SANCHEZ DEPOSITION

15 MR. GOFFE: The time is 2:54. This is the
16 beginning of tape 11 in the deposition of Archbishop
17 Sanchez. We are on the record.
18 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) Archbishop, you seem to want
19 to make the distinction between concern and crisis when
20 talking about the issue of priest pedophilia in 1985. Why
21 did you make that distinction?
22 A. Just for the simple reason that, to the best of
23 my recollection, in 1985 there was not the large amount
of
24 media coverage concerning child molestation that is
taking
25 place today. If I recall correctly, there was the
Page 688
1 beginning of such coverage regarding abuses that were
2 occurring in Lafayette, Louisiana, I believe was the areA.
3 But I don't recall reading about, you know, it being
4 multiplied and being covered so extensively by the media
5 as it has been in the last couple of years. I just
6 thought that would be the difference in words. I wouldn't
7 have considered it in crisis portions in 1985, in
8 comparison to what is happening today. So I chose to
make
9 a distinction between concern and crisis.
10 Q. Well, let's not compare it to what is happening
11 today. Let's look at 1985.
12 A. But that's how I compared it in my mind. That's
13 why I used the terms.
14 Q. Well, I understand. But without that
15 comparison, do you feel that in 1985 the issue of priest
16 pedophilia had reached crisis portions within the
Catholic
17 Church in this country?
18 MS. BURTRAM: Objection, lack of
19 foundation.
20 A. Again, I would have to ask you to define the
21 word "crisis," what you understand by that.
22 Q. Well, let's do it this way: You tell me what
23 "crisis" means to you.
24 A. "Crisis" to me means that something is happening
25 so frequently and so universally that people feel it's a
Page 689
1 crisis. It's out of control. They don't know what to do
2 about it.
3 Serious concern, on the other hand, is something has
4 surfaced. You have knowledge about it. You need to give
5 proper time and attention to that which is surfacing and
6 seems that it could be heading toward a possible crisis.
7 So I think it's just a matter of words here. I'm not
8 denying that even one sexual act of misconduct is not
bad.
9 That's serious, because a child is involved, and people
10 are involved, and, you know, I feel badly just talking
11 about numbers, because it seems like children are
numbers,
12 and they're not. They're people. They're human beings.
13 And so, you know, we could use the word "crisis" over
one
14 child.
15 But I think for the sake of our discussion, I wanted
16 to make that distinction, but I don't want anyone to think
17 that by using the term "serious concern," that it's not a
18 real serious concern for every child that may have been
19 abused at that time.
20 Q. In the life of the child and the family of the
21 child that's been abused by a priest, would you
22 characterize that event as being a crisis in their life?
23 A. I think it's a crisis for the family and a
24 crisis for the priest who's involved, because it's so --
25 it's affected the lives of those people as principals in
Page 690
1 that. It doesn't require a major outbreak everywhere to
2 be a crisis for a family or for an individual.
3 Q. Would it be a crisis for the child who has been
4 molested?
5 A. I would say, yes, that child has suffered
6 seriously, and I think that you should probably use the
7 word -- it's a personal crisis in the life of that little
8 child.
9 Q. And with respect to the crisis in the life of
10 that little child, do you understand now that that crisis
11 is an emotional crisis, as well as a physical crisis?
12 A. This is what I have come to understand, that
13 it's both a deep emotional crisis that a child suffers, as
14 well as physical. I have not been told enough whether
15 there is a distinction at any age group or anything like
16 that. I'm not really familiar with those distinctions.
17 But I would say with all age groups that there is both
18 physical and emotional damage.
19 Q. And is it also your understanding that that
20 physical and emotional damage continues over time
after
21 the abusive event has occurred?
22 A. This has been mentioned -- I believe it was Dr.
23 Schreiner, whom I referred to earlier in my testimony. I
24 believe in her instructions to us, she made comments to
25 that fact.
Page 691
1 Q. And is it also your understanding that
2 professional help, counseling and therapy can help lessen
3 or ameliorate that damage when it's provided to an
4 individual who has been abused by a priest?
5 A. Yes, this is what I've come to understand, that
6 any time there's emotional harm within a person's life,
7 the only way that you can correct that really is through
8 proper counseling or therapy, if you want to call it that.
9 Q. And would you, as a person, as well as an
10 Archbishop of Santa Fe, want to alleviate or mitigate
that
11 suffering as soon as you possibly could?
12 A. That would be my immediate tendency. Knowing
13 that something like that could be helped, we would want
to
14 help however we could.
15 Q. As soon as you could?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Were you aware, or do you know how many lawsuits
18 had been filed around the country prior to your attending
19 the conference in 1985, how many lawsuits concerning
abuse
20 of children by priests?
21 A. I have no way of making a judgment, sir. I
22 don't receive papers, and I didn't have statistics of how
23 many had been filed. I have no ideA.
24 Q. Did you know that some had been filed at that
25 conference?
Page 692
1 A. I had read about filings that had taken place,
2 as I mentioned, in LouisianA.
3 Q. And so you knew that at least some lawsuits had
4 been filed and that this was a serious issue in mid 1985?
5 A. Right.
6 Q. And you also knew in mid 1985 that you had had
7 allegations of sexual abuse of children concerning priests
8 within your Archidocese?
9 A. Yes, sir.
10 Q. But no lawsuits had been filed at that time?
11 A. No, sir.
12 Q. Were you also told at the -- or did you learn at
13 the National Conference of Catholic Bishops in June of
14 1985 that the profile of priest pedophiles indicated that
15 they were likely to abuse children over a long period of
16 time, that they were repeat offenders?
17 A. I don't recall whether that particular fact was
18 mentioned in that initial workshop.
19 Q. Did you know that during 1985?
20 A. No, sir. I wasn't aware that there could be,
21 over a long period of time, that type of abuse.
22 Q. So you're saying that you didn't know in 1985
23 that the knowledge that was available to the Catholic
24 community was that priests who had these tendencies
were
25 likely to act out sexually over an extended period of
Page 693
1 time?
2 A. No, sir, I wasn't aware of that.
3 Q. Now, let me ask you this: Who was on that
4 committee that you appointed to establish a policy for
5 your Archidocese concerning sexual abuse of children by
6 priests?
7 A. The working committee that we had from our
8 office, and they then made consultations outside that
9 committee. But the immediate committee that I can
recall
10 for you was my chancellor, Father Richard OlonA. There
11 was a young woman who did workshops for the State of
New
12 Mexico on sexual child abuse and was employed by
schools
13 and other centers for that purpose to bring awareness to
14 groups and was recognized as an expert. Her name was
15 Stella Gallegos. I believe the Archdioceson attorney was
16 a member of that committee.
17 Q. And who was that?
18 A. That name was Mr. Charles Reynolds. I believe
19 that we had one of our employees who is a mother of
20 several children belong to that committee, as well. I
21 believe her name is Berna Fasio. And I'm not absolutely
22 certain about her, but I think she was a member of the
23 committee. Those are the ones that come to mind
24 immediately, and I believe there were a couple of
others,
25 but I just can't recall who else formed that committee at
Page 694
1 that time. But those were four of probably six.
2 Q. Did anybody else work on that committee over the
3 years, that you can recall?
4 A. They may have had consultants to that committee
5 from men who are trained in canon Law. Father Jerome
6 Martinez may have been one of the consultants. I'm not
7 absolutely certain, but since he's a canon lawyer, he may
8 very well have been one of the consultants. I can't
9 recall the other person.
10 Q. Did Father Sabine Griego consult or participate
11 in that committee?
12 A. No, sir. He was not a member of that committee.
13 Q. And what qualifications or experience did Mrs.
14 Fasio bring to that committee?
15 A. First of all, her concern as a mother for
16 children. Secondly, she had worked with the -- I believe
17 it was the Albuquerque Public School system in the area
of
18 insurance and had experience about insurance coverage
and
19 concerns in this areA. A very concerned lady. I think
20 that her presence and expertise would have assisted that
21 committee.
22 Q. I don't know the answer to this, but had any of
23 her children been abused?
24 A. No. The committee was also open to making
25 contacts with other individuals, psychiatrists,
Page 695
1 psychologists, others who were practicing in the field,
2 for input from them. They could feel free to call those
3 individuals and consult with them, as well, make contact
4 with the National Office of the National Conference of
5 Catholic Bishops for any information that they may have
6 had; contact other dioceses for any work that had already
7 progressed in their particular diocese for establishing
8 such a policy; consulting with centers for treatment, such
9 as St. Luke's Hospital, I believe it's in Maryland, and
10 perhaps the Servants of the Paraclete, which was very
11 close, to solicit as much information as they could for
12 the establishment of the policy.
13 Q. And other than the written policy that was
14 promulgated in July of 1990, were there any other
written
15 policies for the Archidocese established by this
16 committee?
17 A. No, sir.
18 Q. Any unwritten policies?
19 A. No, sir.
20 Q. When did you appoint this committee?
21 A. I can't recall the exact date, sir, but I would
22 imagine it must have been around 1987.
