Diocese of Rockville Centre

Although not founded until 1957, the Diocese of Rockville Centre has been one of the flashpoints of the sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church since the turn of the millennium.  The combination of retired Bishop William Murphy’s involvement in Boston and Rockville Centre and an aggressive district attorney who convened a grand jury to investigate sex abuse in the diocese, has made the Long Island Catholic community a focal point for prosecutors and advocates of children.

The Diocese of Rockville Centre comprises Long Island and is the sixth-largest Catholic diocese in the United States, currently serving approximately 1.5 million people in 134 parishes.

Bishop William F. Murphy (2001-2017) is a key figure in the sexual abuse crisis, both because of his earlier role in the Boston archdiocese and because of conditions in Rockville Centre.  From the outset of his arrival in Rockville Centre, Bishop Murphy was a lightning rod for his service in the Archdiocese of Boston.  In 2004, the NY Times wrote, “Despite his denials, the Roman Catholic bishop of Long Island shielded priests accused of child sex abuse when he served as the second-highest prelate in the Boston diocese.  Bishop Murphy has denied playing any role in sex-abuse issues when he served as the vicar general, or chief deputy, to Cardinal Bernard Law in Boston, saying that another church official was assigned to handle such cases. Revelations of repeated abuses there led to a state attorney's report and the cardinal's resignation.

Ms. Laura A.  Ahearn, a child advocate and advisor to Bishop Murphy, said that the records show that Bishop Murphy was in fact the custodian of the abuse complaints in Boston, referred to as ''the Murphy files,'' and that he became directly involved in a number of cases. Among his actions, she said that he:

• Helped create a service to place accused priests in new assignments, and put a priest in charge who was himself accused of abuse.
• Assigned an accused priest to a new parish with the handwritten directive: ''Let him serve.'' The diocese had already paid $35,000 to settle a complaint against him.
• Allowed an accused priest to go unsupervised, resulting in complaints of new abuses and lawsuits.
• Disputed a therapist's assessment of the danger posed by one accused priest and opposed another therapist's recommendation about another accused priest.
• Allowed transfers to Canada and Australia for an accused priest, enabling him to elude investigations by prosecutors and a social service agency.
• Reassigned two accused priests to new parishes without restrictions on their contacts with children.
• Reassigned other accused priests to nonparish posts, like hospitals and nursing homes, without restricting contact with young people who might be volunteers or visitors, or restricting the priests' off-duty activities. One such priest had 13 complaints, admitted assaulting a 12-year-old 50 times, and cost the diocese $500,000 in settlements.
• Worked with a bishop in Wisconsin to try to stop complainants from filing criminal charges against a priest by asking him to apologize. He pleaded guilty to one charge.
• Denied on a federal form that there were issues involving a priest despite warnings in that priest's file that ''he fools around with kids'' and had ''possible over-involvement with boys.''
• Proposed a United Nations post for an accused priest who was being defrocked.

Murphy’s record in Rockville Centre wasn’t any better than in Boston.  The 2003 Suffolk County Grand Jury Report is damning in its assessment of Murphy’s leadership and the criminal activity of many of its priests.  Here are some excerpts:

• The Grand Jury has examined many instances of criminal sexual abuse by priestsincardinated6 and/or working in the Diocese of Rockville Centre. To that end, the Grand Jury has reviewed personnel records, including the secret archives files of forty-three priests. It is important to recognize that criminal clergy sexual abuse did not occur in a vacuum. Priests who committed these offenses were ordained clergy of the Diocese of Rockville Centre, and they resided in rectories in the parishes of Nassau and Suffolk Counties. They were responsible to an immediate supervisor, the pastor, and served the parishes with other priests.
• The Grand Jury has examined many instances of criminal sexual abuse by priestsincardinated6 and/or working in the Diocese of Rockville Centre. To that end, the Grand Jury has reviewed personnel records, including the secret archives files of forty-three priests. It is important to recognize that criminal clergy sexual abuse did not occur in a vacuum. Priests who committed these offenses were ordained clergy of the Diocese of Rockville Centre, and they resided in rectories in the parishes of Nassau and Suffolk Counties. They were responsible to an immediate supervisor, the pastor, and served the parishes with other priests.
• The Grand Jury concludes that officials in the Diocese failed in their responsibility to protect children. They ignored credible complaints about the sexually abusive behaviors of priests. They failed to act on obvious warning signs of sexual abuse including instances where they were aware that priests had children in their private rooms in the rectory overnight, that priests were drinking alcohol with underage children and exposing them to pornography. Even where a priest disclosed sexually abusive behavior with children officials failed to act to remove him from ministry.
• The response of priests in the Diocesan hierarchy to allegations of criminal sexual abuse was not pastoral. In fact, although there was a written policy that set a pastoral tone, it was a sham. The Diocese failed to follow the policy from its inception even at its most rudimentary level. Abusive priests were transferred from parish to parish and between Dioceses. Abusive priests were protected under the guise of confidentiality; their histories mired in secrecy. Professional treatment recommendations were ignored and dangerous priests allowed to minister to children.

In response to the Grand Jury Report, Murphy refused to accept any blame for his actions in the Archdiocese of Boston or addresses the allegations and concerns brought up about the Diocese of Rockville Centre.

Accused priests have worked at over 60% of Rockville Centre parishes, that many parishes have had two or three such priests, and that at least six accused priests have worked at one parish, St. James in Seaford.

Bishop John McGann, who served as the bishop of the Diocese of Rockville Centre from 1976 to 2000 has recently been accused of sexually abusing two women when they were young girls in the 1960s and 1970s. The abuse occurred at St. Agnes parish in Rockville Centre.

The transparency and accountability that has been absent in the Diocese of Rockville Centre should improve now that the Child Victims Act allows survivors of pedophile priests in Rockville Centre will be able to hold the diocese accountable in the civil court.