Open Letter to Bishop Brandt
The statement signed in the presence of a Notary Public outlines allegations of serious sexual harassment made against Archabbot Douglas Nowicki by a former professed monk of St. Vincent Archabbey, who had to leave the monastery as a result of this sexual misconduct. The statement is unequivocally clear about the nature of the misconduct (sustained highly inappropriate sexualised touching by Nowicki), which now cannot continue be denied or ignored any longer. It is apparent to all who have eyes to see that the single motive behind Nowicki vehement persecution of Fr. Mark Gruber was to cover up his own history of sexual misconduct, including that with this former Junior Monk. These allegations against Nowicki emerged surprisingly, at exactly the same time the Gruber saga began. What a coincidence.
Open Letter to Bishop Brandt
August 16, 2012
Bishop Brandt,
Enclosed is a redacted copy of a statement, part of a larger canonical complaint, submitted to the Dicastery for Religious, and assigned the following protocol number: 41261/2010 by said Dicastery
The statement signed in the presence of a Notary Public outlines allegations of serious sexual harassment made against Archabbot Douglas Nowicki by a former professed monk of St. Vincent Archabbey, who had to leave the monastery as a result of this sexual misconduct. The statement is unequivocally clear about the nature of the misconduct (sustained highly inappropriate sexualised touching by Nowicki), which now cannot continue be denied or ignored any longer. It is apparent to all who have eyes to see that the single motive behind Nowicki vehement persecution of Fr. Mark Gruber was to cover up his own history of sexual misconduct, including that with this former Junior Monk. These allegations against Nowicki emerged surprisingly, at exactly the same time the Gruber saga began. What a coincidence.
Let us be clear about what is not in dispute: you, Bishop Brandt, have wilfully allowed a sexual predator free rein within your Diocese. Recent correspondence submitted to you evidences these facts, including your callous failure to exercise effective Pastoral Governance in accordance with the Dallas Charter.
YOUR refusal to act, and to remove the priestly faculties of Archabbot Nowicki demonstrates an egregious, and even contemptible attitude to the protection of the young within the Diocese of Greensburg, which brings the ancient office of bishop, which you hold, into serious disrepute. Evidently you have become blinded by the sycophancy of Archabbot Nowicki and Co., allowing his ingratiation to colour your judgement.
You displayed no hesitancy in withdrawing the faculties of Fr. Gruber, when allegations of misconduct were made against said cleric; yet now you waver and hesitate to act with similar, requisite swiftness. What is it that holds your hand from applying the same rigorous standards? Why do you refrain from withdrawing immediately the faculties of Archabbot Nowicki to function as a priest within your Diocese. The ideological concept to provide protection to the young, now demands you take immediate, and decisive action.
Given that you hold a Doctorate in Canon Law from a Roman Pontifical University, complemented by additional courses at the Pontifical Ecclesiastical Academy, together with your experience in the diplomatic service of the Apostolic See, your failure, to date, take effective action against Archabbot Nowicki, is unfathomable. The only plausible explanation is either personal incompetence or ineptitude; possibly a combination of both can only explain your lamentable failure in this matter. I’m open to your explanation, but please refrain from a churlish to attempt to defend the indefensible.
Bishop Brandt, I have in my possession a copy of the Decree issued by the CDF signed by the new Prefect, His Excellency, Archbishop Gerhard L. Müller. Surprisingly, said Decree does not insist upon Pontifical Secrecy; therefore, it can be widely disseminated. Importantly, said decree clearly attests to how Archabbot Nowicki lied to the CDF in his written correspondence. Furthermore, the complicity of Monsignor Bartchak in this unsavoury matter – now a Bishop in a neighbouring Diocese – points to his regrettable pusillanimity and deceit in this plan architected by Nowicki.
The assertions made by Nowicki in his letter to the CDF are flatly contradicted by a written letter by the local District Attorney Mr. Peck. A copy of his letter is also in my possession. All this documentation will be uploaded, along with this redacted copy of the complaint against Nowicki on the Misconduct in Latrobe website, later on today.
More sensationally, the Decree provides irrefutable proof that Archabbot Nowicki committed a criminal misdemeanour under Pennsylvania State Law, which is evidenced by the Decree signed by the new Prefect and the two police reports produced by the Pennsylvania State Troopers.
Thus said, Bishop Brandt, when are you going to remove the priestly faculties of a sexual predator, and a priest who arguably has committed a variety of criminal offences?
In light of the above correspondence, a pertinent question spontaneously arises: Will Archabbot Nowicki be permitted to masquerade illegitimately. wearing his mitre as a priest in good standing at the forthcoming episcopal ordination of Bishop Elect Persico at the Cathedral of Saint Peter in the Diocese of Erie?
My understanding is that you are to be one of the co-consecrators of Bishop Elect Persico. Will you allow said day to be besmirched by admitting a known sexual predator to celebrate the Eucharistic liturgy? Certainly, this would not differ much from how you recently permitted your old friend, His Excellency Archbishop Viganò, to concelebrate, (during his recent visit to Greensburg) with the sexual deviant Archabbot Nowicki, in your Cathedral.
In light of this complaint, a great number of laypersons and Christifideles will be extremely interested in your explanation, concerning Archabbot Nowicki’s standing as a priest within your Diocese. I hope you demonstrate accountability for your lamentable failure to act.
Finally, the recent news about the decision of the CDF with respect to Fr. Gruber is interesting. However, this is not the single, salient point. I intend to continue to highlight the significant conduct of Archabbot Nowicki and others at St Vincent Archabbey, until I have established the identity of, and obtained an apology from Fr. Randall Flag for his scurrilous emails to me during last year.
Respectfully,
James Carr