Governor Keating's remarks, as quoted today (June 12) in the Los Angeles Times, were both irresponsible and uninformed. Just yesterday (June 11), the John Jay group acknowledged the flaws in their proposed protocols and finally agreed to conform to California and Canon law. With these amendments, the California bishops will at least be free to participate in the study without violating the law.

News reports that I, the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, and the other Bishops of California have resisted a national statistical data gathering effort by the Church's National Review Board are unfounded and not correct. In fact, I have championed a fuller, deeper and more accurate statistical study.

While well meaning, the study being conducted by the John Jay College is deficient in its assumptions, its design, and its methodology. Sadly, the study now underway will simply not give the Church and the general public the data that we truly need and want.

On Jan. 20, 2003 I wrote to Kathleen McChesney, the Executive Director of the Office on Children and Youth and staff to the National Review Board, urging a broad collaboration with the Bishops and the Dioceses across the country in developing a sound and comprehensive statistical matrix that would result in accurate and meaningful data. I pointed out the need to consult broadly with those Arch/Dioceses with larger numbers of cases so that the proper categories could be developed. I urged a broad pre-testing of the questionnaires with a variety of Arch/Dioceses to make certain that the instruments would be accurate and that the resulting data would be valid.

Unfortunately, none of my recommendations were followed.

On Tuesday, March 4, 2003, four members of the National Review Board visited with me and our team working on safeguarding the Church for all children and youth. The group was headed by Mr. Robert Bennett. At that meeting I learned that only $250,000 had been allocated for this national statistical study. I pointed out that with 190 Arch/Dioceses across the country, that amount was totally inadequate to develop a truly accurate study. Rather, I stated that at least $4 million to $6 million would be required. I further pointed out that a prestigious national research organization should be retained, such as the Rand Corporation, the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, or the Stanford University Research Institute.

In addition, I stressed that with the lifting of the statutes of limitation for civil actions in California for the year 2003, we would not be certain until the end of the year exactly how many priests would be charged with sexual abuse, nor how many victims would come forward. And once those people were identified, it would be necessary to verify all of the allegations. All of this will take time, and any study will be woefully inaccurate if that data is not included.

I wrote to Bishop Wilton Gregory at once and urged that he and the Administrative Board of the Bishops' Conference seek grants so that the National Review Board would have the funds necessary for a first-rate statistical study. I believe that steps are underway to help find the funds needed for the type of survey that will be truly comprehensive and accurate.

When the questionnaires arrived from John Jay College, I was surprised - and saddened - that they were designed in such a way that truly comprehensive data would not be collected, and that the privacy rights of all parties could be in jeopardy and possibly violated. These are just a few of my concerns:

-John Jay College was required to obtain a Certificate of Confidentiality from the National Institute of Health to protect all parties in the study. However, to date, that Certificate of Confidentiality has not been granted - which means that any data now in the possession of John Jay College is subject to public disclosure, threatening the privacy rights of all parties.

-The statistical questionnaire requests data up to and ending with Dec. 31, 2002. Yet, because of the lifting of the statute of limitations in California, the majority of the new allegations of sexual abuse have come after Jan. 1, 2003. Completing that questionnaire as of Dec. 31, 2002 would be relatively easy for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, but it would also be totally inaccurate.

-Sufficient information and facts have not yet emerged in many pending cases to determine with certainty how many possible priest offenders are involved, nor how many victims there might be. The process of clarifying the veracity of all allegations is in the hands of both the criminal and civil judicial system, and until all of these matters are fully resolved, it is impossible to give accurate data.

-California's Privacy Laws are among the strongest in the country, protecting the privacy rights of all parties - defendants and plaintiffs included. And yet, the John Jay questionnaire requests information that could readily lead to identifying both the priest accused and the alleged victims. Because of the construct of the instruments, it would be relatively easy to trace priests and link them to specific victims. California Law does not permit the Church or any employer to give to third parties confidential information of the nature requested by these study instruments. In fact, there are criminal and civil penalties for so acting.

-The Canon Law Society of America has written to Bishop Wilton Gregory and has raised many serious questions about the rights of parties according to the Church's Canon Law. None of those concerns has been addressed.

-Confusing and overly-broad questions make it difficult to complete the questionnaires, and I fear that Arch/Dioceses across the country are simply interpreting the questions as they see fit. This will surely result in woefully inadequate results. An example: "How many clerics with allegations have been completely exonerated?" How is one to define "completely exonerated"? Does it mean that no criminal indictment has been handed down? Does it mean that law enforcement has ended its investigation? Does it mean that no corroborating evidence can be found?

Both the Archdiocese of Los Angeles and I are fully committed to all of the various research projects that have begun, as well as those that will eventually be inaugurated. Producing accurate data on the extent of the sexual abuse of minors is essential so that all of our efforts to make the Church as safe as humanly possible for all children and youth can be implemented fully.

But serious, comprehensive, and reliable studies require close collaboration between the National Review Board and the Bishops of the country, as well as the resources necessary to engage the most talented and expert research institutes in our country. I pledge myself to both of these goals.

Issued June 12, 2003