23 Q. Why did you wait two years to appoint the
24 committee?
25 A. I don't recall any reason why I waited. I don't
Page 696
1 think it was a matter of, you know, just twiddling my
2 thumbs. I think during that period of time there was
3 information that I had to familiarize myself with, and
4 other obligations, as well, towards establishing policy.
5 I'm not certain that it was unanimous feeling among
6 the bishops that policies should be established
7 differently for every diocese. There was discussion that
8 perhaps a uniform policy should be worked on and then
9 offered to dioceses throughout the country, so that
10 everyone would benefit from the expertise of a select
11 group and a center, and I was hoping for that.
12 I know that there was some information sent out to
13 that effect by -- it was it was another center for
14 treatment in Massachusetts, but I can't exactly recall
the
15 name of it. I don't know if it was called Guest House or
16 another hospital center.
17 Q. That was sent to you?
18 A. I think they sent some information -- it wasn't
19 a packet, but it was comments about establishing
policies
20 to all the dioceses. So there was work, in other words,
21 activity in the areA. It wasn't a matter of simply
22 putting it on the shelf and waiting for a year and a half.
23 There was activity in the area and a lot of discussion
24 about what should be contained in the policy, its
25 appropriateness and who could best give us information,
Page 697
1 and so forth.
2 Q. Who were you discussing this with before you
3 appointed a committee?
4 A. By bishops.
5 Q. You were having discussions with bishops?
6 A. In our own meetings. It's not -- it wasn't
7 having a meeting with all the bishops together. These
8 were group meetings, meetings that you would -- informal
9 discussion when you would come together for other
10 obligations. All of us belonged to a host of committees
11 for the bishops' conference, and you're obliged to meet
12 two, three times a year as committees. Whenever we
would
13 meet, we would have opportunity, if we so chose, to
14 surface that topic.
15 Q. And when did you have opportunity to surface
16 that topic?
17 A. I can't give you dates or places, sir, but
18 during that period of time, I do recall discussion among
19 the bishops on that particular topic regarding either one
20 uniform policy versus the concept of individual policies.
21 Q. Aside from discussions with other bishops on the
22 issue of whether or not there should be a unified policy
23 versus a policy archdiocese by archdiocese, did you
have
24 any other discussions with the bishops concerning the
25 content of the policy?
Page 698
1 A. Not formally. There were no formal meetings
2 which called for a discussion of the content.
3 Q. Informally?
4 A. Who knows? I can't recall all of the subject of
5 our discussions. I just know that the subject was raised.
6 It's possible that some had their opinions about content,
7 but I can't recall that for certain at this time.
8 Q. In any of those discussions before you appointed
9 a committee in 1987, did you discuss whether or not a
10 bishop should go back to parishes in which these priests
11 had been previously to determine whether or not there
may
12 be other victims who might need help?
13 A. No, sir. I don't recall that topic ever having
14 been surfaced or discussed.
15 Q. Was that topic ever surfaced or discussed, to
16 your knowledge, by the committee after it was
appointed?
17 A. Not to my knowledge, sir, no.
18 Q. When you appointed a committee in 1987, what
19 direction did you give it?
20 A. I asked the committee to do research and to come
21 up with a preliminary report on what form of a policy
22 should be provided for the Archdiocese to give adequate
23 guidance to the personnel of the Archdiocese, both
clergy,
24 religious and laiety, for the sake of reporting any type
25 of sexual allegation and whatever else they felt could be
Page 699
1 included in such a policy. And they are to do research by
2 contacting, as I have mentioned, other dioceses that may
3 have done similar work already that would give us an
idea
4 of the type of work that was being done and issues
5 includes.
6 Q. Were those instructions verbal or written?
7 A. Those were verbal instructions, sir.
8 Q. Were there ever any reports given to you by the
9 committee between the time you appointed it in 1987 and
10 the time that policy was issued in 1990?
11 A. There was consultation between myself and the
12 chancellor on another occasion, or perhaps twice;
13 consultation with the person that we had employed as an
14 expert, this Stella Gallegos; consultation between
myself
15 and the attorney from time to time on it. But I did not
16 meet with them as a body for the meetings.
17 Q. You never met with them as a body?
18 A. I don't recall, outside of the initial
19 commissioning of the committee to get the policy
moving.
20 Q. When the committee was initially commissioned,
21 did you meet with them?
22 A. I don't think I even have recollection of
23 meeting with the whole body. I can recall meeting with
24 chancellor. I can recall meeting with Ms. Gallegos, with
25 the attorney, but I don't recall a full meeting with the
Page 700
1 commission.
2 Q. So at no time between 1987 and 1990, did you
3 meet with the committee as a body?
4 MS. KENNEDY: Objection, asked and
5 answered.
6 A. I cannot recall a specific meeting. I know that
7 the members were present for presentations at which I
was
8 present, also, and that was the presentation made to the
9 clergy of the Archdiocese on the preliminary facets of the
10 content of that document. This was long before it was
11 published, but it wasn't a meeting just for the
committee.
12 I mean, this involved the entire priestly gathering.
13 Q. And was the focus of the committee's work on the
14 publication of guidelines for reporting of child abuse by
15 priests?
16 A. Apparently that was, because that was the result
17 of the document that they decided to provide us with.
18 Q. And was that the direction you had given them,
19 to focus on that subject?
20 A. Well, I really had no direction, specific
21 direction, that I could give them. I had never done a
22 booklet like this. I wasn't really skilled in all the
23 contents of what should be included in a document such
as
24 that. I was hoping that they could come up with
25 information from other dioceses and with other experts
as
Page 701
1 to what should be included, and this was their response to
2 that.
3 Q. Did you ever ask for the inclusion in this
4 particular policy of any other issues, aside from the
5 reporting of sexual molestation?
6 A. I don't recall any specific additions that I may
7 have requested, or concerns. Like I said, I gave them a
8 general mandate, and I think when they had come up
with
9 this preliminary report on it, I felt that they had
10 focused on an area that was certainly a very strong
11 beginning. I don't think that any policy of that nature
12 is a final document. I think that can always be improved
13 and added to. But I thought it was a good beginning.
14 Q. Well, it didn't address the area of how to deal,
15 within the Archdiocese, how to deal administratively
with
16 a priest who was accused of these types of activities,
did
17 it?
18 A. Right. Well, it touched on that, it does, sir.
19 Q. But not in any formal fashion?
20 A. As far as being granted -- or sent to a center
21 for therapy, etc., no, it was not included in there.
22 Q. And neither did it discuss whether or not a
23 search should be made within the Archdiocese for
potential
24 prior victims of any priest who was alleged to have been
25 sexually abusive?
Page 702
1 A. No, sir, it did not include that.
2 Q. Did that concern you that it didn't address that
3 issue?
4 A. No. I think the issue it chose to address was a
5 very essential, a very important issue, since it was going
6 to be directed not to one specific group of people, but
7 that was going to involve literally thousands of people
8 throughout the Archdiocese. And it was going to take a
9 yeoman's effort to make certain that this policy was
10 brought to their attention. Workshops were held for all
11 of them, full-day workshops, so that they were familiar
12 with it and familiar with the concept of child abuse and
13 have them sign off on that, that, in fact, they had been
14 present, they had received this guideline and were going
15 to abide by it.
16 Q. Did you have the authority as the Archbishop of
17 Santa Fe to issue a policy concerning the disposition of
18 allegations of priest sexual misconduct on your own
19 without any approval by any priests, committee,
20 parishioners? Did you have that authority intrinsic to
21 your office at that time?
22 A. To do what? For a disposition of --
23 Q. To make up your own policy on these issues and
24 disseminate it to the priests and the parishioners.
25 A. On what issues? You mean reporting? Are you
Page 703
1 talking about the reporting policy that we have?
2 Q. Any policy with respect to the investigation,
3 reporting --
4 A. Oh, yes.
5 Q. -- priest sexual misconduct.
6 A. Yes, the Archbishop could go ahead and sit down
7 and write something out. It may not be very good,
because
8 he's not skilled in that particular areA. He has a lack,
9 a great lack, of knowledge of the field. Without the
10 assistance of anyone of a professional nature, it would
11 would have been, I think, a very poor effort, a dangerous
12 effort, for myself to venture into that with the lack of
13 knowledge that I had.
14 Q. But you had the power to do that, if you so
15 chose?
16 A. Yes, you can publish various things.
17 Q. You've indicated that one of the reasons that --
18 or let me put it this way: You have said that it has not
19 been the Archdiocese's tradition to go to a parish where
a
20 priest had sexually molested children and make a public
21 announcement that the parish had had a pedophile for a
22 priest, because you felt that such an action would be
23 divisive; is that a fair summary?
24 A. Not quite. If I could just make a comment on
25 it?
