More than 1000 people attended the session. About 40% were men and about 60% were women. The group was more middle aged and older than younger.

Initially there was discontent expressed by a few vocal people about the design of the process for the evening. Some people came with the expectation that they would receive answers to their questions as opposed to participating in a small group process that would give input and advice to the Archbishop. However, most people entered into the process and participated fully. People who did not want to participate in the process were invited to be listened to by the facilitator as others worked in small groups in the meeting room and in the Church.

Most of the people who were part of the group that did not participate in the process expressed anger at the Church for the way it handled sexual abuse of minors by priests in the past. This group also had issues about homosexuality in the priesthood and the relationship of that to child abuse. Events surrounding Fr. Pecore, a case involving a Salvatorian priest, were raised.

Among those attending was a woman who had been abused by a priest when she was 12 to 14 years old. At the time, all those she spoke to advised her to keep quiet about the abuse. No one in the church hierarchy had acknowledged the abuse and the pain it caused her. Now at 56 years old, after years of therapy, she asked Archbishop Weakland to listen to her story during a private moment at the gathering. Following her discussion with the archbishop, some of the anger was resolved. She told the group she had experienced some healing and considers herself not a victim, but a survivor.

Six major themes surfaced in the written small group reports and individual responses.

1. Credibility of the Church, trust of the hierarchy
Over and over again people expressed in various ways that they felt deceived by the hierarchy and they wondered how the credibility of the Church and its leadership could be restored. “Cover up” was an expression used over and over that pointed to the mistrust people felt. Related to this, was the fact that the Archdiocese had not released the names of the six priests in active ministry who had been accused of abusing minors, or had self-reported improper behaviors. People want to know the names of these priests as soon as possible. The secrecy surrounding this has led to allegations of a cover-up.

People want to know the total number of cases pending and the total number of priests (active, inactive, retired, deceased) involved in sexual abuse of minors. The Archbishop should be able to announce that all priests presently serving the laity have not been involved in child abuse.

Contributing to the disillusionment with the Church was the notion that all this should have been handled years ago. Typical questions: Why are we just hearing about it now? Why were priests not prosecuted 15, 20, 25 years ago?

Adding to the sense of mistrust was a perception by some that victims/survivors were given “hush money.”

One group suggested that Bishops and Cardinals who handled this scandal poorly should resign.

Groups called upon the Cardinals to be accountable to the people who are also the Church.

Representative comments: We need to pressure Rome to give bishops permission to laicize priests who sexually abuse minors. Our bishops need to be empowered to act. The Cardinals need to be more accountable to the people. Where were the women and lay people at the meeting at the Vatican? The Church seems like a dictatorship. The Pope is not well enough to lead. There is a lack of leadership in the Church.

2. Seminary Screening, Training and Recruitment
There were strong feelings expressed that candidates for the priesthood need to be better screened and tested before being admitted to the seminary. This was expressed many times as was the need to recruit well-rounded mature individuals who could be trained and coached in areas related to sexuality and sexual abuse.

One group suggested looking into statistical information such as the year of ordination, year when the abuse occurred, etc. and to use this information to evaluate seminary screening processes.

Another group made it clear that the seminary should not be seen as a refuge, but rather should attract wholesome young men who are mature and dedicated to the mission of the Church.

Homosexuality in the seminary was brought up. One group commented that homosexuality was not a sin. Several groups felt homosexuality was a contributing factor to the abuse problem.

One group pointed to the fact that all Church workers need better training about appropriate boundaries

3. Optional Celibacy, Woman in the Priesthood
There were many calls to look at expanding the priesthood to include women and married men. Underlying this call was the belief that the expansion of ordination beyond male celibates would enhance the priesthood in a wholesome way. A few people did not want the ordination question discussed because they said the Pope did not want to discuss options for ordination.

4. Financing the care of victims/survivors
There were many questions about how much money the Archdiocese has paid out to victims/survivors, lawyers, therapists regarding the source of the funding. (These questions will be answered by the Archdiocese as soon as figures can be pulled together which also include insurance payouts.)

Some suggestions were made that the perpetrators of the abuse, rather than the Archdiocese, should pay the victims/survivors. One group suggested that if the priest is now deceased, his estate should pay the victims/survivors.

Another group suggested that the Archdiocese establish a Victim/Survivor Compensation Fund so that people who are so inclined, can contribute to it. There was concern that funds that currently support other services not be diverted for this purpose.

