philly.com
10 February 2012
By John P. Martin
INQUIRER STAFF WRITER
Philadelphia Archbishop Charles J. Chaput (right with staff) says prayer over the casket of Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua in the vestibule of the Cathedral Basilica of Saints Peter and Paul. The first public viewing took place Monday evening. (Sarah J. Glover / Staff Photographer)
Montgomery County District Attorney Risa Vetri Ferman asked the county coroner to examine the body of Cardinal Anthony J. Bevilacqua last week because the timing of the 88-year-old prelate’s death struck her as “peculiar,” she said Friday.
Ferman acknowledged that she enlisted county Coroner Walter I. Hofman because the cardinal died one day after a Philadelphia judge said Bevilacqua could be called to testify at the child sex-abuse and endangerment trial of three current and former priests.
“I had the same reaction that many people had and that many people communicated with me,” Ferman told reporters at a news conference in Norristown. “It struck many of us as odd, as peculiar, that the cardinal passed away so suddenly after the court ruling. . . . I just thought that someone should make sure that nothing happened that was inappropriate.”
Ferman said she had no information to suggest that the cardinal was the victim of foul play or an unnatural death. She said her office had not opened an investigation.
“This death is not the subject of a criminal inquiry,” she said. “It is simply being examined by the coroner to determine what the cause of death is.”
Ferman spoke a day after Hofman told The Inquirer that prosecutors had asked him to examine the body “to make sure there were no intervening events that could have speeded up” the cardinal’s death.
Bevilacqua died shortly after 9 p.m. Jan. 31 at his residence at St. Charles Borromeo Seminary in Wynnewood, just outside the city limits. He had been in declining health since his 2003 retirement as the leader of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. Lawyers and church officials said he suffered from cancer, dementia, and other ailments.
Hoffman has deferred declaring a cause of death. He said he did not conduct a full autopsy, but declined to elaborate.
In an interview Friday, Hofman said he saw no marks on the cardinal’s body or other evidence to suggest anything but a natural death. The coroner said he would review the cardinal’s medical records and toxicology test results to see if Bevilacqua had unusually high or unexplained amounts of prescription medication or other chemicals in his blood.
Hofman said he expected to publicly release those results after he gets them, possibly this month.
Autopsies and other examinations of the dead are standard in homicides or when the decedent is young, seemingly healthy, or dies in unexplained circumstances. Hofman estimated that his office has been notified in about 60 percent of the deaths in Montgomery County each year.
Ferman said she had no authority over the coroner, who is independently elected, and that she only “suggested” the examination. She said her office rarely acknowledged its role in such reviews, partly to avoid stirring rumors.
But, acknowledging the throng of reporters and camera crews who crowded into a conference room Friday, she said she felt she had to publicly address the issue.
“If I were to remain silent on what’s going on right now, I think I would actually generate speculation, which is not appropriate,” Ferman said.
One of Bevilacqua’s top aides, Msgr. William J. Lynn, faces trial in Philadelphia Common Pleas Court next month on child-endangerment charges, having allegedly recommended sexually abusive priests for assignments that gave them access to minors. As secretary for clergy, Lynn was responsible for reviewing abuse allegations and recommending treatment or placements for accused priests.
Bevilacqua was not charged in the case, but had become a central witness.
In November, Judge M. Teresa Sarmina declared the cardinal competent and let prosecutors from the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office question him during a closed hearing at the seminary. The assistant district attorneys cited Bevilacqua’s frail health as one reason they wanted to preserve his testimony on videotape before the trial.
Acting on a request from defense attorneys, Sarmina last week reiterated her ruling that Bevilacqua was competent and could still be called to the witness stand at trial. He died the next night.
Ferman said Philadelphia prosecutors did not contact her or anyone in her office about Bevilacqua’s death or ask her to intervene.
After the cardinal died, his body was transferred to Donohue Funeral Home in Upper Darby. Hofman examined it the next day, Feb. 1, at his Norristown office.
The body was already embalmed, but Hofman said embalming would not interfere with his exam. The body was returned to the funeral home that day.
Bevilacqua was entombed Tuesday in a crypt at the Cathedral Basilica of SS. Peter and Paul.
An interesting turn of events!
The word “coward” comes to me.
Since when does no marks on a person’s body reflect no foul play.
That smells foul.
It is entirely possible that the cardinal died of natural causes. Having said this however, there is a distinct odor to this matter that “deeply betrayed” has referred to that I agree with.
I would hope it isn’t the case. I find myself wondering if this hasn’t happenned before, perhaps even very close to home? Mike
I feel it is important to repeat what I said in another thread on this site. I said :::::::::::::::”This Talach lawyer says: “quite frankly, we are getting fed up with the number of cases we’re seeing and it’s time for our criminal justice system to step up and launch an investigation into how these crimes were covered up over time.
Any institution involved in such crimes should be investigated by the secular authorities and, just like other corporate crimes, face substantial penalties,” .
Somebody above also said “crimes against humanity”. I actually think if we leave the words God and satan out of this….at least for this life….and concentrate on the crime within the Catholic Church…..and the MEN…be they priests, Bishops, Cardinals or even the Pope….who allowed these crimes to continue……whether through ignorance or deceit…..then YES… ABSOLUTELY………….”Any INSTITUTION involved in such crimes should be INVESTIGATED by the secular authorities and, just like other corporate crimes, FACE SUBSTANTIAL PENALTIES,” .
