Peter Kramer

Printable PDF version here

A Case Study of Sexual Abuse
page 1 2 3

 

 

Placing Blame

 

Müller repeatedly refused to take any responsibility. “The culprit bears the responsibility for the offense. I am not responsible for everything that out clerics and coworkers do,”38“Die Veranwortung für eine Straftat trägt der Täter. Ich bin nicht verantwortlich für alles, was unsere Geistlichen und Mitarbeiter tun” (“Regensburger Bischof wascht seine Hande in Unschuld,” Der Spiegel, September 21, 2007). he said. Though he expressed sympathy for the victims, Müller maintained that he did not make a mistake, and in fact did what Jesus would have done: “If Jesus forgave even the worst sinners, how could one deny the pastor a second chance?”39“Wenn Jesus auch den schlimmsten Sündern verziehen hat, wir konnte man dem Pfarrer da eine zweite Chance versagen” (“Regensburger Bischof wascht seine Hande in Unschuld,” Der Spiegel, September 21, 2007). Müller, like many American bishops, confused forgiveness with restoration to a position of trust.

 

Müller did not like being criticized, and also said, “We will not let us be slandered and if that doesn’t stop, we will also take a legal action.”40“Wir lassen uns nicht verleumden und wenn das nich aufhört, werden wir rechtlich dagegen vorgehen.” (Karl Birkensee, “Bischof sieht sich als Ziel einer Kampagne,” Passauer Neue Presse, September 10, 2007). (Müller previously asked Catholics not to take intra-Church disputes into the secular courts.41“Er vor nicht allzu langer Zeit selbst ein Dekret erlassen hatte, in dem er den Katholiken seines Bistums untersagte, bei kircheninternen Streitigkeiten weltliche Gerichte anzurufen” (Rudolf Neumaier, “Pädophiler Pffarer – ein Geheimnis des Ordinariats,” Süddeutsche Zeitung, September 11, 2007). ) He maintained that he could not control his priests: “I have the spiritual authority, but I cannot control everyone,”42“Ich habe die geistliche Autorität, aber kann nicht alles kontrollieren” (Birgit Fürst, “Riekhofen? Wo liegt das?” Deutsche Radio, October 15, 2007). he said. A parishioner of Riekhofen, however, familiar with the way Müller treated those who disagreed with him, said, “We have seen in past years that Müller can control things.”43Christopher Wenzel, “Sexueller Missbrauch: Regensburger Bischof in Kreuzfeuer,” Die Welt, September 15, 2007.

 

Müller insisted that he “had not made a mistake. Müller ruled out any apology for the appointment of the pedophile-priest without the knowledge of the faithful in Riekhofen.”44“Der Regensburger Bischof Gerhard Ludwig Müller hat mehrfach erklärt, dass die Bistumsleitung keinen Fehler gemacht habe. Eine Entschuldigung dafür, dass der pädophile Priester ohne Wissen der Gläubingen in Riekhofen eingesetzt wird, lehnt Müller ab” (“Bistum Regensburg widerspricht: Richterin warnte nicht vor Pfarrer-Einsatz,” Mittelbayerische Zeitung, October 1, 2007). Though the German bishops’ guidelines said that no convicted abuser would work with children, Müller maintained his actions did not violate the guidelines because the convicted abuser had been pronounced healed by his therapist. The guidelines, the diocese said, did not absolve the diocese from making its own decisions–which it would continue to do.45Muller maintained that “the guidelines did not absolve the diocese from the responsibility of making its own decisions. They would rely in the future on reports in assessing dangers,” “Die Leitlinien würden die Diözesan nicht von der Verantwortung entbinden, eigene Entscheidigung zu treffen. Bei der Beurteilung von Gefährdungen werde man auch in Zukunft auf Gutachten verlassen müssen” (Karl Birkenseer, “Bischof sieht sich als Ziel einer Kampagne,” Passauer Neue Presse, September 9, 2007). Müller claimed that he was the victim of a campaign to discredit him, and that he did not need “any lectures from people who have nothing at all to do with pastoral care.”46“Belehrungen von Leuten, die in der Pastorale gar nichts zu tun haben” (“Bischof Müller: Brauche keine Belehrungen,” Bayerische Rundfunk, October 26, 2007).

