Statement by James Goodness,
Director of Communications,
on a report published in the October 17, 2005 Jersey Journal
The Jersey Journal's presentation of Msgr.
Peter Cheplic's return to limited ministry after an allegation of
sexual misconduct is giving readers an impression that the Archdiocese
acted recklessly. This is clearly unfair.
When Martin Kansky first informed the Archdiocese
in 2002 of the allegation, local county prosecutors were notified.
These prosecutors chose to take no action under state law.
When the Archdiocesan Response Team - a group
of lay people that reviews allegations against clergy in the Archdiocese
- investigated this matter in 2002 and 2003, it did not conduct
a "trial" to determine guilt, but rather an inquiry to
see if the matter be dealt with under appropriate Church law. While
it ultimately deemed the allegation credible, not all of the information
presented was credible.
Further, the allegation was the only matter
that had come to the Archdiocese’s attention in Msgr. Cheplic's
35 years of service. In light of this fact, the Archdiocese did
determine that a return to a limited ministry - including a requirement
that Monsignor be supervised when dealing with anyone under 21 years
of age - was permitted. During the time of the investigation, Msgr.
was not permitted to undertake any ministry.
Some may consider that the age of an individual
is a minor point. The Archdiocese believes that every allegation
of misconduct deserves action. However, the laws of the state of
New Jersey and the law the Catholic Church specifically make such
distinctions for sound reasons. Both sets of laws also make distinctions
in terms of penalties for such misconduct based on the age of the
individuals. The Archdiocese did take punitive action against Msgr.
Cheplic, based on the parameters of the applicable law.
Consequently, the Archdiocese believes that
it took appropriate cautions at the time.