Page 704
1 Q. Please.
2 A. Surele. First of all, I know I used the word
3 "tradition" at one point. I think the word that I was
4 trying to search for in my mind was it's been the
5 "practice" of the Church. It's almost the same. But
6 anyway, for the sake of clarity, it has been the practice
7 of the Church not to make public announcements this
way in
8 a parish which are so general in nature that in a sense
9 it -- for the sake of soliciting people who might be
10 considered having been victimized because it would
cause
11 people then to become suspicious of one another and
could
12 have a divisive effect upon them and a negative effect
13 upon them, because parents would begin to wonder
about
14 this child or that child. Children would begin to talk
15 about themselves. And so the Church, in her own
16 guideline, has never encouraged open-type of
announcements
17 and, in fact, has stated that this type of procedure
18 should be done with caution, that any investigation of a
19 case should be done with great care, so as not to harm
the
20 good name of people.
21 Q. All right. You mean harm the good name of the
22 priest?
23 A. No, the good name of the people of the parish.
24 Q. That's what I'm having a little confusion about.
25 How are the good names of parishioners harmed if you
Page 705
1 gather all the parents of your parish in and say, "We've
2 had a pedophile priest in your midst who has been in
3 contact with your children, and we are concerned, and we
4 want -- if there's anything unusual going on with your
5 children, we feel you should bring it to the attention of
6 a psychologist"; how does that harm the parishioners?
7 A. It seems to me that parishioners -- because we
8 had spoken earlier about general announcements from the
9 pulpit, from the Church. This is the way that most people
10 will come to meetings or hear announcements, that a
11 general announcement of that nature announces to them
that
12 Father X has, in fact, been accused of pedophilia, and
13 we're wondering if any of the children of this parish may
14 have been accused -- or rather been offended, and they
15 should report that to us, and we'll be here for that
16 purpose.
17 People would feel that -- first of all, they're
18 shocked about hearing this, and children become an
object
19 of suspicion from parents or from friends. "Are you one
20 of them? Are you one of them? Are you one of them?"
The
21 people themselves begin to feel --
22 Q. Let's stop there.
23 A. I'm sorry.
24 Q. Why is that harmful, that parents make inquiry
25 of their children to see if there's been any offensive
Page 706
1 contact between them and a pedophile priest; why is that
2 harmful?
3 A. It's not harmful for parents to make inquiry of
4 their children. It could be harmful to the family if they
5 feel that -- they feel obliged to have to make this known
6 because they feel that other people are going to know
7 this. Maybe they're going to feel hurt. Maybe they want
8 to simply keep this quiet. They don't feel any need to
9 divulge anything that's taken place with their child.
10 Q. Well, you're not asking them to do that. You're
11 just saying, "Your children may have been harmed. Be
12 aware. Be on the alert. Find out." How does that harm
13 the family?
14 A. For what purposes are you asking them to find
15 out?
16 Q. So the kids can get help.
17 A. Which means that they really should do some
18 action, and I understand that. I would want to help those
19 children as much as we can. I am just sharing, sir, that
20 if there's enough of questioning and people begin to -- if
21 they don't understand what all of this means either,
22 especially the children, they themselves begin to
wonder
23 whether this child is involved or that child is involved.
24 Q. So what?
25 A. Well, it's almost like a stigma maybe on that
Page 707
1 child, and they would want to exclude them from their
own
2 activities or from their friendship or from their homes.
3 Q. So in order -- and you feel that it would be a
4 benefit for a family to be advised that a pedophile priest
5 had been in their midst, so they could find out if there
6 children had been harmed; would that be beneficial?
7 A. I think it's always a benefit for families to be
8 advised for their own protection and help. I think we
9 have to do what we can to help our families that way. I'm
10 not certain that a public announcement like that is the
11 best way to go about bringing it to the attention of
12 people.
13 Q. What is the best way?
14 A. I think that there are other ways that can be
15 done. Either through individual questioning with
16 investigators or that they would hear it not announced in
17 their own parish, but in more general announcements, so
18 that they would not feel that they are zeroing in
19 particularly on their parish, that this is something open
20 to all people everywhere.
21 And so announcements that there has been child
22 molestation occurring and anyone -- all parents can
speak
23 with their children, whether or not this may have been
24 happened to them; they should be aware of this. And this
25 was precisely what we tried to do in the Archdiocese by
Page 708
1 bringing this to the attention of the people of the
2 Archdiocese universally with our public announcement,
with
3 800 numbers.
4 Q. When was that?
5 A. That occurred, sir, in 1991, between '91 and
6 '92.
7 Q. Why would that have been less divisive, as you
8 say, as an announcement to a particular parish that had
9 children who were abused by a priest prior to that?
10 A. Only because it is less personal to them. It's
11 more -- it protects their anonymity. They can call. They
12 do not have to state their name, if they don't choose, or
13 if they wish to, they may. If they want to meet with a
14 person at the chancery, they may do so. If they simply
15 want to talk about the instance and get some guidance,
16 they're able to do that.
17 Q. But how does an announcement from the pulpit in
18 a parish to the parishioners that there's been a problem,
19 "There's been a pedophile in your midst," how does that
20 defeat their right to preserve their anonymity? Can't
21 they then come to you individually and say, without
22 anybody else knowing, and say, "You know, our son was
23 abused"?
24 A. It's possible they could come, but the general
25 announcement itself is going to give speculation to the
Page 709
1 people, is what I'm saying.
2 Q. So what? You want them to speculate.
3 A. Your question of me originally was why the
4 Church had this type of practice, and I was trying to
5 explain that practice. We're trying to gather, at this
6 time, what is the best way to bring issues of this nature
7 to the attention of people for the protection of children,
8 and certainly practices can change, and you would want
to
9 have the best way of bringing that to the attention of
10 people, so that children will not be harmed in the future.
11 Q. How do -- I assume that parishioners contribute
12 money to the Church through their parish?
13 A. Oh, yes.
14 Q. And how much of that money on a percentage basis
15 is then contributed to the Archdiocese?
16 A. They contribute -- right now, it's gone up.
17 It's 10 percent of what they give is sent to the central
18 office to help maintain those programs, those ministries
19 that are then centralized so that they can provide a
20 greater source of -- a greater resource for the individual
21 parishes. So 10 percent or 10 cents out of every dollar.
22 Q. Comes to the Archdiocese?
23 A. Comes to the Archdiocese.
24 Q. And 90 cents out of every dollar?
25 A. Remains in their parish.
Page 710
1 Q. And out of that 10 cents on every dollar that
2 comes from every parish within the Archdiocese, is your
3 salary paid?
4 A. No, sir.
5 Q. How are you paid?
6 A. Excuse me, no. Out of that 10 percent, my
7 salary was paid, yes, out of that 10 percent.
8 Q. So the contributions that parishioners make to
9 each parish are, in part, to pay your salary as
10 Archbishop?
11 A. It used to be when I was the Archbishop.
12 Q. I understand. And are there any other sources
13 of revenue that come to the Archdiocese outside of
parish
14 contributions?
15 A. Yes, sir. There is a campaign. It's a
16 free-will offering that people are asked to contribute to
17 which is designated for all of the pastoral ministries
18 that are conducted throughout the year for the various
19 parishes. It includes everything from support of
20 seminarians in their training to Native American
programs,
21 to Catholic Social Services and the care that they
extend
22 to the community from immigration to family
counseling, a
23 multiple list of other things, to helping support the
24 clinic in Santa Fe, which offers free care, Villa Therese
25 Clinic, to people who are in need, especially children,
Page 711
1 its emphasis is on children. There's a large variety of
2 ministries that are supported totally -- the collection,
3 that campaign's money, 100 percent of that is dedicated
to
4 those personal ministries that go back to people.
5 Q. And who contributes to those campaigns?
6 A. People who so choose.
7 Q. And those are parishioners?
8 A. Parishioners, yes.
9 Q. So the parishioners give to the Archdiocese and
10 the parish through the collection plate?
11 A. Yes, sir.
12 Q. And give to the programs of the Archdiocese
13 through these campaigns?
14 A. If they so choose, right.
15 Q. And are the monies that are collected through
16 these campaigns put into the same account as the
monies
17 that are contributed by the parishes?
18 A. No, sir.
19 Q. They're separately accounted for?
20 A. Yes, they are.
21 Q. And do any those funds collected through these
22 campaigns go toward payment of Archdiocese
administration
23 or operating expenses?
24 A. No, sir.
25 Q. So the operating expenses of the Archdiocese,
Page 712
1 including your salary, when you were Archbishop, relies
on
2 the contribution made by parishioners through their
3 parish?
4 A. Yes, sir.
5 Q. Hypothetical question, Archbishop Sanchez: If a
6 parish community was advised that one of their priests --
7 or the priest that was serving in that parish was a
8 pedophile, do you think that that might affect the amount
9 of money those parishioners might contribute in the future
10 to the parish?
11 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, calls for
12 speculation.
13 A. I don't know, sir. I could imagine that it
14 might, but that is not a reason for withholding
15 information.
