"My Encounter with William Lynn" by Eileen McCafferty Di Franco

My one and only meeting with former Vicar for the Clergy William Lynn took place on March 25, 2001 in the home of a woman who had been sexually abused by Nicholas Cudemo, a man whom Lynn’s predecessor, James Molloy called, “One of the sickest people I ever knew.” Sick would have been just one of many adjectives our support group used to describe a man who had done unspeakable things to young girls with impunity for many years. Whether or not Lynn shared this assessment, one would assume that he was acquainted with the now public and very copious diocesan notes attesting to Cudemo’s sordid record before arriving at our meeting.

Lynn arrived at the meeting dressed in a green sweater sans Roman collar at the survivor’s request. A Pillsbury Doughboy sort of guy, he seemed both friendly and nervous, almost anxious to please. He gave us all a tense smile as one of our members recited the now public litany of Cudemo’s abuses to him. I recall beginning the meeting feeling sorry for him. That feeling didn’t last.

How, we asked, given the undisputable facts of Cudemo’s actions, could he remain in ministry, a priest in good standing? Lynn sadly and repeatedly nodded his head in seemingly empathetic understanding and agreement as if he felt the woman’s pain and shared the support group’s disbelief. Unfortunately, Lynn told our stunned group, Cudemo had “rights under canon law,” rights, which apparently superseded crimes against children that would make a decent human being shudder, crimes which were never reported to the police, because of that canon law. The nurses, doctors, and social workers in our support group would have lost their jobs and their professional licenses for failing to report crimes such as these to the police.

To add to our horror, the survivor told all of us, including Lynn, that Cudemo continued to preside at Mass at her local parish. Lynn’s face turned red in what seemed to be genuine anger. He said forcefully that he had told the pastor not to allow Cudemo to preside at Mass at the woman’s parish.

I was not the least bit reassured by Lynn’s words. The survivor had told us that Lynn had made similar promises in the past. My suspicions were confirmed in May of 2001 when an acquaintance called me to report that Cudemo had presided at the woman’s parish on Mother’s Day, almost two months after our meeting. I called the secretary at the parish to confirm the story. She told me that “Father Nick” regularly filled in whenever the pastor needed him.

I have saved an email I wrote to another member of the support group on May 25, 2001 detailing the telephone conversation I had with Lynn apprising him of Cudemo’s latest infraction. I told Lynn that I needed to know that the survivor could freely walk into any church in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia and feel confident that she would not see her abuser behind the altar.

Lynn replied that he was “furious” with both Cudemo and the pastor. Lynn said, “I told that pastor he would lose his parish if NC (Nicholas Cudemo) is ever there again. According to Lynn, the pastor “misunderstood” the directive. (My note at the time? 50 ways to obfuscate) Lynn also said that although it was “terrible” that Cudemo had returned to the parish, it could also be seen as a “good thing” because now (finally?) they could take “canonical” action against him. Lynn assured me he was going to contact a canonical lawyer, which led me to believe that he was taking a really big step. Silly me. When I spoke to the survivor about my phone call with Lynn, she assured me that so such thing would happen.

The Grand Jury Report of 2005 states that Lynn knew in November of 2000 that Cudemo was hanging out at the woman’s parish. In fact, Cudemo actually bragged about it in writing. Lynn also knew that Cudemo had a long-standing record of non-compliance with archdiocesan directives. Yet the man could feign anger at both Cudemo and the hapless pastor who, according the 2005 Grand Jury report, had no idea that a dangerous serial predator walked amidst his unknowing flock.

Cudemo remained in priestly ministry until his faculties were finally restricted in March, 2002, a year after our meeting and two months after the sexual abuse scandal in Boston rocked the church. His rights under canon law, so inalienable in 2001, magically began to disappear as the specter of public scrutiny loomed in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. Obviously, the specter of negative publicity posed more of an impetus to defrock Cudemo than did the destruction of innocent souls.

In September of 2005, Lynn told his parishioners at St. Joseph Parish, “I never put a child in harm’s way,” and received a standing ovation. I don’t think Cudemo’s victims would agree with Lynn’s self-declaration of innocence.

Eleven years ago I wrote in my email to my fellow support group member, “Told him I felt that he feels he can be disobedient with impunity; that he is above the law.” Eleven years ago I meant Cudemo. Today, my words apply to the members of the hierarchy and their obedient lieutenants who handed over spotless lambs to the wolves.

Eileen McCafferty DiFranco

June 26, 2012