 

The bishop of Fulda, Heinz Joseph Algermissen, said that an offender can be given a second chance, but with such an offense, the new beginning must be somewhere there are no children.47Martin Gehlen, “Bischöfe diskutieren Missbrauchsfall,” Tagespeigel, September 24, 2007. Bishop Müller countered, “There is no space free of children and youth. Even in a home for the elderly, children visit their grandmother, and in a prison, one can encounter the children of the employees.” 48“Es gibt keine kinder- und jugendfreie Räume. Auch in Altersheim besuchen die Enkel ihre Oma und in Gefängnis kann man den Kindern der Angestellten begegnen,” (Missbrauchsfall überschattet Bischofskonferenz,” netzeitung.de, September 24, 2007).At a conference of the German bishops in Fulda, the bishops emphasized the “binding character”49Daniel Deckers, “Ein grausames Experiment,” Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, October 1, 2007. (Verbindlichkeit) of the guidelines. Cardinal Lehmann insisted that when someone is “guilty, in no way can he be employed in the normal care of souls.”50“Wenn jemand ‘schuldig geworden ist, darf er auf gar keinen Fall in der normalen Seelsorge beschäftigt werden’” (Christian Gressner, “Missbrauch durch Pfarrer: Hohe Kirchenpolitik und tiefer Schmerz,” Der Stern, September 28, 2007). But Lehmann “ruled out an intervention of the bishops’ conference in the current case. The bishop’s conference in this situation has no legal authority.”51“Ein Eingreifen der Bischofskonferenz in den aktuellen Fall lehnte Lehmann aber ab. Die Bischofskonferenz habe hierzu keine rechtliche Befugnis” (“Bischöfe: Fall in Riekofen hat Vertrauen zerstört,” Bayerische Rundfunk, September 28, 2007).

 

 

The Aftermath

 

In Bavaria, all political parties condemned the diocese’s conduct. Kramer was employed by the state to teach religion in the school at Schönach, where he recruited his altar servers. The church did not inform the school of his conviction.52“Kirchen sollen Staat über Vorstrafen informieren,” Die Welt, November 29, 2007.

 

Today, police continue their questioning of children in the village to find out whether there are more victims. Kramer was initially in police custody and on suicide watch.53“Jörg Klotzek, “Missbrauchsfälle: Pfarrer K. sitzt und schweigt,” Passauer Neue Presse, October 22, 2007. He was then transferred to a psychiatric institution. On March 13, 2008 he was tried on charges that between the beginning of August 2004 and August 2006 he abused a boy (who was about ten or eleven when the abuse began) twenty-two times. Kramer pleaded guilty so that, he explained, his victim would not have to face the trauma of testifying about the abuse in open court. The maximum sentence was fifteen years in prison. The judge sentenced Kramer to three years in prison and to a closed psychiatric facility following the prison term, because Kramer, experts testified, had diminished responsibility.

 

The diocese had not told the complete truth in September 2007, to say the least. Diocesan officials claimed that they thought that Kramer as only helping out by saying mass in Riekofen, and this was with the permission of his therapist (overlooking the fact that interacting with the children who served mass was in violation of Kramer’s probation). But Kramer’s diocesan personnel file contained newspaper clippings about his activities with children of the parish, including his overnight trips with them.54“Er [Kramer] unternahm zahlreiche Ministratenausflüge…. In der Pfarrgemeinde wurde darüber Buch geführt, später fand die Polizei über die Minstratenreisen etwa nach Rom, München und an die Nordsee, Zeitungsausschnitte in der Personalakte, die das Ordinariat über K[ramer] führte” (Rolf Thym and Rudolf Neumaier, “Ein Priester als Gefahr für die Allgemeinheit” Süddeutsche Zeitung, March 13, 2008). The diocese’s claim that it did not know that Kramer was interacting with children during his probation was belied by the diocese’s own file. The judge was not happy, and pointed out that putting Kramer in the parish was “as if a bank hired as a cashier a man who had been previously punished for dishonesty.”55Christian Gressner, “Drei Jahre Haft und Psychiatrie für Pfarrer,” Der Stern, March 14, 2008. The diocese led Kramer into temptation.