16 Q. I didn't say it was.
17 A. No, but you asked me to speculate, and that is
18 why I'm saying that it might happen. And I would say to
19 you that that would never be a reason for withholding
20 information of any kind.
21 Q. What other divisiveness, other than what you've
22 testified to, would you imagine could occur if it was
23 announced to parishioners in a parish that their priest
24 was a pedophile?
25 A. I think I have commented on that divisiveness
Page 713
1 multiple times, and to do it again would be just
2 repetition. So I would simply say that the divisiveness
3 that divides people against people as individuals or as
4 families or even within their thinking within the parish,
5 any divisiveness within a parish would be a negative.
6 Q. And do you feel that it is reasonable for you,
7 as Archbishop, to avoid that negative at the expense of
8 finding out which of the children of the parish had been
9 abused in order to get them help?
10 A. Let me repeat again. I have mentioned before --
11 excuse me for repetition, but as I've mentioned before, it
12 had never been our practice to make such public
13 announcements, to take that type of action. It was a
14 practice that simply did not occur to us because it had
15 not be done.
16 But in addition to that, it had not been a practice
17 because the Church had always indicated in her canons,
18 canon law, that care had to be taken regarding any type
of
19 allegations and the type of investigation that would be
20 conducted, and so public announcements of this nature
had
21 been avoided. It was past practice, and that is all I can
22 say again.
23 Q. Archbishop, during your tenure, or prior to your
24 tenure, are you aware or have you been aware that any
of
25 the priests serving in the Archdiocese of Santa Fe,
Page 714
1 whether incardinated here or not, had a felony conviction
2 on their record?
3 A. You say prior to my taking --
4 Q. At any time from the time you became a priest
5 until this moment, do you have any knowledge of that
fact?
6 A. The knowledge of one instance comes to mind. I
7 found out about it, I suppose, in '91 or '92. I don't
8 exactly recall, but it was an indictment against Father
9 Jason Sigler that had occurred after he had left the
10 priesthood and had married and was recorded apparently
11 with the Albuquerque Police Department. That had
happened
12 in 1983, I believe. Knowledge of that did not come to
my
13 attention until approximately 1991.
14 Q. Is it permissible, as far as the policy of the
15 Archdiocese of Santa Fe, for a convicted felon to serve
as
16 a priest within the Archdiocese?
17 A. No, sir, it is not policy for a convicted felon
18 to serve in the Archdiocese of Santa Fe. I'd like to
19 repeat that Father Jason Sigler was not only not a priest
20 of the Archdiocese, but he had resigned from the
21 priesthood, as well.
22 Q. Could you please describe to me any
23 circumstances under which you would permit a priest
who
24 had admitted to sexually molesting children to serve as
a
25 priest in a parish in the Archdiocese of Santa Fe?
Page 715
1 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, calls for
2 speculation. It's hypothetical.
3 Q. And I'm asking for Church policy in this
4 Archdiocese.
5 A. You're asking me to speculate?
6 Q. No, I'm asking, what's the policy?
7 A. The policy -- there is no policy that says a
8 priest who has sexually molested a child cannot serve in
9 the Archdiocese of Santa Fe, because the concept of
10 "service" is so broad. I think you have in mind perhaps
11 service in a parish.
12 Q. I do.
13 A. Well, then you cannot make the general
14 statement.
15 Q. I didn't.
16 A. Because there are various ministries that can
17 take place.
18 Q. Let's confine it to serving as a parish priest.
19 A. In a parish, okay, parish priest.
20 Q. Yes, sir.
21 A. There is no written policy that so states.
22 However, whoever the archbishop or bishop is -- are you
23 speaking about the Archdiocese of Santa Fe?
24 Q. Yes, sir.
25 A. And you're speaking under my tenure?
Page 716
1 Q. Under anybody's tenure, insofar as policy is
2 concerned.
3 A. The policy would state that no priest serving
4 under -- excuse me. No priest who would represent a
5 threat to people in the Archdiocese of Santa Fe, who was
6 previously accused of child molestation -- I'm not
7 using -- I'm progressing improperly, excuse me. May I
8 start again?
9 Q. Take your time.
10 A. No priest who has been accused, previously
11 accused, of child molestation who has not received
therapy
12 and a positive recommendation from therapists would be
13 able to serve as a parish priest in the Archdiocese of
14 Santa Fe. More than likely, even with the
recommendation
15 of therapists, the man would be excluded.
16 Q. And has that been the policy of the Archdiocese
17 of Santa Fe?
18 A. That policy has had a variable over the years,
19 because of the understanding of pedophilia over the
years.
20 There is adequate literature stating that in the 1960s, in
21 the 1970s and into the early part of the 1980s,
pedophilia
22 was considered to be curable, as well as to be
surrounded
23 by sufficient support as to render the candidate able to
24 function once again within society without posing a
threat
25 to children.
Page 717
1 The concept that pedophilia is absolutely not curable
2 and now becomes the prevalent opinion is an opinion that
3 has occurred in the last few years. Due to the fact that
4 there's been a change in approach by psychiatrists and
5 psychologists over the years, I would say that in the
6 1970s, certainly, any psychiatrist or psychologist having
7 treated a person for sexual abuse could readily have
8 recommended that that person be reintroduced to parish
9 ministry because he felt that he no longer posed a threat
10 to children, because that happened to be the prevalent
11 opinion during those years.
12 I could well have been influenced by that opinion
13 during the 1970s. We're talking about a hypothetical
14 situation. At this time, however, given the additional
15 type of information that has been provided by the field
of
16 psychiatry and of psychology, it appears that a child
17 offender about which we have spoken going through a
18 program of rehabilitation would not be considered to be
19 cured, but rather reached a level of achievement where,
20 with people surrounding him, he can function, but they
21 would recommend that he be kept away from children or
22 those circumstances where children may be present in
large
23 numbers.
24 Q. Did you ever have any meetings or discussions
25 with the parish priests in general concerning the issue of
Page 718
1 priest pedophilia?
2 A. I wouldn't call it -- well, I'd call it a
3 discussion. It was more of a seminar. In fact, there
4 were two seminars that were held, day-long discussions.
5 Addresses were given to the priests from a variety of
6 standpoints: One was from what is pedophilia and a
7 perpetrator, and what leads that person -- what might be
8 the profile of such a person. And that address was given,
9 at that particular case that I have in mind, by Stella
10 Gallegos using some videos, as well, to assist her in that
11 presentation. And then the attorney for the Archdiocese
12 also added comments from the legal point of view, so
that
13 they would understand that areA.
14 I had introduced the day's seminar with my own
15 reflections for them to bring them to an awareness of the
16 importance of the topic that was going to be discussed.
17 Q. When was that?
18 A. To the best of my recollection, Mr. Bennett, it
19 occurred, I believe, in 1987.
20 Q. And where was that seminar given?
21 A. It was held at the Catholic Center, what is
22 known -- I guess you'd know it as a chancery office or
the
23 offices of the Archdiocese.
24 Q. And who attended that seminar?
25 A. Priests from the Archdiocese.
Page 719
1 Q. All of the priests?
2 A. I can't swear that all attended, but all were
3 invited and strongly urged to attend. I would say that at
4 least 90 percent were in attendance.
5 Q. Other than Stella Gallegos and Mr. Reynolds,
6 were there any other presenters?
7 A. I can't recall another presenter at this time.
8 I recall those two.
9 Q. Were there any written materials distributed at
10 that seminar?
11 A. I don't recall written materials. I do know
12 that a video was used by Ms. Gallegos as part of her
13 presentation.
14 Q. Do you know where that video came from?
15 A. The video is one that she regularly uses around
16 the state of New Mexico to inform people regarding
sexual
17 molestation of children, and she uses it both for teachers
18 in schools, leaders on the reservations or the pueblos,
19 and any other group that might invite Health and Social
20 Services for a presentation, and she is contacted to
make
21 that presentation.
22 Q. You mentioned a second seminar?
23 A. Yes, sir. A second seminar was held; and on
24 that occasion, the seminar was to present to the priests
25 the policy that we have been speaking about of the
Page 720
1 Archdiocese of Santa Fe and to field from them questions
2 regarding the policy and regarding pedophilia in general.
3 Q. When was that seminar?
4 A. That seminar occurred shortly after the
5 dissemination of the policy. The policy was disseminated
6 on July 1, 1990. So the gathering of the priests would
7 have occurred perhaps a month or so later.
8 Q. Prior to July 1, 1990, had any seminars, videos
9 or any other presentations on this topic been offered to
10 parishioners?
11 A. No. The offering to parishioners began at least
12 from the Archdiocesan center. Now offerings may have
been
13 made on parish levels that I am unaware of because
they do
14 this quite independently. But our contact with them
15 occurred for the remaining months of 1990 and into '91
and
16 '92.
17 Q. And that was with respect to the institution of
18 your new written policy?
19 A. Yes, but at that occasion, it was a lengthy
20 presentation which also included the video, so that they
21 would become aware of the issue of pedophilia and its
22 consequences on children.
