Kirchenakte Documented events from judgments, reports and church documents
2002-2022 · 20 years · show in timeline

Diocese of Buffalo 2002 to 2022: New York Attorney General sues the diocese and its bishops; according to the complaint the diocese referred not a single priest to Rome for 15 years and listed abusers as "retired"

In November 2020 the New York State Attorney General sued the Diocese of Buffalo and former Bishop Richard J. Malone and former Auxiliary Bishop Edward M. Grosz. According to the complaint the diocese had not followed the rules against abuse adopted by the US bishops in 2002: until 2017 it referred not a single accused priest to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, investigations were conducted by the auxiliary bishop himself or by its own defence lawyers, and in files and public statements removed abusers were called "retired" or on "medical leave". Malone had resigned in 2019. In the settlement of October 2022 the diocese agreed to an independent audit; Malone and Grosz undertook not to hold leadership positions in charitable organisations in New York.

Period
2002-2022 (20 years)
Country
United States
Institutions
Diocese of Buffalo
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
Category
Sexual abuse, Cover-up
Level of evidence
A Primary source · what does this mean?
Persons
Richard J. Malone (Bishop of Buffalo 2012 to 2019; sued by the New York Attorney General, in the 2022 settlement gave up leadership positions in charitable organisations)
Edward M. Grosz (Auxiliary Bishop of Buffalo 1990 to 2020; sued by the New York Attorney General, in the 2022 settlement gave up leadership positions in charitable organisations)

What happened to the people

How were they charged and sentenced?

  1. The Attorney General based the complaint of 23 November 2020 on diocesan records, including personnel files and the secret archive, and on sworn testimony by Malone and Grosz. It sought independent oversight, five years of reporting and a ban on both bishops holding secular leadership positions in charitable organisations. Malone had resigned in December 2019, about a year after the investigation began, himself speaking of systemic failings over many years.
    Evidence: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Präambel, S. 2
    „personnel files, letters of good standing, documents in the archivum secretum“
    Stipulated Final Order, People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo et al., Case 1:21-cv-00189-RA, Document 38, Präambel, S. 2. Original
    Evidence: Attorney General of the State of New York, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Abs. 4
    „The Attorney General seeks injunctive relief to accomplish three objectives“
    The People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo, Richard J. Malone, Edward M. Grosz et al., Complaint, Abs. 4. Original
    Evidence: Attorney General of the State of New York, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Abs. 7
    „In December 2019, roughly one year after the commencement of the Attorney“
    The People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo, Richard J. Malone, Edward M. Grosz et al., Complaint, Abs. 7. Original
    Evidence: Attorney General of the State of New York, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Abs. 7
    „failings over many years in the worldwide handling of sexual abuse of minors by members of the“
    The People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo, Richard J. Malone, Edward M. Grosz et al., Complaint, Abs. 7. Original

What happened to those affected?

  1. According to the complaint, in several instances the diocese's internal records falsely described priests as "retired", on "medical leave" or on "sabbatical", although they had been removed because of abuse allegations or a finding of abuse; sometimes this was also announced publicly. In the court-approved settlement of 25 October 2022 the diocese agreed to a priest supervision programme and an independent audit over five years; Malone and Grosz undertook not to hold leadership or fiduciary positions in charitable organisations in New York, but may continue in pastoral roles.
    Evidence: Attorney General of the State of New York, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Abs. 102
    „In several instances, the Diocesan Corporation’s internal records falsely describe“
    The People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo, Richard J. Malone, Edward M. Grosz et al., Complaint, Abs. 102. Original
    Evidence: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Teil III
    „that they will not serve as a director, trustee, officer, or equivalent fiduciary position with any“
    Stipulated Final Order, People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo et al., Case 1:21-cv-00189-RA, Document 38, Teil III. Original
    Evidence: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Teil III
    „This agreement by the Individual“
    Stipulated Final Order, People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo et al., Case 1:21-cv-00189-RA, Document 38, Teil III. Original
    Evidence: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Teil IV
    „Other than Part II(B), this Stipulated Final Order shall remain in effect until five years“
    Stipulated Final Order, People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo et al., Case 1:21-cv-00189-RA, Document 38, Teil IV. Original

Background

Why? Justification and motives (according to the sources)

  1. According to the complaint a draft of the first referral to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 2017 states that the aim was to limit the diocese's liability should New York lift the civil statute of limitations for abuse victims; the author writes that he had discovered many cases that had not been handled properly.
    Evidence: Attorney General of the State of New York, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Abs. 76
    „we followed our procedures accordingly so [sic] limit any liability if it were“
    The People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo, Richard J. Malone, Edward M. Grosz et al., Complaint, Abs. 76. Original

Response of the Church

  1. According to the complaint it is undisputed that from 2002 to July 2017 the diocese did not refer abuse allegations to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; Grosz admitted that before 2017 not a single priest had been referred, Malone that he made his first referral only five years after taking office. Grosz questioned accused priests himself, sometimes by telephone, without ever having been trained for it; from about 2011 to 2019 the diocese's longtime defence lawyers conducted the internal investigations. The review board kept no minutes.
    Evidence: Attorney General of the State of New York, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Abs. 75
    „Auxiliary Bishop Grosz admitted in his testimony to“
    The People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo, Richard J. Malone, Edward M. Grosz et al., Complaint, Abs. 75. Original
    Evidence: Attorney General of the State of New York, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Abs. 75
    „Malone further admitted that he had not made his first CDF referral until 2017“
    The People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo, Richard J. Malone, Edward M. Grosz et al., Complaint, Abs. 75. Original
    Evidence: Attorney General of the State of New York, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Abs. 65
    „Grosz contacted accused priests (sometimes by telephone)“
    The People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo, Richard J. Malone, Edward M. Grosz et al., Complaint, Abs. 65. Original
    Evidence: Attorney General of the State of New York, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Abs. 67
    „Diocesan Corporation’s longtime, defense counsel“
    The People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo, Richard J. Malone, Edward M. Grosz et al., Complaint, Abs. 67. Original
    Evidence: Attorney General of the State of New York, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Abs. 72
    „The DRB maintains no written minutes of its meetings.“
    The People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo, Richard J. Malone, Edward M. Grosz et al., Complaint, Abs. 72. Original

See also

Original documents to read

  1. Government report
    Attorney General of the State of New York, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York: The People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo, Richard J. Malone, Edward M. Grosz et al., Complaint, 23 November 2020. Original (retrieved 31 Oct 2026)
  2. Judgment
    U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York: Stipulated Final Order, People of the State of New York v. Diocese of Buffalo et al., Case 1:21-cv-00189-RA, Document 38, 25 October 2022. Original (retrieved 31 Oct 2026)
Change log (1)

The change log is kept in German only.

  • : Aufgenommen

Last changed on 31 October 2026. Is something missing or wrong? Suggest an addition or correction.