Deceased LA auxiliary bishop named as alleged abuser

Baltimore archdiocese says former Auxiliary Bishop Carl A. Fisher was the subject of multiple abuse accusations dating back to his time as a priest in Baltimore

Bishop Carl A. Fisher in an undated photo from his time as an auxiliary bishop for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. (image from Angelus)

The Archdiocese of Baltimore announced Wednesday that now-deceased Los Angeles Auxiliary Bishop Carl A. Fisher was the subject of multiple abuse accusations dating back to his time as a priest in Baltimore.

Fisher’s was one of 23 names of deceased priests added to the Archdiocese of Baltimore’s list of priests accused of abuse, which was updated today, April 24. 

The release said that “multiple individuals have accused Father Carl Fisher of sexual abuse that occurred in the 1970s in the Archdiocese of Baltimore.” However, the allegations were not made until years after Fisher’s death in 1993 at the age of 47.

During his six years as an auxiliary bishop under Archbishop and later Cardinal Roger Mahony, Fisher served as episcopal vicar for the San Pedro Region. He died in September 1993 after a two-year battle with colon cancer. 

Full story at Angelus News.

Comments

  1. Anonymous says

    When did any of these allegations come to the attention of the Archdiocese of Baltimore? If well prior to Fr Fisaher being named a Bishop, this is an especially serious cover-up.

  2. I knew the man, knew about his schedule in LA. He would not have had the time, here, nor contact opps. Also, it simply did not fit his profile/personna. I am inclined NOT to believe a word of it. He was a man who absolutely took his priesthood, duties and vows seriously. A man of integrity, grit and intellect. We admired him greatly.

    • Your Fellow Catholic says

      Jay, what exactly is a profile/personna(sp) of an abuser? You knew him, you liked him, you admired him, fine. I’m sure he had good qualities that made you feel that way about him. But assuming that you know who “fits the profile/personna” of an abuser, which I have to say I doubt you have that knowledge, wouldn’t you agree that most of the men who abused had good qualities that others admired? Their brother priests & bishops probably also thought they know the kind of person that “fits the profile/personna” of an abuser, but they were wrong, weren’t they? I like your intention to see the best in others, and to treat everyone as innocent until proven guilty, but their are pitfalls in that approach.

      • There is a pitfall in always accusing and believing accusations without proof too, it’s the same pitfall Satan fell in to.

        • Your Fellow Catholic says

          Yes and thousands of kids later and hundreds of millions of dollars later, we all fall into the pit with them. And then we ask ourselves how all this could have possibly happenned.

  3. I’ve know both type. First of all – to any of these accusations that come out ONLY after the death of the accused, and many years – I can’t give full weight, if I give any weight at all. There have been MANY cases, since diocese basically, with their lawyers, came up with, “just take this $amount and go away” policies, as to avoid court cases, and many came out of the woodwork – many NON LEGIT cases. You did not have to prove anything at that point. Most of the “problem” priests are same sex attracted, and have had some sort of rep, some indications, in that regard, and like I said, I have known such, he did not, in any way, appear to be as such, at all.

    While you are correct, that there is no way to follow the person…

    • Your Fellow Catholic says

      They have a “rep”. What does that even mean? Gossip, perhaps? How many “reps” have you known? How many have you acted upon? Did you just act on the “rep”, or did you see something and say something, or did you just rely upon innuendo and “rep”>

      • Does the name Fr. Blackwell ring a bell? ( I should not have to go down that path further. If you know anything about these cases you’d understand that reference. Capisce? I’m not hear to name names and add to this already mucked stew).

        Scepticism is fine, your snark is unwarranted. It’s also disingenuous. I am the one, remember (go read) defending some of these cases as baseless, and NOT based on facts and only posthumously enacted – the accused not able to mount ANY sort of defense.

  4. Don’t forget to factor in that the accusations are coming out of Baltimore, surely the most parasitic, dysfunctional, and corrupt city in America. If he hadn’t own-goaled himself, I’d bet St Freddie Gray, RIP, would be in on this suit.

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.

Speak Your Mind

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.