The Major Slight of Hand Deception about Donald Wuerl

The media praise given to Donald Wuerl is nothing more than
a slight-of-hand deception in light of the contradicting fact that
he has been centrally involved in the national office of priestly
formation for years.  This is pertinent to note in light of the fact
that, throughout those years, seminaries were being made into
scaled versions of Sodom and Gomorrah, while parish after
parish had been made the venue for the devouring of the youth.

One seminary (where "priestly formation" takes place) earned
the nickname "the Pink Palace," while another one earned the
nickname, "Notre Flame," as in 'flaming homosexual.'  Mean-
while, another seminary has been nicknamed, the "Theological
Closet," as in 'coming out' thereof.  Needless to say, someone in
power and influence is to be held accountable for that state of
the post-Vatican II church in America.

Incidentally, the Theological Closet is located in the Washing-
ton DC where Donald Wuerl is presently stationed.

Seminary Visitation, Otherwise Known
as the Papal Seminary Study

Donald Wuerl once held a national chairman post in the Office
of Priestly Formation during the 1990s.  In addition, he was a
participant in the Visitations of American Seminaries during
the same 1990s.  Now, the visitations were conducted for the
purpose of assessing the American seminaries' state of moral
and spiritual health, as well as their progress in renewing them-
selves in the image and likeness of Vatican II.  Wuerl claimed
that American seminaries were healthy, solid, and proper.  This
claim would come to be entirely contradicted by the accounts
published in the Michael Rose book, Goodbye, Good Men.
Wuerl's claim was also contradicted by a federal appeals case
that transpired in the Year 2002.  Someone lied.

Wuerl was also involved in the seminary visitations of the
1980s, while he was still a monsignor.

The Slight of Hand Deception about Donald Wuerl

The slight-of-hand deception about Wuerl consists in the fact
that his public relations personnel only stated that there are no
active priests in the Pittsburgh diocese who have been accused
of abusing "minors."  Even at that, this claim was not able to
have been made until the Year 2002, when Wuerl removed
"several priests" all at once.  Therefore, even in the Year 2001,
Wuerl's official spokesman could not make that claim.  Yet,
the media made it sound as if Donald Wuerl were an ironclad
disciplinarian from the beginning.  In fact, during his first year
as the bishop of Pittsburgh, Wuerl got caught failing to report
three criminal priests to law enforcement authorities.  (More
about this later.)

And What about those Adults with the Minds of
Adolescents, as well as Adults who are Impaired?

There are adults who are in social predicaments, academic sit-
uations, business arrangements, and medical states where they
can not easily defend themselves.  This includes the disabled.
In addition, there are adults who have the minds of children.
Thus, while Donald Wuerl was being hailed as an accomplish-
ed protector, this claim of protectorship:

[1] did not include persons over the age of 18 who have
      the minds of 8, 10, or 12 year old minors.

[2] did not include traumatized adults in impaired states.

[3] did not include medically vulnerable adults who can not
      easily endure any retaliation that ends in either a physical
      pursuit or a consuming economic loss.

[4] did not include economically blackmailed adults who
      stand to loose job posts, promotions, seminary enroll-
      ment, economic opportunities, or even shelter.

[5] did not include adults who get their reputations attacked
      as a diversionary tactic, shortly after they repel the ad-
      vances of a predatory priest.

[6] did not include adults intoxicated by alcohol, such as an
      "under-aged" adult college football player, still in his teen-
      age years, who was given alcohol by a priest on the
      property of a diocesan parish, only to fall to his death in
      the parish church. (And please take note of the con-
      tradiction in the phrase, "under-aged adult, still in
      his teenage years.")

A Class of  Vulnerable People Left Out by the Bishops,
during the Highly Publicized Dallas Conference

Stated for the record, there was a floor motion at the highly
publicized bishop's conference that sought to include as pro-
tected persons those adults who have the minds of 12 year
olds.  It was voted down.

Wuerl Got Caught Red Handed During
His First Year as the Bishop of Pittsburgh

Even before Wuerl arrived at the diocese that he acquired in
1988, it had been confronted with allegations of sexual crimes
against minors.  And among the allegations were those which
involved three priests and two repeatedly abused altar boys.
In fact, the criminal conduct of one of the three priests included
sado-masochistic acts.

The priests are Robert Wolk, Richard Zula, and Francis Pucci.
One of those three priests was even an assistant chancellor of
the diocese.  In addition, it was Bishop Anthony Bevilacqua
(and not Donald Wuerl) who removed the three priests from
public ministry -- for an indefinite period of time.

Wuerl Kept them on Sick Leave, Remaining Silent.
Then a Lawyer for the Victims Notified the
District Attorney of the Crimes

When Wuerl came into power, he kept those priests in the
proverbial bull pen, electing not to report them to law enforce-
ment authorities.  Wuerl simply kept the priests on Sick Leave.
Someone else reported them -- the attorney of the victims'
family.  Therefore, Wuerl wasn't given the chance to reassign
those priests, even if he wanted to.  Someone made sure that
Wuerl wouldn't be given the opportunity to do so.

The two victims, incidentally, were brothers

News of these Events Made the New York Times, the
Cleveland Plain Dealer, the Pittsburgh Post Gazette,
and even the San Antonio Express

In October and November 1988, arrests were finally made.
The New York Times, the San Antonio Express, the Pitts-
burgh Post Gazette, and the Cleveland Plain Dealer covered
the story.