 

Dr. Ottermann during the trial severely criticized the therapist who pronounced Kramer cured. Ottermann in his original report had come up with the correct diagnosis, that Kramer suffered from “Kernpädophilie.” Kramer’s therapist did not ask to see this report, and instead decided that Kramer had regressed once and was in no danger of regressing again. Having made a false diagnosis, the therapist was going in the wrong direction with his therapy (which was only two hours a month). “When someone has a headache, I can’t treat him for athlete’s foot,” was Ottermann’s analogy.56Christian Gressner, “Drei Jahre Haft und Psychiatrie für Pfarrer,” Der Stern, March 14, 2008.

 

The father of the boys whom Kramer abused in Viechtach is divorced and wanders the Way of St. James in Spain, railing about the priest who abused his sons. No one takes him seriously.57“Jörg Klotzek, “Kaplan missbraucht Buben – and wird Pfarrer,” Passauer Neue Presse, July 26, 2007. Joanna Treimer has raised three children alone. One son, now twenty-one, has difficulties with relationships.

 

The abused boy in Riekofen stays home from shame and suffers sleep disorders. The family is hesitant to pursue a lawsuit against the diocese, because the boy would have to testify and would be retraumatised. The boy, his family, and the parish are waiting for an apology from Bishop Müller. None has been forthcoming.

 

Müller still refuses to listen to criticism, because “the only superior of a bishop is the pope,” and “from that quarter I have heard no criticism.”58“…denn der einzige Vorgesetzte eines Bischofs sei der Pabst. ‘Und von dieser Seite habe ich noch keine Kritik gehört’” (“Bischof Müller: Brauche keine Belehrungen,” Bayerische Rundfunk, October 26, 2007). In December 2007, Pope Benedict XVI sent Bishop Müller congratulations on his sixtieth birthday, having just appointed him to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith59“Pabst Benedict lobt Bischof Gerhard Ludwig Müller,” kath.net, December 29, 2007. which, among other duties, oversees the trials of clerics accused of sexual abuse.

 

Negligence

 

The case is important because it occurred after German bishops read the news from the United States and saw what happened when bishops reassigned abusers who were diagnosed as “cured.”

 

Negligence is clear on all sides, among officials of both the church and the state:

 

The judge in the trial failed:

 

  • The sentence was light.
  • She should have sent to the diocese the 50-page report in which Kramer was diagnosed as a pedophile, instead of giving the diocese a general verbal report.
  • She should have appointed a probation officer to monitor Kramer. She would then have discovered that Kramer was violating his conditions of probation by serving in a parish and working with children.
  • She should have noticed the disparity between the diagnosis of pedophilia in the 1999 report and the diagnosis of a one-time regressive behavior in the 2003 report, and sought further opinions.
  • In 2004, she should have followed up her telephone conversation with a written report stating she thought that Kramer could work in a parish only if he was supervised and did not work with children, if in fact that is what she said. Although not legally binding, it would have carried weight because she saw both the 1999 report and the 2003 report.

 

The therapist failed:

 

  • He was taken in by a con man.
  • He did not request the report and diagnosis that Dr. Ottermann had done for the court.
  • He was aware that Kramer was working in a parish with children, contrary to the conditions of probation.
  • He should have been aware of the dangers of developing a relationship with a patient and of hoping that the therapy was working.
  • He should have suggested an independent evaluation by a psychotherapist who had worked with abusers.

