Priests Added to List of Alleged Abusers


Click here to read: “Diocese: Three priests added to list of alleged abusers,” by Brandie Kessler, York Daily Record, August 29, 2016

Excerpt:

Add three priests accused of child sexual abuse to the list of those with ties to the Harrisburg diocese.

The diocese confirmed Friday three names identified by the York Daily Record/Sunday News, which has been investigating the scope of abuse in the diocese.

Advertisements

11 Responses to “Priests Added to List of Alleged Abusers”

  1. I am humbly grateful to these brave victims for putting this out there and increasing the transparency in our church. To all victims of clergy sexual abuse, I say this: KEEP YOUR VOICES STRONG! You are not alone. You are loved and supported and admired by your fellow catholics that want our church back. Keep naming those names. Even if you think they are dead. Say what happened. The truth will heal us all

  2. Susan Blum’s video is moving. What do the enabling, abuser-supporters think when they hear something like this? Does anything move them, besides supporting the status quo?

  3. The YDR also ran an excellent letter from the editor in response to opinion piece from the bishop of Harrisburg. The bishops supposed heartache for victims doesn’t cut it when the money from Sunday collection baskets on his watch went to lobbying against giving victims a voice to trash HB1947. You can find these opinion pieces if you do a search on “sexual abuse” on the YDR.com website where you will find Brandie’s excellent piece

  4. Not wanting to seem flippant, but I wonder if any of those priests have been falsely accused?

  5. Mark – If you had any idea at all the ordeal it is to make an accusation!
    And what would be the benefit of a false accusation? The research on this has proven that the possibility is almost zero.
    The alleged victim would be found out very quickly. No priest that wasn’t guilty would have a reason to put a gone in their mouth. The church is on their side and does everything they can to protect them. They are innocent until there is enough evidence provided. Then the church and attorneys start the process of scrutinizing the details. They look for anything that might make the accusation questionable. Then they do a thorough invasive history of every detail of the victims life questioning THEIR reliability. It is a horrific process for the victim, but for me was necessary to validate the experience of other victims. When I thought the scrutiny might not be worth it I remembered that THEY HAD TO KNOW. The truth had to be told to support his other victims. I suffered for 45 years before speaking about it to anyone and couldn’t even tell my husband. It is when people realize they weren’t the only one so it wasn’t their fault that they get the courage to speak and begin the process of trying to heal

  6. From the article: Koychick — The diocese said “credible allegations” against Koychick were made to the diocese in August 2003 about abuse that occurred in the 1970s, diocese spokesman Joseph Aponick said. Koychick had been stationed at St. Joseph’s in York from June 1953 to June 1957 and at St. Patrick’s in York from November 1967 to June 1981, Aponick said in an email. “Already being retired, and out of ministry, [Koychick] was formally forbidden to function in any capacity as a priest and law enforcement authorities were notified,” Aponick said. Koychick could not be reached for comment.

    A quick Google search and It seems that Koychick donated money to a Diocesan high school in 2010 and is listed as Fr George Koychick…unless there are two Fr George Koychicks in the Harrrisburg Diocese???
    What does the explanation of retired and out of ministry mean? There are many priests who are retired and not in active ministry but perform weddings,baptism etc at people’s request. How did the general public know, or not know, of Koychick’s faculties being restricted? Then his name turns up in 2010 in the donations to a Diocesan high school and no laity would be the wiser …former parishioners might even have him over for dinner, having no clue..with their children present. How would fellow priests know to not allow him at their parishes to perform a sacrament for a friend or family member?

    • donna r hornock Reply May 19, 2017 at 5:42 pm

      Father George passed way this past week, So; don’t worry about it. My husband and I knew Fr. George for over 30 years and know he was incapable of such deeds. Some priests are pedophiles, but he was a man of God, not of wonton desires. We stayed in his home for many years (to visit him for several days, and know him well.

      • I’m sorry for your loss. The worry remains for a broken system of oversight. While Father George has passed away the diocese deemed the allegations to be credible while he was alive. How many other former priests with credible allegations are out there. Too many. Society has good reason to be worried. In regard to your friend specifically, I know many wives who would claim the same of their husbands. We don’t always see every part of those we love.

  7. https://www.bishopmcdevitt.org/wp-content/twintowers/1011%20annual%20report.pdf
    Page 16 under 1940 Pacesetter Club.
    Why is he allowed to present his name as a priest in a Diocesan High school communication?

  8. My husband submitted an opinion piece to ydr.com. It was published in the Sunday paper yesterday. “How do Catholic Church officials sleep at night”. Below it was another opinion “YDR priest a use stories hurt the church”. People don’t get it. The church is taking itself down

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: