greeley calls the “higher clergy.” Then, there was the comment from the rectory in Westminster that the “book had been closed” on me. I, actually, should look-up Bishop Symon’s on Google and see if anything more had been reported on him. Without even doing that much, I bet, we hear nothing more. He is a bishop. He, most likely, is no in isolation and living in a “cave” living on a poverty stipend as a priest. 

June 20, 1999

                 I was thinking how I wanted to “play the tapes back” of what has happened so far. This would be achieved by re-reading the notes, studying the techniques of the Chancery and realize that this whole thing was absurd. Questions were raised in my mind of what these two girls used for their approach to get  Attorney MacLeish in Boston? What was their trail and agenda to take such a route on me? Wouldn’t it have been something to get where these two girls were coming from ? Don’t forget, there was no real cross-examination besides their depositions which I never actually read or received copies of their separate depositions. Other questions that kept up surging as how did my story get into the press? When I asked this question with the Chancery Gang with reaction from Pedone and especially Bowen. Bowen comment was: “ The Chancery, actually were helping you out.” What I was asking was why didn’t anyone on my “team” address the issue of Rueger saying in the newspaper that I was “odd”? There was no such thing as any discernment but “Your guilty till proven innocent.” (Harrington)  Fr. Kilcoyne once said  to me: “Ted, it goes with the territory.” Oh? I am never able to get anything on the table. Another aspect I realized was that I was always swimming against the current in the seminary and being ordained. 

June 25, 1999

                Bishop John F. Kinney of St. Cloud told an interfaith gathering on clergy sexual misconduct that he has seen the church’s handling of sex abuse shift “from utter crisis-based management to more systematic and deeper approach to the issue.” The article continued with that this did not mean the church should be lulled into thinking the crisis was over, cautioned Kinney who was chairman of the U.S. bishops’ Ad Hoc Committee on Sexual Abuse. The article continued “But the more systematic approach ‘will allow us to look more deeply into the root causes of why this happening, and to study more closely not only individual aspect of this crisis but also what might be described as the corporate or organization aspects of this reality which can promote, aid, abet, tolerate or ignore the warning signs of this problem in the future.” 16

                Was ‘crisis-based management” a label to describe Bishop Harrington on me of “Guilty till proven innocent” tactics justifiable? One must not forget that some bishops operate that they are “supreme” in their Diocese and that is that. But does this justify “I know you have something on me and I will wipe you out.”? This was what I was and am facing with the Worcester Hierarchy.

                The atmosphere was something else during this period of time. The National Catholic Reporter  had “Inside NCR” about priest: “There are widespread reports of scandal and less sensational reports of a new breed of more conservative priests, of gay priest, of careerism and elitism.” 17 In Massachusetts, there was published The Massachusetts News , June, 1999 issue on pages 12 thru 14 dealing with pedophilia especially “Will Pedophilia Be Next In Massachusetts Schools? ‘Child Molestation’ Is Being ‘Normalized.’ “ 18

                In my reading of these items and other material, I came across terms and labels how changes were supposed to come in 1990’s with the updated The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual published by the The American Psychiatric Association named DSM- IV. This gave me some insight of the games and labels that had been played out on me since 1993. I was sure that I was able to put things on the table about my case. One example was “prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 or younger)” language. This same approach was working in me while attending AA meetings and learning more about alcoholism. 

June 30, 1999

                I bumped into one of the priest of the Deanery that I was in and we began to speak. The usual general greetings were shared. Then he shared with me about another priest that was on “administrative leave.” I contained myself because I have learned that people introduce something to get information from me and my situation. It is a technique that I have learned to deal with in that I listen and keep a straight- poker face. I know this may sound paranoid. But, I have been asked so many times “How are you? What are, now, doing?” My response has been that “I have a daily routine and keep myself busy with a number of personal projects.”

                But, back to this priest conversation, he told me that this friend priest of his has not got a raise since being put on “leave” as the other priest in the Diocese. But, he said that this friend of his is getting what the “retired priest receive.” I felt that this story was a “fishing expedition” on this priest part about me.  Then the conversation shifted by this guy asking me is I was gong to the Bishop’s Residence for the annual priest cookout. I said that I had not received any  notice. He knew that I was not getting any mail or communication from the Diocese. He said that I should just have showed up. I asked him if he intended to participate. He said that he never attended this event. Yet, on my part, it was not a good idea to “just show up.” This encounter had me feeling that this priest was arrogant towards me and manipulating  to see what I would have said about the Bishop or money situation. I went into my “poker-face” mode and said nothing. It was a degrading encounter. But, I had to realize that I had to “play the game.” I was learning. Yet, I was thinking and struggling with “What about my rights?” I’m still not able to get my turn on the table. 