5. Role of the Laity
Many called for more involvement of the laity in making decisions regarding the sexual abuse of minors by priests. Some of this was related to the thought that “priests cannot police priests.” Some suggested lay involvement at the Vatican. Some said mothers should be represented on various committees as should victims/survivors and people who counsel perpetrators. It was unclear where people saw additional lay involvement as desirable at the Archdiocesan level. They could have been referring to Project Benjamin or the Special Commission or yet to be named groups.

A group suggested using Children’s Hospital experts because they treat offenders and victims/survivors.

6. Special Commission Report and Zero Tolerance Policy
The Archbishop was commended for setting up and using the Special Commission, though one group questioned whether he would follow the recommendations and another questioned whether a commission appointed by the Archbishop could be objective.

The prevailing advice to the Archbishop was to follow the recommendations of the Special Commission.

The overwhelming number of groups reporting supported zero tolerance, with no exceptions, for past and present incidents of sexual abuse of minors by priests. Several groups advocated “zero tolerance” after a conviction. One group suggested that “zero tolerance” should apply to sexual involvement with adults as well. Several groups strongly objected to the article regarding the challenges associated with a zero-tolerance approach that was enclosed with the Question and Answer Sheets. At least one group wondered if a priest who was believed to have been involved in just a single incident, and who responded well to therapy, should be given a second chance. Another group acknowledged that there were “gray areas” when it came to “zero tolerance.” These comments and reports were very much in the minority as compared to those advocating a strict interpretation of “zero tolerance.”

Some thought the definition of “zero tolerance” needed to be described more. Some struggled with the possibility of false allegations. Many felt it was important to have third party investigators such as retired law enforcement officers used to investigate cases that did not result in criminal charges. One group thought there should be an oversight board made up of elected Catholic and non-Catholic lay people to oversee investigations and follow through with those involved.

Some suggested forgiveness may be in order, especially if an incident occurred years ago and the priest had not been the subject of any allegations since.

General comments about priests

1. There was a ground swell of applause for all the fine priests who are ministering in the Archdiocese. Several groups mentioned in their written reports the need to support these good priests.
2. Some commented that priests should be held to a higher moral standard and responsibility than others and should certainly not be above the civil law or the Ten Commandments. If they commit a crime, they should be jailed or punished as any lay person would be.
3. One group wondered what happens if a priest confesses his crime in the sacrament of Reconciliation. Does the priest hearing his confession have to maintain confidentiality?
4. It was noted that the clergy are no longer on a pedestal in the eyes of the laity.

Suggestions for the future

1. Have more listening sessions.
2. Invite parishes and districts to have listening sessions that are “not controlled” by the Archdiocese.
3. Talk to children about sexual abuse as well as sexuality.
4. Have the “Question & Answer” sheets inserted in every bulletin in the Archdiocese.
5. Clarify or expand Questions 2, 7, 24 and 29, Have people read these before they come to a listening session.
6. Give equal importance to sexual abuse happening in families.
7. Support the whole parish and pastoral team when a team member is removed for sexual abuse of a minor.
8. Provide more information to the laity about Project Benjamin.
9. Have more clergy available to talk with small groups at future listening sessions.
10. Clarify policies regarding minors being alone with priests.
11. Have the Archbishop answer hard questions in the media.

Some comments and questions not included in what has been previously stated:

1. People had questions about individual priests and the number of people they had victimized.
2. A group wondered why neighboring parishes were not told about the resignation of a priest who had abused a minor.
3. We need a process more than prayer to help heal.
4. There needs to be a greater sense of accountability by the Archdiocese to parishes.
5. What is the difference between “undoing orders,” laicized, defrocked and excommunicated?
6. Learned a lot, most questions answered, liked process, now realize the complexity of issues.
7. We don’t like process; we need answers. Need more time to ask questions.
8. Where are the younger Catholics?
9. How are we supporting those removed from ministry?
10. Will pedophile priests who return from prison have their histories made known to the community in which they are living?
11. Wanted the Archbishop to speak to us tonight.
12. We won’t contribute to “pay-offs.”
13. Will the Archdiocese give us the names and circumstance of sexual abuse of minors by priests?
14. Follow up on allegations no matter how far back.
15. Move beyond pedophile abuse to sexual abuse of adults, emotional abuse, gender abuse and power abuse.