Perhaps the penalties should be eventual bankruptcy and closure. Comments?”
Sylvia
You smell scandal everywhere – time to see a doctor!
jon smith
As Mike says, it’s entirely possible, I’d say from the little that I know of the situation, that he probably died of natural causes. The DA however knows more about the situation than all of us put together. She apparently decided to exercise prudence and ask for an autopsy to rule out foul play. Under the circumstances, I think that was the proper thing to do.
To: Jon Smith….suspicious? Why not. Read about a priest I knew. The whole article is about what good he did…….until you get to the last paragraph. I’m not sure if anyone still knows how he died.
He was supposed to appear in court on Monday but never showed up.
Last paragraph:Meanwhile, the CBC reported Wednesday that McGrath was supposed to appear in provincial court in Corner Brook Monday to enter a plea on sexual offence charges. The report stated that McGrath was alleged to have committed the offences on an 11-year-old boy while he was a priest in Lourdes in the 1980s. McGrath never appeared in court.
McGrath’s funeral takes place on Friday at 2 p.m. in Corner Brook.
Suspicious? ….Why not.
I can’t seem to put the Western Star article in here. But Sylvia does cover this priest’s articles and info in this site. The priest was Fr Desmond McGrath.
I put a link in to the Des McGrath page for you Mike Mc
Thankyou. It saddens me every time I see his photo. He was a good man in our community. In the Province too. What warps a person to do this? If marriage within the priesthood was possible, would this have happened? To have a wholesome happy marriage and all its natural benefits is much needed in the priesthood. Of course the problem may have even existed before he was priest. He must have known this was wrong and unacceptable, so why abuse innocent kids? Perhaps if he was married he may have still abused. We just don’t know. But like the Cardinal who was to testify, Fr McGrath did not attend the court hearing on that Monday, and died…..in his case, ….the next day(Tuesday). I guess the torment is enough to kill some people.
I think an autopsy report should be made public in both situations. Maybe they have and I am not aware.
Marriage doesn’t quench the perverted sexual appetites of those who molest children MikeMc. There are countless cases of married men who molest, often even stooping to molest their own children. There are also many instances of priests who molest children while carrying on affairs with women. There are Anglican clergy who are free to marry or are married who molest. Ditto leaders in other non-Catholic religions. There are those who enter the priesthood who were free to marry but chose instead to molest children (before ordination) rather than find a good wife.
Allowing Roman Catholic priests to marry will not negate the problem, any more than allowing every man in the country to marry has not protected our children from those predators who view the child as a sexual object.
You mention that Father McGrath was a “good man.” In truth, and in hindsight, you and I and others can see that he was not a “good man” at all. He was a wolf in sheep’s clothing. A predator masquerading as a man of God.
Sylvia
You are correct – married men and women are among the abusers in society. Marriage is not a solution to a profoundly disturbed person!
Thankyou Sylvia for your observations. You speak well. …….But it still amazes me and bothers me that these men like Frs. Lahey, McGrath, George did do good works….in my class, community, Province. You can see where I am coming from. When you know them and have them talk to you and interact with your class or community(at Mass etc), and you see them running a Fisherman’s union for example or confirming kids or giving retreats etc etc, and then you hear they were really “wolves in sheeps’ clothing”, …well that is hard to take. I mean you are right….but I know they did do good works as well. I will never understand that darker side of them that has come to light. As I said before, this all saddens me and angers me. But I do know that this plague exists within the Church and I guess the Church is part of Society. I don’t know….I just expected better of my Church…And to now see the secrecy, the pride, the greed, and LACK of help and open assistance being given to the victims of their abuse,……I am dismayed. I wonder if that biblical Mighty Beast is rearing its ugly head.
Mike, I think part, at least, of the answer is they are great conmen. A con man grooms his future victims, but he also needs to be at least accepted in the community. If people are wary of him, the victims to be might smarten up and have nothing to do with them.
I am not a medical person, but I believe they are mentally warped, and have been for a good portion of their lives. It did not just happen overnight.
I have developed the attitude, that a new person MAY be alright, but I will wait to see if that is accurate. My 2-cents worth for today.
Like you Mike Mc I so often try to understand, and inevitably fail. And I don’t think there is a one of us Roman Catholics who haven’t personally been betrayed by one or more of these predatory priests. Like you I can not fathom how a priest can molest a child in the sacristy and then offer up the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Nor can I fathom a priest molesting a child in the sanctuary of the Church. I can not fathom how a priest can molest the children of parishioners who have reached out to befriend him and make him feel part of their family. I can not, for that matter, fathom how a priest can see a child as a means to satiate his lust.
I think the biblical Might Beast is indeed rearing his ugly head.
“I can not fathom how a priest can molest the children of parishioners who have reached out to befriend him and make him feel part of their family.” How true!! Exactly in Canada, what % of priests have abused children? Is there an approx number/figure or is this something we will never really know? Should we not expect better results from the Church? And what is the real reason why Bishops and priests covered things up and placed abusing priests back in different parishes? Can someone clarify these simple questions?