23 Q. But there had been no presentations of that
24 nature prior to that time?
25 A. None that I can recall.
Page 721
1 Q. Prior to 1980, did you ever discuss the issue of
2 priest pedophilia with the priests in an informal setting?
3 MS. KENNEDY: I'm sorry, prior to?
4 MR. BENNETT: 1980.
5 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: 1980.
6 A. I have no recollection of any meeting or formal
7 discussion with our priests regarding the issue of
8 pedophiliA. As I mentioned, just a few moments ago,
9 pedophilia both -- not only in the ecclesiastical field,
10 but in the civic field itself, was not a high-profile
11 issue.
12 The amount of literature was minimal that was coming
13 out from anyone, and even the justice system -- and I
14 mention this because I had a brother who was a district
15 judge. But I think the justice system depended really
16 upon the individual psychiatrists and psychologists to
17 advise them of issues of pedophiliA. But it was not a
18 high-profile issue, and I don't recall calling any meeting
19 for that discussion.
20 [The witness conferred with his attorney.]
21 Q. When was the first time after you became a
22 priest that you heard of another priest sexually molesting
23 a child, that you heard that that type of activity had
24 occurred anywhere on the planet?
25 A. I've been a priest for 34 years. Let me go back
Page 722
1 and -- in our testimony here in this deposition, it was
2 brought to my attention, again -- it was brought to my
3 attention a year ago earlier -- that a woman named Mrs.
4 Nowak had apparently met with me. I don't recall this
5 meeting, but it appears that she had asked to meet with
me
6 in my office. And according to her testimony, she says
7 that she had shared with me information that a priest of
8 the Archdiocese had abused one or two of her sons.
9 I don't recall it in my active memory, but since this
10 was a public testimony, I have no reason to doubt that
11 she, in fact, came to see me. And so I would have to say
12 probably the first time that it came to my attention or
my
13 awareness -- I'm not even certain how forcibly, but
would
14 have been that occasion.
15 Q. Had you ever heard before then that that had
16 occurred with respect to any priest anywhere?
17 A. No, I had not heard of any allegations against
18 priests anywhere prior to that occasion that is apparently
19 documented from Mrs. Nowak.
20 Q. After you became a priest, did you know that the
21 Servants of the Paraclete existed?
22 A. I knew that the Servants of the Paraclete
23 existed. I felt, in my priest years -- because I was
24 ordained in 1959 -- I felt that it was a center for
25 retreats for priests who were coming there from all over
Page 723
1 the country. To me, this retreat was for priests who had
2 left the priesthood and who wanted somehow to be able
to
3 be reconciled and were coming there to make a spiritual
4 retreat.
5 I believe it was in the early '70s that I then began
6 to think or hear that they also treated alcoholics; and
7 that became my identity, then, for the center at Jemez
8 Springs, that it was a center for priests who had left the
9 priesthood and for priests who were alcoholic.
10 I had concern about alcoholic priests, because I
11 could see among my own brother priests evidence that
some
12 of them were certainly drinking more than they should,
and
13 I feared that they were alcoholic, and that seemed to be
14 my major concern in the 1970s, was alcoholism among
the
15 priesthood.
16 Q. In the early '70s, before you became Archbishop,
17 were you also aware that priests with sexual disorders
18 were residing at the Servants of the Paraclete?
19 A. No.
20 MS. BURTRAM: I'm going to object to the
21 question, as it states facts not in evidence.
22 A. No. I wasn't aware of men with sexual disorders
23 being housed there at the Servants of the Paraclete.
24 Q. When did you first become aware of that?
25 A. Well, I certainly became aware of it in 1981,
Page 724
1 when we directed Father Jason Sigler to go to the
Servants
2 of the Paraclete because of his misconduct against the
3 children in St. Therese Parish. I may have become aware
4 of it prior to that, but I don't have any recollection of
5 that particular instance.
6 THE WITNESS: Do you want to call a break
7 now, before you pick up anything?
8 MR. BENNETT: Sure, let's go ahead.
9 MR. GOFFE: The time is 3:59. We will go
10 off the record.
11 [A recess was taken.]
12 MR. GOFFE: The time is 4:17. We are back
13 on the record.
14 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Bennett, before you
15 begin, I'd just like to note, although I'm probably
16 stating the obvious, that as we conclude the fourth day
of
17 this deposition, we are now in what I believe to be our
18 22nd hour of taped testimony from the Archbishop. It's
19 been grueling. He's an elderly man. He's tired. I
20 suggest that our position will be, and is as of this time,
21 that this deposition concludes at 5:00 o'clock, and it
22 will not be continued or reopened.
23 I tell you that not as a threat by any means,
24 because that ultimately will be a decision for the Court,
25 but that I encourage you to order, if you haven't already,
Page 725
1 your subjects in some hierarchy, so that you get your
most
2 important things out of the way while you have the
3 Archbishop here, and we have this present deposition
4 running, because at least for our part, we don't plan to
5 be very sympathetic to arguments to the Court that you
6 have not been able to cover the most important areas that
7 you sought to explore in this deposition.
8 So given our last hour here, 45 minutes, if you
9 have something of burning importance, I'd urge you to put
10 it to the head of your list.
11 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) Archbishop, you indicated that
12 you believe the first time you would have learned that
13 priests with sexual disorders were residents at the
14 Servants of the Paraclete would have been when
Marlena
15 Nowak had made that report to you sometime in the mid
16 '70s.
17 MS. BURTRAM: I'm going to object.
18 MS. KENNEDY: No, that wasn't it.
19 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) I'm sorry. Please help me
20 out.
21 MS. KENNEDY: Well --
22 MR. BENNETT: Not you, the Archbishop.
23 MS. KENNEDY: Just trying to be assistance
24 and move it along, Mr. Bennett.
25 MR. BENNETT: That's okay. I'd rather rely
Page 726
1 on the Archbishop.
2 MS. KENNEDY: You're asking Archbishop to
3 tell you what your question to him was?
4 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) My question to you,
5 Archbishop, is I -- correct me if I'm wrong, but I was
6 assuming from your answers that the first time you had
7 learned that the Servants of the Paraclete was a facility
8 that was a residence for priests -- do I have the wrong --
9 A. I think you have the wrong one, if I may
10 clarify. I think there are two questions. In response to
11 when I may have known about the Servants of the
Paraclete
12 as a center for residential center for priests who may
13 have offended children, I think I gave you the date of
14 1981 in conjunction with Jason Sigler, his offense at that
15 time, and then I also stated that I may have learned
about
16 it at some point earlier, but I have no recollection of
17 that.
18 The other response which I mentioned that 1976, I
19 think they mentioned, from Mrs. Nowak, was in response
to
20 your question when was the first time that I may have
come
21 to the knowledge that priests had offended children this
22 way, sexually offended children, since I had been
23 ordained. And I was trying to remember a date since I
had
24 been ordained a priest. And so there were two separate
25 questions there, if I'm not mistaken.
Page 727
1 Q. Thank you for refreshing my recollection. When
2 is the next time after the Marlena Nowak contact that
you
3 recall any information coming to you concerning sexual
4 molestation of a child by a priest, or that that type of
5 thing had occurred in the priesthood?
6 A. My memory right now is sort of overwhelmed, I
7 guess, with the issue of Jason Sigler and the incident in
8 1981. That's the first thing that just pops out in my
9 memory. I'm trying to think if there was any other
10 occasion that I may have had to learn of anything of that
11 nature. But I have to confess that just for the passage
12 of years, I could not accurately say that it was at any
13 other time. But I do know, obviously, that with the
14 incident of Jason Sigler at St. Therese, that was
15 definitely a memorable event.
16 Q. And as far as your present recollection is
17 concerned, that was the next memorable event after the
18 Marlena Nowak event?
19 A. Yes. And I have to add, just for clarity's
20 sake, that I don't recall meeting with Mrs. Nowak. I want
21 that clear.
22 Q. I understand.
23 A. It's just that I know that they've made the
24 statement, and she has made the statement, so I have to
25 assume that I did, but I just don't remember it.
Page 728
1 Q. Does the Archdiocese of Santa Fe pay any money
2 to the Vatican?
3 A. No, sir. There's no payment from the
4 Archdiocese of Santa Fe. The only offering that people
5 may want to participate in was called, for years, a
6 Peter's pence collection, and it was a a freewill offering
7 that was taken up on, oh, one of the Sundays in -- I
8 believe it was June, like the last Sunday of June. It was
9 never a very large gift offering, but it was sort of like
10 a second collection during the Mass, and people were
asked
11 to contribute to that if they so chose. And the total
12 offering for the entire Archdiocese might have been
about
13 $15,000, maybe that.
14 Q. Does that still occur?
15 A. Yes, that's gone on for years. They would ask
16 us to assist in -- the Vatican has their own ministries
17 and missions, as well, that they try to help out, the
18 foreign mission areas, where bishops ask if they can be
19 helped in any way with the work that they're doing in all
20 the -- what I'd call the Third World countries. So the
21 Holy Father tries to assist them in that way. So
22 basically what we're doing is simply asking the Holy
23 Father to help those different ministries that are not
24 localized for ourselves.
