The Nation

Case casts cloud over Adelaide process

It began as one man’s mission to make peace with his past and reconcile with the bride he deserted but still loved.

Now the personal story of John Hepworth, the global primate of the Traditional Anglican Communion who says he abandoned the Catholic Church in the 1970s due to a decade of systemic sexual, psychological and spiritual abuse as a seminarian and priest in the archdiocese of Adelaide, has become a crucible for wider issues.

Archbishop Hepworth’s allegations of byzantine delays by the Archdiocese of Adelaide in acting on his complaints of sexual abuse, first raised in 2007, against two priests now dead and one still alive and running an Adelaide parish, have ignited a media firestorm.

Contradictory versions of events proffered by Archbishop Hepworth and the Archdiocese of Adelaide have put on the line the credibility of a leading figure in the most significant rapprochement of Protestants with the Catholic Church since the Reformation and the presiding head of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference.

The issue that will vex the archdiocese is not why it took four years to begin a formal investigation but its alacrity since the complaint was formalised in February, given the back history and the complainant’s role in the reunion of Anglicans to the Catholic communion.

On the periphery conspiratorial theories circulate. These involve the revelations’ timing, on the eve of the Australian bishops’ five-yearly “ad limina” trip to report to the Vatican; the breaking of the story by reporter Tess Livingstone (biographer of George Cardinal Pell); and the contrast of Adelaide’s response to that in the Melbourne archdiocese, where Archbishop Hepworth’s complaints against two dead Victorian priests were upheld.

Melbourne’s protocol to handle abuse complaints, established by the then Archbishop Pell, predates the 1996 adoption of national Towards Healing guidelines.

In a statement intepreted by some as implicit criticism of the Adelaide archdiocese’s response, Cardinal Pell said: “More information seems to be needed to explain further to the the public any unusual delays in acting on this complaint, and the decision not to stand aside the person who has been accused.”

Yet he also noted that: “Towards Healing procedures are genuine, adequate and work well.”

Differences between the so-called “Melbourne Response” and Towards Healing were about procedure, said the executive officer the Australian bishops’ National Committee for Professional Standards, Sr Angela Ryan CSB. Melbourne directed complaints to an independent commissioner, Peter O’Callaghan QC, who assessed their validity and then, if appropriate, referred them on to a compensation panel.

Under Towards Healing, a contact report was first prepared by the relevant Church authority. If an investigation was necessary, professional assessors were appointed.

The Adelaide archdiocese has adhered rigorously to the guidelines before proceeding to an assessment.

Section 37.3 of Towards Healing stipulates a complainant not wishing to go to the police must sign a statement before the Church takes any action. That statement notes that the Church has “strongly urged” the complainant to take the matter to the police or other civil authorities, and that it has been carefully explained that any Church process will not have the same power to investigate the matter as the courts. “Aware of these limitations, I still state that I do not wish to take my complaint to the police or other civil authority at this time and I ask that a Church process be established,” it concludes.

An Adelaide archdiocesan statement on September 11 said Archbishop Hepworth had decided only in February to formalise his complaint. Since then “the matter has progressed in an orderly way”.

In a follow-up statement, Archbishop Wilson said his vicar-general, Mgr David Cappo, had on multiple occasions since 2007 urged Archbishop Hepworth to give his permission to proceed with an investigation. “On each occasion Archbishop Hepworth declined, indicating that he was not in a proper emotional state to deal with an investigation. Sensitive as we must be to the needs of complainants, we adhered to his request.”

Archbishop Hepworth said he was offered a statement to sign conforming to Section 37.3 of the Towards Healing guidelines about 18 months ago, but in the context of Monsignor Cappo proposing a face-to-face meeting to confront the priest he accused of raping him. He refused to sign, he said, because he objected to that course of action.

He told The Record that about six weeks ago, when he informed the vicar-general of the results of his complaint to the Melbourne archdiocese, Monsignor Cappo told him Adelaide’s investigation was still at a “preliminary stage”.

Where the investigation is now remains unclear. A spokeswoman for the archdiocese confirmed the accused priest was informed in March of the complaint against him, which he had denied.

Under the Towards Healing guidelines, in cases where the facts of a complaint are disputed the diocese’s director of professional standards shall appoint one or two professional assessors “as soon as is practicable” to investigate.

In its September 11 statement, the Adelaide archdiocese said: “The investigation into the allegations is proceeding and is in its closing stages. Whilst evidence is still being gathered, prominent Adelaide barrister Michael Abbott QC has been retained to examine the evidence once it has been collated.”

In a statement three days later Archbishop Wilson said: “The process is well under way and we are currently waiting to speak with the priest accused, to obtain his detailed response to the allegations.”

He said the process was subject to Archbishop Hepworth supplying a list of people who might be able to assist in investigations. He would then have Mr Abbott “become involved in the process and assess all the evidence and documentation and give me his opinion in law”.

A spokeswoman for the Adelaide archdiocese was unable to elaborate on how archdiocesan statements squared with the process laid down in the Towards Healing guidelines, or how the archdiocese’s investigation could be “well under way” and “in its closing stages” when it did not yet appear to have reached the assessment stage. She said she would need to consult the archdiocese’s lawyers.

Share this post