Errant priests’ secret children to sue church

[VitaminC]

Excerpt:

From The Sunday Times
April 18, 2010
When Pat Bond told her lover Henry Willenborg, a Franciscan priest, that she was pregnant, he urged her to have an abortion.
Bond, who was 28, had a miscarriage and then became pregnant again. This time Willenborg’s superiors urged her to give up the child for adoption.
Bond, from Missouri, kept the child but agreed to a vow of silence. In a signed contract with the Catholic Church, she undertook to keep the priest’s identity secret in exchange for financial support for her son, Nathan.
In America, Britain, Ireland, Germany, France, Italy and Austria,women made pregnant by priests have signed such pledges in exchange for hush money from the church.

More at: timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7100920.ece

 

[Janks]

I’m confused…what exactly are these women suing for? For child support? It seems like most of them willingly signed confidentiality agreements. I’m confused why they are suing the Church instead of the men individually. I can see how they would have a case against the fathers of the children but I’m not sure how they can make a case against the Church.

And the piece states that thousands of priests in German speaking countries have fathered children but I didn’t see any official statistic, so I want to know where they found that number. J.M.J. here we go again.

 

[Benadam]

This really angers me. This Priest was obligated to give his son as legitimate a family life he could possibly give. No matter how or whatever the consequences to his current vocation. Instead, he becomes an absent father. Might as well be called a deadbeat father because spiritually it’s true.

When will the Church become an example that invites the light of scrutiny when faced with the wounds of sinfull behaviour?!! When will it stop prefering the dark because of evil deeds?

 

[Dale_M]

. I’m confused why they are suing the Church instead of the men individually.

I don’t understand that either. Its clear that priests can be deadbeat dads, just like any other guy. But we don’t normally expect the employer to pay the bills of its employees.

I suppose a case could be made for suing an organization if the priest belongs to a religious order and is under a vow of poverty.

 

[Benadam]

I don’t understand that either. Its clear that priests can be deadbeat dads, just like any other guy. But we don’t normally expect the employer to pay the bills of its employees.

I suppose a case could be made for suing an organization if the priest belongs to a religious order and is under a vow of poverty.

The Church paid for secrecy of paternity. The Church paid the mother to ignore the paternal obligations the state requires by law. To ignore what the child deserves from it’s father. State law requires that the non-custodial parent not only pay child support but take part in parenting the child. The Church paid the mother to ignore these rights the state gives the child. To ignore the paternal obligations the state requires of the non-custodial parent. I don’t know if the Church was within it’s own rights to do this but maybe that’s what the suit is about. Bottom line; because the child’s father was a Catholic Priest he was denied what God expects the child to recieve and it was paid for by the Church God established!

 

[kimmielittle]

Did not the mother know she was going to bed with a Priest?

Was she a consenting adult?

The mothers choose to have sex by men they knew could not play the role of father…and this mother - over a 5 year period of time.

She was an accomplice in the cover up - assuming she wasn’t some mindless person. The mother and father share equal blame.

She says at approximately 28-29 years old she “was very naive”…what she didn’t know about sex…or the ramifications of having sex with a priest? C’mon She knew he wasn’t going to marry her - yet, she chose to have sex repeatedly with him.

Yes, the father should have stepped up and supported his child

Sue the father of the child for non support.

'She signed a contract with the Catholic Church", it says…a bit misleading IMHO. She might have signed a contract…but who was it with?

As always, just my thoughts

 

[Santi2]

When will the Church become an example that invites the light of scrutiny when faced with the wounds of sinfull behaviour?!! When will it stop prefering the dark because of evil deeds?

I do not understand why it is the Church that suffers immediate criticism from the fallout of these affairs.

It has been said that it takes two to tango. Surely, whatever transpires between couples are exclusive to that couple? I also believe that each case would have to be assessed on circumstances exclusive to that couple. On that note, I pray that charity for these women are found when their stories unfold.

 

[Benadam]

I’m assuming the contract and payment was a resolution realized with the Biship’s approval.

 

[OriginalJS]

Lots of legal questions here, the answers to which would be determined by the law of the forum. These include whether a mother can waive child support without court approval, what standing the Church has to enter into such a contract, whether there are limits on collection of past due support; and others.

 

[Disciple4Christ]

I’m assuming the contract and payment was a resolution realized with the Biship’s approval.

Never I repeat NEVER make assumptions without facts. The News media has such a reputation for lies and unfounded attacks on the Church. We need to get all the facts correct before we can begin to form any opinion.

So where are the documents to back this new persicution??

 

[Bob_Crowley]

Excerpt:

More at: timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7100920.ece

Let’s assume the story is true for argument’s sake. In the first case we have a priest urging an abortion and then getting her pregnant again.

I hope he was fired. He had no right to remain a priest.

The honorable thing would have been for him to be sacked, marry the woman and get a job outside the church, and support her and the child.

As a former Protestant, I’m getting a bit fed up with what appears to be a Catholic tradition of covering up.

 

[Dave_in_Dallas]

Sounds like both sides have culpability in this. The mother was certainly old enough to know better, and it sounds like it was consentual, i.e. not coerced…
The Father should have thought to himself… hmmm… maybe I’m not cut out for this vocation… the Bishop / Church probably should have pastoraly counseled him… hmmm… doesn’t sound like celibacy is a vocation for you

I wonder how many times during confession he confessed this, and I wonder if another priest or bishop advised him to maybe seek another vocation?