 

Bishop Manfred Müller, Bishop Gerhard Müller, and the diocesan officials
all failed:

 

  • Bishop Manfred Müller should not have let Kramer work with children in the parish of Riekhofen, because this violated his conditions of probation.
  • Bishop Gerhard Müller should have followed the 2002 guidelines of the German bishops and not appointed a convicted abuser to a position working with children.
  • If he chose not to follow the guidelines, Müller should have announced that decision to the diocese, so that everyone would be aware there might be convicted abusers in parishes.
  • He let Kramer work in this parish even before it received the report from his therapist.
  • The diocese should have informed the deans who supervised the parish of Riekhofen about Kramer’s conviction and trained them about how to spot danger signs.
  • The diocese should have let a responsible person in Riekhofen, such as the mayor, know about Kramer, and trained him on how to spot danger signs.
  • The diocese should have asked the judge to convey in writing the opinions she expressed in the 2004 telephone conversation.
  • The diocese should have asked for a second opinion about Kramer from someone who was independent and an expert in pedophilia.
  • Diocesan officials should read their files and tell the truth about what is in them, before the police seize the files. Cover-ups rarely work, and, as St. Augustine said, God does not need our lies.
  • Having made a disastrous decision with catastrophic consequences, Bishop Müller should have learned that the infallibility of the Church does not extend to the administrative decisions of bishops. He should have solicited advice from as many people as possible, including those with whom he disagreed. Humility is a virtue, even in bishops.
  • For Müller to make such a fuss about his suffering under a “Diffamierungskampagne” is unbecoming. Müller is the victim of his own errors and carelessness. Somehow in Müller’s mind the chief point is how much he is suffering by being criticized. However, the boys, their families, and the parishes must suffer the long-term consequences of sexual abuse. The consequences are always painful, and are sometimes death through suicide.

 

Pope Benedict failed:

 

  • Müller’s failure did not hurt his standing with the pope. Benedict appointed him to a position of great trust at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Benedict should at least have reprimanded him publicly as a warning to other bishops not to take chances with children’s souls. But Benedict has been silent. If anyone should know, a German should know the truth of the maxim that was on a protestor’s placard outside of the courtroom where Kramer was on trial: “Auch wer wegschaut macht sich schuldig,” – “The one who looks away makes himself guilty.”

 

Footnotes

_____________________

38 “Die Veranwortung für eine Straftat trägt der Täter. Ich bin nicht verantwortlich für alles, was unsere Geistlichen und Mitarbeiter tun” (“Regensburger Bischof wascht seine Hande in Unschuld,” Der Spiegel, September 21, 2007).
39 “Wenn Jesus auch den schlimmsten Sündern verziehen hat, wir konnte man dem Pfarrer da eine zweite Chance versagen” (“Regensburger Bischof wascht seine Hande in Unschuld,” Der Spiegel, September 21, 2007).
40 “Wir lassen uns nicht verleumden und wenn das nich aufhört, werden wir rechtlich dagegen vorgehen.” (Karl Birkensee, “Bischof sieht sich als Ziel einer Kampagne,” Passauer Neue Presse, September 10, 2007).
41 “Er vor nicht allzu langer Zeit selbst ein Dekret erlassen hatte, in dem er den Katholiken seines Bistums untersagte, bei kircheninternen Streitigkeiten weltliche Gerichte anzurufen” (Rudolf Neumaier, “Pädophiler Pffarer – ein Geheimnis des Ordinariats,” Süddeutsche Zeitung, September 11, 2007).
42 “Ich habe die geistliche Autorität, aber kann nicht alles kontrollieren” (Birgit Fürst, “Riekhofen? Wo liegt das?” Deutsche Radio, October 15, 2007).
43 Christopher Wenzel, “Sexueller Missbrauch: Regensburger Bischof in Kreuzfeuer,” Die Welt, September 15, 2007.