A couple newspaper articles quoted the district attorney as
having said, "It was not the spirit of cooperation we would
like to see," as he called the diocese's compliance with the
investigation "minimal at best."  The D.A. accused Wuerl's
people of "foot-dragging," and Wuerl called his coverup of
three criminal priests the act of "keeping confidentiality."

Because of these three arrests, the new bishop of Pittsburgh
made a bad first impression in front of Western Pennsylvania
residents, Eastern Ohio residents, San Antonio residents, and
persons who read the New York Times.  And of course,
Wuerl made a number of excuses for his silence, but it was
insufficient to undo the damage Wuerl caused to his public
image.  So, in the years to come, he would have to trowel
over his first year's track record.

Concerning the excuses, an exact quote from the October 12,
1988 edition of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette goes as follows:

      "Lengwin said he did not believe that the diocese
      was obligated to report incidents of child sexual
      abuse to the youth services agency."  (Lengwin
      is the official diocesan spokesman who has had
      a radio talk show on KDKA Radio for years.)

Photocopies of a few of the original news articles can
be accessed by clicking on the following weblink:

      http://www.donaldwuerlsupplement.blogspot.com

Concerning Father Francis Pucci, he was spared of conviction
on account of the fact that the statute of limitations expired on
his case.  By any chance, did Wuerl's silence provide enough
time for the statute of limitations to run out on Pucci's case?

Wuerl's Botched Cover-up of Father Edward Huff

In February 1992, two families, days apart, reported Edward
Huff to Donald Wuerl.  Wuerl responded by doing the exact
thing that Cardinal Law repeatedly did in Boston.  Huff was
sent to a psychiatric facility (St. Michael's, in St. Louis.)
The prognosis was that Huff had enough 'residual function-
al capacity' to perform some type of ministry.  So, Wuerl
assigned him to a chaplaincy post, giving him living quarters
in downtown Pittsburgh.  This occurred in November 1992.

In December 1992, parishioners from Huff's parish sent a
letter to Wuerl, informing him that Huff was a molester.
This was the third time Huff was reported.  At this point,
Wuerl knew that the cat was out of the bag.  There were
enough people who knew of Huff's transgressions that at
least one of them would inform the police should Wuerl's
diocese declined to do so.  This is when Wuerl's Get Out
of Jail Free Card expired.

Wuerl did NOT immediately report Edward Huff.  He sent
Huff back to St. Louis, despite the positive bill of health
that was given to Huff.  It was not until March 18, 1993,
when the Diocese of Pittsburgh reported Huff to law enforce-
ment authorities.  By that time, Huff had already offered
his resignation.

Take note on how Wuerl sought to manipulate time lines, in
order to look diligent and trustworthy --- in order to cover
the fact that he failed at yet another cover-up attempt.

Reinstating Cipolla Would Have Meant Subpoenas & Warrants

If Wuerl were to have reinstated a priest such as Cipolla who
had sexual abuse allegations publicly attached to him, then
warrants and subpoenas would have rained down on Wuerl's
diocese.  This would have resulted in the unveiling of every
secret that Wuerl and his diocese had been keeping.

Wuerl's standing for validly appealing to the Signatura was
the emergence of newly acquired evidence involving the 1978
allegation of sexual abuse, made against Cipolla.  That alle-
gation involved a nine year old boy, and it included a police
report. In brevity, the allegation was that Cipolla committed
molestation under the guise of a medical exam.  The police
report did mention that a stethoscope, blood pressure gauge,
and thermometer was found in the nine year old boy's room.

Donald Wuerl originally declared the Tim Bendig allegations
to be NOT credible.  In addition, Bendig accused far more
people of misconduct than Anthony Cipolla. Bendig was in the
Pittsburgh seminary for a while.  He did not excel in his studies.
He did not graduate.

Conclusion

All in all, Wuerl's motivating force, from that point onward,
would be the criminal & civil court system, along with public
relations damage control and concerns for money.  He was in
need to trowel over his first year's track record.  In addition,
Wuerl's concern for money, even to the point of miserliness
or avarice, is shown in the 118 parishes that he closed.

Not Only is Wuerl's Past History Contrary to the
Present Praise of Him, His Recent History is, also

Wuerl was given widespread media praise in 2002.  And then,
in 2003, he was called the poster bishop for zero tolerance.
Now, this was a de facto claim that his diocese was free of
danger, at the hands of unruly priests.  Yet, before June 2003
would come to a close, one of Wuerl's good-standing priests
would be arrested and charged with involuntary manslaughter,
wreckless endangerment, and furnishing alcohol to persons
under the age of majority.  And this was a priest who had
been previously reported to Wuerl for disturbingly wrongful
conduct.

And then there is the matter of Wuerl's former secretary.
There was no zero tolerance concerning that priest.

Wuerl Has Proven that He Will Let Remain Covered Up
Whatever He Can Get Away with Covering Up

In the case of his former personal secretary, and in the case
of the three priests who were arrested during his first year as
the bishop of Pittsburgh, Wuerl has shown that he will let hap-
pen whatever he can get away with letting happen, covering
up whatever he can get away with covering up.