25 Q. So the Vatican makes a request to the
Page 729
1 Archdiocese of Santa Fe to assist them in that endeavor?
2 A. It's a world-wide request, actually. Every
3 parish in the United States has that same request. It's a
4 national thing. And then the same thing happens in
5 Germany and Spain and other countries.
6 Q. I understand. But that request is made by the
7 Vatican to all of these archdioceses?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Does that offering take place once a year?
10 A. Once a year.
11 Q. And that offering occurs after a Mass or during
12 a Mass?
13 A. It's, yes, normally towards the end of the Mass,
14 after the communion part of the Mass, then the ushers
come
15 and pass the collection baskets a second time, and it's
16 announced that whatever freewill offer they make at that
17 time is for that special intention.
18 Q. When you served on the personnel board prior to
19 becoming Archbishop, who else served on the board
with
20 you, that you can recall?
21 A. I have absolutely no recall of the other members
22 at all. I'm going to use the word "maybe," because as I
23 say, recollection is just very hazy. Maybe Father
Francis
24 Eggert, maybe Father Ron Bruckner, maybe a Father
Ray
25 Aragon, and that's where it ends.
Page 730
1 Q. Would there be a record of that anywhere?
2 A. It may very well be still retained in the
3 Archdiocese. From time to -- minutes were tried to be
4 kept, but normally it amounted to who was present for the
5 meeting, and then any recommendations in the personnel
6 board meeting. But it wasn't what I would call minutes of
7 discussion or anything like that, because we just -- we'd
8 be participating in the meeting, and one would try to take
9 down whatever you could. So we just asked him to take
10 down resolutions. But it should have -- if they still
11 have the minutes, it should have the members in
12 attendance.
13 Q. Where would these minutes be located?
14 A. Probably now, since it goes way back then, it
15 would have to be in the archives. They'd have to look
16 down there for them.
17 Q. I also need a little help, Archbishop. Did you
18 indicate that you came back to Albuquerque in 1971
from an
19 outlying parish?
20 A. Yes. I indicated that I had previously been the
21 pastor in northeastern New Mexico in an area -- the two
22 communities of Roy and Mosquero. And then the
Archbishop
23 asked me to become the next pastor at San Felipe
Church in
24 Albuquerque in September 1971.
25 Q. And did you serve at that parish until your
Page 731
1 appointment as Archbishop?
2 A. Yes, exactly.
3 Q. When you were at St. Pius after 1971 and until
4 you were appointed at San Felipe, were you more active
in
5 Archdiocese activities than you had been previously?
6 A. During what time? I'm sorry.
7 Q. The time you were at San Felipe Parish.
8 A. Official activities of the Archdiocese?
9 Q. Or unofficial.
10 A. Well, I was active in activities, but it wasn't
11 necessarily official activities of the Archdiocese. It
12 was an age where there was a lot of concern in the City
13 for ethnic groups, minority groups. If you recall back,
14 the '60s and early '70s was quite a challenge to our
15 country in reference to minority groups, cultural
16 identity, etc. And the same was true in Albuquerque.
17 There had been an awareness, a growing awarenes,
18 among the Spanish-speaking Catholic people of their
need
19 to maintain the old traditions and customs of the Church
20 and of their villages that seemed to be rapidly fading or
21 being forgotten. And so several priests, including
22 myself, were concerned about making efforts to preserve
23 those customs and cultural traditions for the people, as
24 well as the language. And so we became active in those
25 affairs.
Page 732
1 And our activity at that level, then, also lead to
2 activity on other concerns, such as the Albuquerque
Public
3 School system and if they were reaching out to the
4 minority group, and my concern was the Spanish-
speaking
5 youngster, since so many were dropping out of school,
and
6 our concern was for the future, both of the child, as well
7 as for the future of the community. If you have a large
8 percentage dropout, you're going to be buying some
trouble
9 down the road.
10 So we attended board meetings with the Albuquerque
11 Public School and worked closely with the
superintendent
12 to help in whatever way we could to encourage staying
in
13 school for the Hispanic child and other minority groups,
14 as well, so that we could try to upgrade the level of
15 education for everyone for the future.
16 So we felt that we could be almost a liaison group
17 working with APS, and they were very grateful. I know
18 even -- excuse me.
19 Q. Were there any other activities associated with
20 the Archdiocese in which you participated in those
years?
21 You were on the personnel board.
22 A. I was on the personnel board.
23 Q. Did that meet at the Archdiocese offices?
24 A. No, it normally would meet in a parish. One of
25 the priests who had a parish would host the meeting.
Page 733
1 Q. Were there any other activities of that type
2 that you participated in that were associated with the
3 Archdiocese?
4 A. I can't recall any right offhand. I know that
5 the Archbishop in 1974, approximately a week before I
was
6 named the Archbishop, he appointed me vicar general. I
7 wasn't certain why that appointment came. It was out of
8 the clear blue. And he just sent me a letter just saying,
9 "I just want you to know I've appointed you vicar
10 general," and I thought I guess he needs someone to
help
11 him with the problems, or whatever, you know. And I
had
12 no idea -- I guess he wanted me to at least have the title
13 of vicar general before I was appointed Archbishop. But
I
14 had no responsibilities with that title for one week.
15 [Exhibit 13 was marked for identification.]
16 Q. Archbishop, I'm going to show you what I've
17 marked as Exhibit 13 which purports to be minutes of a
18 meeting held February 13th, 1967, at the offices of Most
19 Reverend James Peter Davis, Archbishop of Santa Fe.
20 A. 1967?
21 Q. That's correct, and I want to ask you -- my
22 question to you is, have you ever seen those minutes
23 before today?
24 MS. BURTRAM: Mr. Bennett, do you have an
25 extra copy of that?
Page 734
1 MR. BENNETT: I don't.
2 MS. BURTRAM: Could I see it when they're
3 finished, please?
4 A. Did you want us to read the entire document?
5 Q. Well, just to the extent you need to to
6 determine whether or not you've seen them before.
7 A. I have not seen these at all.
8 Q. Were you ever told about the existence of these
9 minutes after you became Archbishop?
10 A. No, sir, not at all.
11 Q. Let me show you what I've marked as --
12 A. It's more like part of the history of the
13 Servants of the Paraclete.
14 [Exhibit 14 was marked for identification.]
15 Q. Let me show you what I've marked as Exhibit 14,
16 which is a nine-page document bearing the -- the first
17 page of which bears the letterhead of Via Coeli
Monastery
18 of the Servants of the Paraclete. The date on it is
19 December 29, 1966. And let me ask if you were ever
aware
20 of that document prior to today.
21 MS. BURTRAM: Mr. Bennett, I'm sorry,
22 Exhibit 14 is what?
23 MR. KIERST: That's the front?
24 MS. BURTRAM: Okay. And Exhibits 13 and 14
25 were Exhibits to Dr. Salazar's deposition?
Page 735
1 MR. BENNETT: Yes.
2 MS. BURTRAM: Our are marked, the copies
3 are marked --
4 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: What's the question? Is
5 the question has he ever seen it before, Mr. Bennett?
6 MR. BENNETT: Right.
7 A. Mr. Bennett, I have never seen this before
8 either.
9 Q. After you became Archbishop, were you ever
10 advised of the existence of this document?
11 A. No. Again, it appears that it's part of the --
12 I guess, the evolution of the programs at the Servants of
13 the Paraclete, is what it looks like.
14 Q. When you became Archbishop in 1974, were you
15 ever briefed on what the historical relationship between
16 the Archdiocese of Santa Fe and the Servants of the
17 Paraclete had been?
18 A. No, sir, I was not.
19 Q. Did you ever inquire of Chancellor Hendren or of
20 anyone else what that relationship was?
21 A. No, I didn't inquire. It seemed to me, from all
22 appearances, that it seemed to be a -- what should I say,
23 a fraternal relationship. In other words, the Servants of
24 the Paraclete seemed to get along with the diocese.
They
25 didn't seem to feel apart or ostracized or -- and there
Page 736
1 was no letter saying that no one is welcome to come up
2 here, whatever. In other words, it was a cordial --
3 seemed to be a cordial relationship. So I didn't inquire
4 as to its history.
5 The first thing that struck me was that the Servants
6 of the Paraclete had their own community, their religious
7 community, and they had a facility up in Jemez Springs,
8 and it was their own facility and really didn't depend
9 upon me for finances from the Archdiocese in any way.
So
10 I really wasn't too curious about its history.
11 Q. I believe you testified that you had a general
12 knowledge at that time, when you became Archbishop,
that
13 the Servants of the Paraclete was a retreat for, among
14 other things, priests who had alcohol problems?