July 8, 1999

                 I sat down with my Liturgical Desk Calendar and parish bulletins and outlined “Persoanl Chronology as Pastor” from October 1, 1984 thru February 6, 1997. It was some experience to do this. Besides, it gave me a an “overview” of my journey up to that point. I was so alive with my priesthood and ministry that I realized it was the grace of God that I was responding too. It was somewhat a miracle in my life and ministry that hit a wall on March 9, 1993 to report to the Chancery and being told of the allegations.  This chronology proved to be interesting reading with a lot of remember when of specific dates. 19 

July 10, 1999

                I had in my journey by value in what I had  learned and continued in my spirituality. I would wake-up at 5:00 a.m. and do daily Mass with my Divine Office (Brevary). I would make it a point to find some time each day for meditation and spiritual reading which I followed through the New Testament.

                I notice that this helped me with my mental discipline, self-confidence in my abilities, and unshakable determination as ever to clear my name.

                I was reading 1964: The Last Innocent Year by Jon Margolis. He had in his Introduction this statement: “There is no point in repeating what has been amply described. Instead, my goal has been to integrate, to place in their context, the central events that remain relevant today. Events, of course, do not just happen. People make them happen. So this is also about people who made history that year. 20

                When I read this, it had more reason of why  I write the work and see so many different people as I never thought I would. But, I, always, enjoyed history and wonder, at times, why am I surprised that people act the way they do especially with power and positions. My writing continues to have people placed in context and my personal reactions and observations. One example that comes into mind was how Bishop Kinney’s Committee “On Sexual Abuse” of the American Bishop’s Conference was described that the Hierarchy was moving from a crisis- management stage to the present situation.

                Another incident that I recall was when a classmate of mine, who left the priesthood, told part of his story. What first came to mind was how President Nixon’s resignation  had a pivotal turning point in the way Washington politics was practiced. The news media was reporting that his resignation threw off the old conviction and dealt with president differently. This was happening with the Church and especially the hierarchy. This classmate told me how he had a private meeting with Bishop Harrington in the 80’s where the Bishop said to him that if he told the truth about being a parish priest in this Diocese, he would not have any vocations. This was an atmosphere that I immediately recognized a year or so after my ordination in 1970. This classmate even took the conversation to the level by saying: “The Diocese owes you. Whatever they give you, you have earned for over 25 year plus of work.”  It was fine hearing this. But, I was isolated by the Diocese who had me in waiting- we’ll get back to you. I had been humiliated and say the least violated. My style of conduct was that one can lose an argument to win a war. I believe Abe Lincoln said that. 

July 22, 1999

                I had my scheduled meeting with Dr. Zeman in Hartford. What was interesting that Dr. Zeman was talkative which he usually is very reserved. He spoke to me about Bishop Reilly who he only met once before. This was a meeting with Fr. Jack Keily (Priest Director at I.O.L.) in the Chancery Office in Norwich, Connecticut where Bishop Reily was the Ordinary. Dr. Zeman described how they waited for a 1 hour appointment where they waited for a ½ hour and meeting was ½ . Bishop Reilly said “O.K. boys, time for you to go back to Hartford.” Dr. Zeman said that it was like a “nothing” meeting. This raised a number of questions in my own mind of wonderment. The Church Hierarchy was going to do their own things. Were they using the professional medical world for  insurance purposes and nothing else? 

July 26, 1999

                I was in the area of Bob’s Hot Dog Truck in West Boylston where I stopped by to say hello. I was sitting with Bob O’Brien in the front of his truck when he asked me an interesting question: “Why haven’t you ever asked me what was the name of the Palmer girl that Bishop Harrington hit while being drunk?

                I said it was information that I was never ever to get on the table. But, I realized that Bob was “chewing at the bit” to tell me. He told me her name was Lorraine. I didn’t say anything else. But, Bob did say that he was very surprised that no one in my defense used that information of what happened with this girl’s father telling me at the accident and carrying that information to his lawyers. I was careful in what I told Bob in regards to my specifics. But, Bob was adamant to hear anything besides what he read in the newspaper. This was another one of those situations where I had people that were my friends that wanted me to talk about my situation with the Diocese. 

July 29, 1999

                I was sitting and re-reading my list of items that were “stolen” from my personal quarters at St. Edward’s Rectory. It was my reflecting of so many basic items that were my personal property that just vanished. When I reported this to Bishop Reilly and his comment that “We will take take of this…” and then nothing.

                While reflecting on this, I recalled my conversation with Msgr. Mongallozo where he said to me that I need to get a “benevolent benefactor” as someone to “adopt a priest” to financially help me for what was to come. When he said that to me, it didn’t register. But, as time developed, I realized the significance of his statement. Here I was a priest that if I went to work in the public market- taking a job, I was signing myself out of the priesthood or lose my health insurance and any other benefits that were never explained to me as a priest. So, it was “benevolent benefactor” of earning any money which had to be done under the table for me. I didn’t have parents or family that would take me in or support me financially in any way. It was another one of the “codes” of being a Catholic priest. Is this what the phrase of “playing the game” had meaning.

                This lead me to reach in my library and re-read parts of Diary of a Country Priest. I, periodically, reach for this work as I continue to write my daily journal.  

July 30, 1999

                There seemed to be an interesting area that the media began reporting-Bishops’ resignations. The story that continued opening my eyes was Bishop G. Patrick Ziemann of Santa Rosa, Calif..