OTH… this might happen A LOT? SO this is just typical protocol for a church covering up?

From what I’ve read and heard it seems that most priests (Latin Rite) don’t see celibacy as some unreasonable burden that non-celibate folks do.

 

[catharina]

Let’s assume the story is true for argument’s sake. In the first case we have a priest urging an abortion and then getting her pregnant again.

I hope he was fired. He had no right to remain a priest.

The honorable thing would have been for him to be sacked, marry the woman and get a job outside the church, and support her and the child.

As a former Protestant, I’m getting a bit fed up with what appears to be a Catholic tradition of covering up.

Bob, although you are a former Protestant, you are now a Catholic.
I advise you to cultivate the virtue of Patience. We are part of a 2000 yr-old Faith.
Counting Judaism, make that about 5000 yrs-old tradition in Faith.

Like most serious sin, the sin of sexual abuse deserves prayer, penance and patience.
It does not qualify in any special way for our becoming “fed up,” IMO.

 

[Disciple4Christ]

Show me a perfect church and I will join that one. No wait I can’t do that because I am a sinner and it would no longer be perfect.
Let the one without sin cast the first stone.

We need to pray for our Priests and our Bishops that they might follow Christ no matter what the cost, because the cost of not following is so much greater.

Hail Mary full of Grace…

 

[curlycool89]

I’m confused why they are suing the Church instead of the men individually. I can see how they would have a case against the fathers of the children but I’m not sure how they can make a case against the Church.

Just speaking logistically, the priest is a Franciscan. Most likely, he has nothing (vow of poverty and all).

As for the getting sacked, I think someone’ll need to get Brother JR in here to explain the process to us. Religious orders have their own rules and constitutions after all.

 

[catharina]

Just speaking logistically, the priest is a Franciscan. Most likely, he has nothing (vow of poverty and all).

As for the getting sacked, I think someone’ll need to get Brother JR in here to explain the process to us. Religious orders have their own rules and constitutions after all.

Quite agree. I didn’t even mention Bob’s reference to “getting sacked”
It simply does not apply in the Code of Canon Law or the Catechism.

Thanks to you for mentioning it.

 

[Corki]

This really angers me. This Priest was obligated to give his son as legitimate a family life he could possibly give.

And the most legitimate family possible would have been an adoptive one - an option the mother refused.

Did not the mother know she was going to bed with a Priest?

Was she a consenting adult?

The mothers choose to have sex by men they knew could not play the role of father…and this mother - over a 5 year period of time.

She was an accomplice in the cover up - assuming she wasn’t some mindless person. The mother and father share equal blame.

She says at approximately 28-29 years old she “was very naive”…what she didn’t know about sex…or the ramifications of having sex with a priest? C’mon She knew he wasn’t going to marry her - yet, she chose to have sex repeatedly with him.

Yes, the father should have stepped up and supported his child

Sue the father of the child for non support.

'She signed a contract with the Catholic Church", it says…a bit misleading IMHO. She might have signed a contract…but who was it with?

As always, just my thoughts

I have no sympathy for these women who get themselves sexually and emotionally involved with men that they know are priests.

No matter how naive a woman is, she knows not to have sex out of marriage. The article says she went to the priest for marriage counseling. So, she was married and too naive to know that sex with someone not her husband wasn’t a “no-no”??? Give me a break!

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

I have no sympathy for these women who get themselves sexually and emotionally involved with men that they know are priests.

Well child support is just that – support for the child. How the youngster came to be here is irrelevant to the discussion.

What is relevant is how much the non-custodial parent earns, since that is how we come to a figure for child support amounts. If I were suing someone who worked for a religious organization, I’d laugh about any statement concerning a vow of poverty.

The organization has so much control over how much the person makes, that just taking a percentage of the father’s earnings is inappropriate. It not like the father has negotiated his salary. So we have to deal with the reasonable needs of the child. Thus, the group employing the father needs to come up with a reasonable amount to rear and educate the child through college.

That is if you are discussing the legal component of all this. The moral stuff is not my bailiwick.

 

[Darryl1958]

5:1 It is actually reported that sexual immorality exists among you, the kind of immorality that is not permitted even among the Gentiles, so that someone is cohabiting with his father’s wife. 2 And you are proud! Shouldn’t you have been deeply sorrowful instead and removed the one who did this from among you? 3 For even though I am absent physically, I am present in spirit. And I have already judged the one who did this, just as though I were present. 4 When you gather together in the name of our Lord Jesus, and I am with you in spirit, along with the power of our Lord Jesus, 5 turn this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. 6 Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast affects the whole batch of dough? 7 Clean out the old yeast so that you may be a new batch of dough – you are, in fact, without yeast. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. 8 So then, let us celebrate the festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of vice and evil, but with the bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth. 9 I wrote you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people. 10 In no way did I mean the immoral people of this world, or the greedy and swindlers and idolaters, since you would then have to go out of the world. 11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who calls himself a Christian who is sexually immoral, or greedy, or an idolater, or verbally abusive, or a drunkard, or a swindler. Do not even eat with such a person. 12 For what do I have to do with judging those outside? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 But God will judge those outside. Remove the evil person from among you

.

 

[Janks]

So, the argument is, since the priests or religious brothers work for the catholic church, and the catholic church “deprives” them of a real salary, it is the church’s responsibility to pay child support. That makes no sense to me.

And I gotta admit…that comment about the woman being naive, who is that naive in this day in age? Only the children seem to be truly innocent in this time period.