15 A. Right, the Jemez Springs -- it was called, at
16 that time, Via Coeli. There had been articles from time
17 to time about priests of the Servants of the Paraclete
18 appearing in what was then Catholic newspapers. So
people
19 were very well aware of the presence of the Servants of
20 the Paraclete.
21 What their programs were or who their guests were was
22 never made public, certainly not to us. And like I said,
23 I was under the impression, and I think rightfully so,
24 that the center, Via Coeli, Servants of the Paraclete,
was
25 indeed a retreat center in the 1960s. That seemed to be
Page 737
1 what I would read about it. But as I mentioned earlier,
2 sometime in the 1970s, I began to get the impression that
3 priests who had alcoholic problems were also treated
4 there.
5 Q. Did you know, either from your experience on the
6 personnel board or from your general knowledge as a
parish
7 priest, that priests from other archdioceses were in
8 residence at Via Coeli and being placed for service
within
9 the Archdiocese of Santa Fe?
10 MS. BURTRAM: I'm going to object, assumes
11 facts not in evidence.
12 A. Not from documents, but what was the, I guess,
13 scuttlebutt or comments by priest to priest, was that
14 priests from that program of the Servants of the
Paraclete
15 would be helping this priest on a weekend and then
would
16 return up there. On a supply basis, basically. So I was
17 aware that they were, in fact, supplying from time to
time
18 in different parishes. I don't recall how many parishes,
19 and I don't recall who did the supply work, but I know
20 that supply did occur.
21 Q. And in order to do supply ministry, a priest
22 would have to be granted faculties by the Archbishop of
23 Santa Fe?
24 A. Priests -- apparently they had requested
25 permission of Archbishop Davis or his chancellor to go
Page 738
1 ahead and supply priests.
2 Q. And you knew that that was probably occurring
3 when you took over as Archbishop?
4 A. Yes, right.
5 Q. If you knew that was occurring, why didn't you
6 ascertain what the policy of the Archdiocese was with
7 respect to accommodating these supply ministries from
the
8 Servants of the Paraclete?
9 A. Well, it wasn't a policy of the Archdiocese
10 about receiving them. It seemed to be a practice of the
11 Servants of the Paraclete that they would have a man
who
12 they felt could serve as a supply priest, if asked by any
13 of the pastors who experienced a need. And so it was up
14 to the pastor to request that service of the Servants of
15 the Paraclete.
16 But there was no written policy on our part,
17 certainly not before the personnel board, relating to the
18 Servants of the Paraclete, because we had no
jurisdiction
19 over them.
20 Q. But you did have an interaction with them,
21 because the Archbishop had to grant faculties to serve in
22 a supply ministry?
23 A. The request was made of me, "Could we go ahead
24 and provide supply priests from time to time, if the
25 pastors ask?" This is when I was Archbishop. And,
"These
Page 739
1 are men who have completed programs, and we feel that
it
2 will be of assistance to them, and they can be of
3 assistance to the priests."
4 I must also clarify that after I took over as the
5 Archbishop, that practice was greatly reduced, because I
6 was hesitant -- I didn't know the Servants of the
7 Paraclete that well, and so I wasn't anxious to say yes in
8 every case. I had no reason to discriminate from one case
9 to the other, but it just didn't seem right that we should
10 become dependent upon the Servants of the Paraclete
for
11 the priests who were serving us.
12 Q. What efforts did you undertake after you became
13 Archbishop to ascertain what the Servants of the
Paraclete
14 were doing, so you could make decisions granting
faculties
15 to priests who wanted to perform a supply ministry?
16 A. The effort was simply a phone call to me by
17 whomever the director of the program would be to
request
18 whether it would be possible to continue the same
practice
19 as Archbishop Davis had of men being able to supply
from
20 time to time in parishes.
21 No written policy was shown me, nor did I request a
22 written policy. I trusted that the Servants of the
23 Paraclete, and I think with good reason, that they
24 understood priesthood, they understood parish ministry
and
25 would recommend only a man whom they felt they
could have
Page 740
1 confidence in to assist at any given time.
2 Q. So you made no investigation to determine what
3 the prior policy or practice of the Archdiocese of
4 Santa Fe had been in that regard?
5 A. That's right, sir. I made no investigation.
6 Q. When responding to a request from the Servants
7 of the Paraclete to place a priest in a supply ministry in
8 your Archdiocese, did you think it was important to know
9 what type of program that priest was involved in at the
10 Servants of the Paraclete?
11 MS. BURTRAM: Objection, assumes facts not
12 in evidence.
13 A. I did not inquire from them as to what type of
14 program. My inquiry would have been -- I have no
specific
15 recollection of an individual case, but my inquiry would
16 have been, "Are these men responsible? And will they
be
17 able to serve effectively as you're recommending them
to
18 do?"
19 And even prior to asking, I am sure the guarantee
20 or -- not a guarantee, but an assurance would be offered
21 to me that, yes, they felt that these men, or this man, in
22 whatever case it was, would be able to serve effectively.
23 Q. Do you think it would be a prudent practice to
24 determine what kind of a program that particular priest
25 was in before authorizing a supply ministry?
Page 741
1 MS. BURTRAM: Excuse me, I'm going to
2 object, because you're talking about what kind of
program.
3 I think it's been established on the record, or in the
4 evidence in this case, that the Servants of the Paraclete
5 offered spiritual rehabilitation for priests. So in that
6 sense, the Archbishop or anybody would have known the
7 program was spiritual rehabilitation.
8 A. I did not ask them to inquire from any
9 psychiatrist or psychologist what treatment had been
given
10 to an individual priest. That simply was not my place to
11 ask. My only question to any of the superiors was --
12 because normally they would ask permission to do this
13 whenever the requests came. They weren't asking for a
14 specific individual at a given moment, and they wanted
--
15 if I would allow that to take place, and I told them that
16 I was more inclined to allow our own priests to cover
one
17 for another, rather than always to depend upon Jemez
18 Springs for coverage.
19 Most especially was I this way in reference to any
20 priest whom they may want to place in a parish for a
21 greater length of time, and I would reply negatively.
22 Q. In every case?
23 A. No. I can't say that I did so in every case. I
24 think at the beginning I was a little bit more agreeable,
25 you might say, and allowed -- I don't know, a couple,
Page 742
1 maybe. But then I felt that we really needed to take care
2 of our own needs, and we should not be a center for
3 priests to be coming and going, and so I told the director
4 of the program that I would not be agreeable to those
5 requests for the future.
6 Q. At what point in time did you advise Servants of
7 that?
8 A. I would imagine around maybe 1980, that areA.
9 Q. So from 1974 to 1980, you would accept priests
10 from the Servants of the Paraclete to serve on supply
11 ministries in the Archdiocese?
12 A. That was available, but to my recollection, it
13 did not happen on a frequent basis, not frequent at all,
14 but it did happen, yes.
15 Q. And when it happened, did it happen case by
16 case, or did you apply any consistent policy with respect
17 to evaluating whether or not you should grant those
18 faculties?
19 A. I'm not certain what policy you're referring to.
20 We had no policy about when we would grant them
faculties.
21 I simply put the responsibility upon those men at Jemez
22 Springs, the Servants of the Paraclete, that they --
23 anyone that they would allow to serve as supply priests
in
24 a parish to celebrate even a weekday Mass, say, that
they
25 were men that could be relied upon.
Page 743
1 And so that was -- I had to put the responsibility
2 upon them, since I knew nothing of these men, nor could
I
3 really take the time to find out, whenever these requests
4 came, who this person was, what's the background, etc.,
5 etc. I had to rely upon the Servants of the Paraclete for
6 that information.
7 Q. Why couldn't you take the time to do that?
8 MS. BURTRAM: I'm sorry, Mr. Bennett, I
9 didn't hear your question.
10 Q. Why couldn't you take the time to do that?
11 A. Because I felt I had trust in a program of the
12 Servants of the Paraclete.
13 Q. But you didn't know anything about the program.
14 A. The Servants of the Paraclete were a religious
15 community, in my mind, who were dedicated the
spiritual
16 rehabilitation of the priests who had come to them for
17 this purpose. In some instances, it appeared that they
18 had alcoholic problems. I asked of the Servants of the
19 Paraclete an assurance from them that if they were
going
20 to allow any priest to go out as a supply person, that
21 they be ready for that.
22 And I have to add that I had not -- did not receive
23 any complaints from any of my pastors regarding the
24 priests.
25 MS. BURTRAM: Mr. Bennett, excuse me. I
Page 744
1 apologize, but I just reviewed the gag order that has been
2 entered in these cases, and I feel like I'd like to raise
3 an objection, because I'm not really sure, two exhibits,
4 13 and 14, which -- well, I think the gag order covers
5 those exhibits.
6 MR. BENNETT: Doesn't cover me. I haven't
7 been gagged.
8 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Yes, you have, as far as
9 the deposition is concerned.
10 MR. TINKLER: Only in talking about this
11 deposition.