                The Catholic Free Press  carried the story about Ziemann by title: “Bishop resigns, admits sexual relationship with priest.” 21 Then the National Catholic Reporter carried Ziemann’s story with article titled ”Bishop admits relationship, but denies sexual abuse.” This paper pushed out with a quote with no name: "But a churchgoer at the cathedral said she and her husband were ‘horrrified and appalled’ both by the bishop's ‘dishonesty, the deceit and the breaking of solemn vows,’ and by church leaders’ ‘self-service appeals for forgiveness.” 22

                This same paper carried another story in the same issue “Ex-priest assault charges to old to prosecute.” The article was short but reports: “ A former priest who confessed to molesting at least 25 altar boys and students while working in Tennessee cannot be prosecuted because the statue of limitations on the crimes has expired. The assaults by Franklin T. Richards, 52, occurred 15 or more years ago. Crimes older than eight years cannot be prosecuted in Tennessee. ‘I know what I was doing was wrong,’ Richards , former principal of Knoxville Catholic High School, told Nashville detectives recently. ‘It was a constant struggle- just like an alcoholic who know that he can’t drink but he does.’ Richards, who left the priesthood in 1989, now works as an administrative assistant with the Palm Beach County Health Department’s division of environmental health and engineering in Florida. Richards underwent psychiatric treatment for pedophilia for three or four years in the 1980s and now claims he no longer has the desire to have sexual relations with boys.” 23

                I realize that this is not my story. But, I sensed since March 9, 1993 that Rueger with Harrington tired to ”paint by the numbers” a similar scenario on me. There was so many factors in reading this type of story that were not true to me especially comparing alcoholics. But, other factors in this Richards case, I believe that the Worcester Chancery Gang were using as their criteria on me.

                But, the article about Bishop Ziemann had Fr. Gamache very critical of The Catholic Free Press for publishing the story. I commented that the article was a calculated message possibly to fellow priest-brothers and telling the other media that it was not hiding anything. I stated to Gamache that this was a calculated message by the “Upper Clergy-hierarchy.” 

August 4, 1999

                I was reading on this date in Life’s Little Instructions calendar: “When facing an important decision, don’t be hesitant to ask lots of questions.”

                This was something that I was never to do since March 9, 1993. It seemed that every time, I tried to get the issue on the table of what was really happening, I was told: “We will get a hold of you.” So, I waited and waited in my “cave.” But, I was not waiting time, I was researching and writing my journal. But, I continued to  hope that somehow I would have gotten my many questions directed towards the right people in certain positions. 

August 6, 1999

                It had been two years since my forced resignation as pastor. . Since that resignation, I was not getting any invitations to any Diocesan activities. Everything just stopped. It was, as though, that I was a non-person.  

August 8, 199

                I, also, notice at this time that when Fr. Gamache and myself went for lunch, he kept repeating: “The Diocese is afraid of other allegation (suits) that might be brought up against you!” This was a broken message from him as though the Worcester Chancery was behind it in using him as a message carrier. When Gamache said this, I related my “conspiracy theory” of how the Worcester Chancery  got a lawyer to go to a “coffee shop” in Worcester, gives someone $400 to go and call Kathleen Shaw of Worcester Telegram  Gazette to go to the courthouse and read the allegations case against me. Was there a “Deep Throat” from Reardon’s Law Office? This law firm represented the Worcester Diocese in most cases.

 Then I raised the issue to Gamache of how the Canon Lawyers in Worcester of Pedone and Bowen told me different stories when I raised the question: “How id this story of mine get in the press? I figured that this would get back in the Chancery Office.

                The Gamache used what I called “slamming” me. He said at this time: “What says that the next Bishop comes in and goes to Rome to remove all priest that have been allegated in the Diocese and cut-off their monthly allotment and benefits.” I responded: “We go full blast about the article in the media by going public.” I realized that Gamache was playing mind games of control.  

August 12, 1999

                This was the Second Anniversary of my forced resignation as Pastor. I, actually, had the feeling that everything was “stlen” from me. I came to my own when I was appointed Pastor in 1984 as a priest. Things were so different in that I was beginning to implement my education of the 60’s and experience as a parish priest in the 70’s. It was all gone with the resignation.  

August 26, 1999

                I went for a ride with Gamache where he “kicked-in” the conversation of the past Sunday of the Worcester Telegram  Gazette editorial In Our Opinion- Sex offender scare – registry law should be re-examined.” 24 He related to me that this editorial was overdone but that my particulars in my case were my fault. He spoken in such a sarcastic manner. What I noticed in him when he was saying this was his facial expression. It was a duplicate of Msgr. Tinsley’s face when I had to sit through those notorious interrogations in Worcester. Yes, it did come to mind of why did I put myself into these type of situations. One has to understand that I am a priest. I had contact with only two priest that spoke with me.  

August 17, 1999

                I heard a most interesting story on the radio as I was driving that reported how a Boston Negro female reporter named Diane White. She was being interviewed on this radio program. She told how she was debunked by The Boston Globe. It was reported that she was a “scapegoat and others provided nails for her coffin.” The interview continued on with her telling how she