44 “Der Regensburger Bischof Gerhard Ludwig Müller hat mehrfach erklärt, dass die Bistumsleitung keinen Fehler gemacht habe. Eine Entschuldigung dafür, dass der pädophile Priester ohne Wissen der Gläubingen in Riekhofen eingesetzt wird, lehnt Müller ab” (“Bistum Regensburg widerspricht: Richterin warnte nicht vor Pfarrer-Einsatz,” Mittelbayerische Zeitung, October 1, 2007).
45 Muller maintained that “the guidelines did not absolve the diocese from the responsibility of making its own decisions. They would rely in the future on reports in assessing dangers,” “Die Leitlinien würden die Diözesan nicht von der Verantwortung entbinden, eigene Entscheidigung zu treffen. Bei der Beurteilung von Gefährdungen werde man auch in Zukunft auf Gutachten verlassen müssen” (Karl Birkenseer, “Bischof sieht sich als Ziel einer Kampagne,” Passauer Neue Presse, September 9, 2007).
46 “Belehrungen von Leuten, die in der Pastorale gar nichts zu tun haben” (“Bischof Müller: Brauche keine Belehrungen,” Bayerische Rundfunk, October 26, 2007).
47 Martin Gehlen, “Bischöfe diskutieren Missbrauchsfall,” Tagespeigel, September 24, 2007.

48 “Es gibt keine kinder- und jugendfreie Räume. Auch in Altersheim besuchen die Enkel ihre Oma und in Gefängnis kann man den Kindern der Angestellten begegnen,” (Missbrauchsfall überschattet Bischofskonferenz,” netzeitung.de, September 24, 2007).
49 Daniel Deckers, “Ein grausames Experiment,” Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, October 1, 2007.
50 “Wenn jemand ‘schuldig geworden ist, darf er auf gar keinen Fall in der normalen Seelsorge beschäftigt werden’” (Christian Gressner, “Missbrauch durch Pfarrer: Hohe Kirchenpolitik und tiefer Schmerz,” Der Stern, September 28, 2007).

51 “Ein Eingreifen der Bischofskonferenz in den aktuellen Fall lehnte Lehmann aber ab. Die Bischofskonferenz habe hierzu keine rechtliche Befugnis” (“Bischöfe: Fall in Riekofen hat Vertrauen zerstört,” Bayerische Rundfunk, September 28, 2007).
52 “Kirchen sollen Staat über Vorstrafen informieren,” Die Welt, November 29, 2007.

53 Jörg Klotzek, “Missbrauchsfälle: Pfarrer K. sitzt und schweigt,” Passauer Neue Presse, October 22, 2007.
54“Er [Kramer] unternahm zahlreiche Ministratenausflüge…. In der Pfarrgemeinde wurde darüber Buch geführt, später fand die Polizei über die Minstratenreisen etwa nach Rom, München und an die Nordsee, Zeitungsausschnitte in der Personalakte, die das Ordinariat über K[ramer] führte” (Rolf Thym and Rudolf Neumaier, “Ein Priester als Gefahr für die Allgemeinheit” Süddeutsche Zeitung, March 13, 2008).
55 Christian Gressner, “Drei Jahre Haft und Psychiatrie für Pfarrer,” Der Stern, March 14, 2008.
56 Christian Gressner, “Drei Jahre Haft und Psychiatrie für Pfarrer,” Der Stern, March 14, 2008.
57 “Jörg Klotzek, “Kaplan missbraucht Buben – and wird Pfarrer,” Passauer Neue Presse, July 26, 2007.

58 “…denn der einzige Vorgesetzte eines Bischofs sei der Pabst. ‘Und von dieser Seite habe ich noch keine Kritik gehört’” (“Bischof Müller: Brauche keine Belehrungen,” Bayerische Rundfunk, October 26, 2007).

59 “Pabst Benedict lobt Bischof Gerhard Ludwig Müller,” kath.net, December 29, 2007.

 

 

Learn more about the Crossland Foundation and what it is doing at www.crosslandfoundation.org