12 MS. BURTRAM: Well, I don't know. I want
13 to put the objection on the --
14 MR. BENNETT: I haven't seen the gag order.
15 MS. BURTRAM: I understand. I would like
16 to, in reviewing this gag order --
17 MR. BENNETT: Can we use another word
18 besides "gag"?
19 MS. KENNEDY: The Court's April '93 order.
20 MR. BENNETT: Thank you, the Court's April
21 '93 order, which does cover everybody else in this room.
22 And it appears to me that one interpretation could be the
23 exhibits to the other deposition. I just want my
24 objection to stand for the record for Exhibits 13 and 14.
25 MR. BLAKE: It seems to me that it's rather
Page 745
1 academic, given the fact that the deposition has been
2 sealed by the Court anyway.
3 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: To the extent that
4 whatever was in the previous order, Judge Ashby ruled --
5 and it's Exhibit 1 to this deposition, paragraph 4, "All
6 provisions of the previous order regarding dissemination
7 of information obtained in discovery will remain in effect
8 and pertain to this deposition."
9 MS. BURTRAM: Thank you, Mr. Winterbottom.
10 So I think it is by at least reference.
11 MR. TINKLER: I think it's binding on us in
12 this deposition, which is why it's all protected. No one
13 is going to see these exhibits, other than by Court order.
14 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Tinkler, or Mr.
15 Bennett, I forget who, suggested that Judge Ashby's
order
16 only provide -- prohibited verbal or oral communications
17 with regard to substance of this deposition. I read it
18 much differently, and I hope you do, too.
19 MR. TINKLER: I wasn't limiting it. I know
20 we cannot disseminate any information of this
deposition,
21 and that's why I don't think there's any problem
attaching
22 exhibits from another deposition, because they're all
23 sealed.
24 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: My concerns are slightly
25 different.
Page 746
1 MS. BURTRAM: There may not be.
2 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) Archbishop, is it your desire
3 to keep the location of this deposition a secret, or does
4 that come from some other source?
5 A. No, I wanted to keep it from being a public
6 show, because I felt if news media were present with all,
7 that it becomes a distraction for the type of questions
8 that would be asked. And I thought, also, that it should
9 be protective of people whose references may be alluded
to
10 in the deposition.
11 So I thought it would be good to keep it in a
12 situation, a place, where everyone would feel free and
13 open to be able to answer the questions and ask the
14 questions that are before us.
15 Q. And is it you who wanted to keep your physical
16 location a secret, as well?
17 A. Yes. I think I discussed this with my
18 chancellor, and together we decided that it would be
best,
19 because of the attention the media would want to place
on
20 myself. It would be difficult to avoid public interviews,
21 etc., which would certainly distract from what we're
22 trying to do here.
23 Q. When you --
24 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Bennett, to the
25 extent that it's important, your question said, "It was
Page 747
1 you." There are other people besides the Archbishop who
2 had desires in this respect, too.
3 Q. What was your relationship with Ron Wolf when
4 you were Archbishop?
5 A. Ron Wolf served, during my tenure as Archbishop,
6 in several capacities. When he was first ordained, he
7 served as an associate pastor in Albuquerque. After that,
8 after a year, I believe, he was then appointed by myself
9 to be pastor in northeastern New Mexico, where I had
been
10 at one time, in the small communities of Roy and
Mosquero.
11 After he had served there approximately four years, I
12 asked him to attend the Catholic University in
Washington,
13 D.C., to do graduate studies in canon law. He had had
14 extensive administrative experience in his own personal
15 life, especially in the educational field, and I felt that
16 he would be an asset to the Archdiocese by getting a
17 degree in canon law and assisting in administrative
18 affairs.
19 Upon completion of his degree, after a two-year
20 period of study, he returned then to Albuquerque to the
21 Archdiocese, and I appointed him to work in our
marriage
22 tribunal, which position requires a man who has at least
a
23 Master's degree in canon law.
24 So he worked in that position, let's say, either for
25 a year or for several months of a year. And finally, the
Page 748
1 chancellor who had served me at that time, Father
Richard
2 Olona, asked if he could be given permission to return to
3 parish ministry, since he had been away from parish
4 ministry for about 10 years, and I then spoke with Father
5 Ron Wolf, if he would be willing to accept the position of
6 chancellor in the event that I would accept the
7 resignation of Father Olona, and he agreed. So the
8 resignation of the former chancellor was accepted, and
9 Father Ron Wolf was appointed chancellor.
10 Q. And what is your relationship with him now?
11 A. Father Ron Wolf remains the chancellor of the
12 Archdiocese of Santa Fe, and he receives mail -- a good
13 deal of mail still goes to the office there, and he
14 handles that for me.
15-17 (DELETED)
Page 749
1-17 (DELETED)
18 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) Well, my question is: Your
19 location is a secret, the location of this deposition is a
20 secret. My question to you is: Did you instruct Father
21 Wolf, in his capacity as a chancellor, to keep it a
22 secret?
23 A. Yes.
24-25 (DELETED)
Page 752
1
2 MR. BENNETT: Okay, fine. Then the second
3 point I want to raise with you, Mr. Winterbottom, is it's
4 obvious that we cannot cover over 20 years of information
5 in an equal number of hours or even close to it, and I am
6 nowhere near finishing with the deposition of Archbishop
7 Sanchez. As far as I'm concerned, every question is
8 important, and it is likely to read to the discoverability
9 of admissible evidence.
10 There are many questions I need to ask the
11 Archbishop to protect and preserve the rights of my
12 clients. We have the right to do this. We're entitled to
13 do this. The Archbishop is very gracious, and I know he
14 will graciously consent to a mutually convenient time at
15 which we can resume the deposition and complete it in
an
16 expeditious fashion.
17 There have been delays in this deposition that
18 have been caused not through the fault of myself or
other
19 counsel, as I'm sure you're well aware, and we just need
20 more time to make sure we make a full inquiry. We're
21 entitled to do that.
22 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Bennett, I suspect --
23 MR. BENNETT: So I have not posed any
24 questions this afternoon to try to give my best first or
25 order them in any fashion to accommodate you or to
Page 753
1 accommodate anybody else. I'm here to accommodate
and
2 preserve the rights of my client. Thank you, Archbishop.
3 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Mr. Bennett.
4 Thank you.
5 MR. GOFFE: The time is 5:03. We are off
6 the record. This is the end of tape 11 in the deposition
7 of Archbishop Sanchez.
8 [The record was concluded at 5:03 PM]
9
Page 754
1 -10, Page 759 (DELETED-repeat of legal information)
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION OF DEPOSITION
11
I, Jenifer L. Russin, CCR #182, DO HEREBY
12 CERTIFY that on January 12-15, 1994, the deposition of
ROBERT F. SANCHEZ was taken before me at the request
of,
13 and sealed original thereof retained by:
14 BRUCE PASTERNACK
Attorney for Plaintiffs
15 700 Lomas, NE, Suite 100
Albuquerque, NM 87102
16
I FURTHER CERTIFY that copies of this
17 certificate have been mailed or delivered to the
following
Counsel and parties not represented by counsel appearing
18 at the taking of the deposition:
19 Richard Winterbottom Stephen E. Tinkler
Attorney for Witness Attorney for Plaintiffs
20 718 Central, SW 425 Sandoval
Albuquerque, NM 87102 Santa Fe, NM 87501
21
Karen Kennedy Paul Bardacke
22 Attorney for Archdiocese Attorney for Archdiocese
of Santa Fe of Santa Fe
23 6400 Uptown, NE 6400 Uptown, NE
Albuquerque, NM 87110 Albuquerque, NM 87110
Page 760
1 Luis Stelzner Arthur O. Beach
Attorney for Archdiocese Attorney for Archdiocese
2 of Santa Fe of Santa Fe
707 Broadway, NE 414 Silver, SW
3 Albuquerque, NM 87102 Albuquerque, NM 87102
4 Robert Reese Alan Konrad
Attorney for Plaintiffs Attorney for Paracletes
5 P. O. Box 1060 500 Marquette, NW
Green River, WY Albuquerque, NM 87102
6
Merit Bennett
7 Attorney for Plaintiffs
425 Sandoval
8 Santa Fe, NM 87501
9
I FURTHER CERTIFY that examination of this
10 transcript and signature of the witness was required by
the witness and all parties present.
11
I FURTHER CERTIFY that the recoverable cost of
12 the deposition to Bruce Pasternack is $_____________.
13 I FURTHER CERTIFY that I did administer the oath
to the witness herein prior to the taking of this
14 deposition; that I did thereafter report in stenographic
shorthand the questions and answers set forth herein, and
15 the foregoing is a true and correct transcript of the
proceeding had upon the taking of this deposition to the
16 best of my ability.
17 I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither employed by
nor related to any of the parties or attorneys in this
18 case, and that I have no interest whatsoever in the final
disposition of this case in any court.
_______________________________
21 Jenifer L. Russin, RPR-CM
Certified Court Reporter #182
22 License Expires: 12/31/94
Page 761

Previous: Sanchez Deposition Part 4B