Indiana follows Pennsylvania

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jezra
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Uh…clearly we do have to. We shouldn’t have to, sure. But here we are.
 
It already has stigmatized many good priests, who have done nothing, simply by their association with priests who sinned. We must pray for all the priests, good and sinful, and for the Church.
 
Last edited:
What does this even mean? I get that this sounds super pious, but what are you actually saying? That you don’t think all priests are sexual abusers? Obviously. No sane person thinks that.

Do you mean that you don’t believe there is a huge systemic failure beyond just the cliched “few bad apples”? You’re just sticking your head in the sand.
 
A purely practical piece of advice: if you state this in public, you will attract predatory people.

I have safety guidelines for adults that absolutely everyone follows who comes into contact with my kids. None of these imply anything about the adults. Showing that you’re paying attention is the #1 thing you can do to protect your kids.
 
HolySpirit1 said:
Apologies are worthless at this point in time. Criminals are only apologetic upon being caught, if clergy were actually sorry the incidents would have been turned over to the police from the start, investigated internally as well, and suspects if found to have been guilty in any sense would have been immediately removed from public service at all aspects and not swept to a new diocese to be someone elses problem. That would have been a sign of real remorse. Apology masses and public apologies mean nothing. If those who are responsible want to show any sign of remorse, the only option is to step down from public service.
Click to expand...
True… but NONE of the bishops who did that are currently leading dioceses. Almost all of them are now dead, and the ones who are not are in their 90s.

If important to make sure the mistakes of the past do not happen again, but we should not personally hold current bishops responsible for the crimes of their processors.
 
Last edited:
HolySpirit1 said:
If those who are responsible want to show any sign of remorse, the only option is to step down from public service.
Click to expand...
As Phil said above, those who are truly responsible are almost all gone from active service already, with the exception of Wuerl and a couple other very old guys.

The bishops currently holding the jobs are likely to offer apologies as an olive branch of healing, as in, “I’m very sorry the Church let you down.” Even though they themselves were likely not involved in any abuse or coverups.

Although I personally think apologies in this society are way overused and should only come sincerely from the actual people who did the bad deeds, not from their successors, a lot of people don’t agree with me and actually find such apologies to be constructive from a standpoint of at least recognizing the pain somebody suffered in the past. I can accept that despite my personal views on useless apologies.
 
This is just foolish. The only person you can blindly trust is Jesus. Everyone else is a fallable human being. Besides, how do you plan on telling which priests are “good, holy” ones? It’s not like rapists wear signs that say, “hey, I’m a pervert who molests kids.”

Not to mention, announcing that you’re going to blindly trust anyone with a collar is precisely the attitude that abusers exploit. You’re announcing yourself as an easy mark.
 
Well, the statute of limitations has passed before most victims had the strength to come forward
 
I live here in this diocese. Bishop Rhoades was my bishop. (I’m Eastern Catholic now but he was the bishop who granted my canonical transfer.) I’m glad he’s doing this. I’ve already checked the bishop accountability site and I know 2 of the accused/convicted priests listed there. One was the priest who did my first communion. We have a right to know and he’s been very transparent with how he handles abuse cases. It’s always stated in the diocesan newspaper “Today’s Catholic”, to report anything regarding child abuse. Will it possibly damage the church? yes but the poison needs to be drained…the church can heal from this, but honesty is required.
 
I have read about half of the Pennsylvania report. It is true that these cases were not prosecuted because the victims and the church wanted secrecy. However, in most cases I read the priest admitted wrongdoing and the church paid for counseling and settlements for the victims. Do you think the church would have paid if they believed the accusations to be false?
The report ask for the statute of limitations to be lifted. The last thing we need is for all these cases to go to trial.

I believe the investigations done by the bishops followed those principles.
 
Theo2 said:
It is true that these cases were not prosecuted because the victims and the church wanted secrecy. However, in most cases I read the priest admitted wrongdoing and the church paid for counseling and settlements for the victims. Do you think the church would have paid if they believed the accusations to be false?
Click to expand...
I was just about to ask something and your post suits my question. It is technical or legal if you wish.
I know that today, at least in TX we have to report child abuse,elderly abuse and threat to kill( at least about till five years ago,maybe some more has been added,or modified,I do not know…).
Say one reports it.
Would a report prosper if the parent of a minor denies or refuses to make an accusation ?
It is a technical question. Today. Not in the past.And concerning any scenario,not necessarily Church.
 
Last edited:
IMO, it would be hard to prosecute if the victim will not testify. However, the church officials and the police can make a case for them coming forward to prevent others from being harmed.
 
Thank you. Fortunately,I didn t have any case but we had to disclose/ inform this straightaway… And quite honestly,I never asked what happened after we reported if we did.
Thank you,Theo2!
 
But the point is people couldn’t tell if their individual pastors were abusers or not.
 
Theo2 said:
However, in most cases I read the priest admitted wrongdoing and the church paid for counseling and settlements for the victims. Do you think the church would have paid if they believed the accusations to be false?
Click to expand...
This is a fine point of settlements, but often times large entities will settle even if legal guilt is in question. Legally, a settlement cannot be viewed as an admission of guilt or an admission of liability. If it was, there wouldn’t be a motivation to settle, and if nobody settled their cases, the court system could not handle them all.

It’s true in some cases, the evidence looks strong for the plaintiff and that motivates the defendant to settle, because they think they will lose. But in other cases, the defendant might have a good case, but just doesn’t want to go to court because that costs more money and will bring bad publicity or bring further harm on those involved in the case. In a situation like this, the Church would have settled almost every case unless the accusation was really unfounded.
 
Last edited:
And I’m not saying you shouldn’t go to church and I’m not saying you shouldn’t engage with priests. Most priests would never dream of doing what a minority of monsters did.

What I’m saying is that we can’t have this blind, doe-eyed adoration towards all priests, where we trust every priest immediately and unwaveringly. “Father knows best, don’t ever question a priest, they’re above reproach” is precisely the attitude that allowed this to flourish.
 
I wonder how all these news stories will
influence how many sign up for RCIA this fall?
 
Well, then that’s the both of us. It’s not disrespectful to adhere to a code of conduct that protects children AND the adults who might interact with them.

I don’t feel disrespected because I have to be compliant with safe environment regulations to volunteer at my parish and my children’s school. I know that it’s not because they think I might be a child molester. It’s because they know that being vigilant deters predators. To get sloppy about it encourages predators. I have nothing to hide.

I have priest friends who are horrified by what has happened. But I don’t hold them to less of a standard of conduct than I do my friends, my children’s teachers, doctors, etc.
 
I’m not saying that there should be a blanket rule that no priest can be alone with boys. What I want is a culture where people feel that they can call out warning signs and they’ll be taken seriously. A culture that says priests are nearly always above suspicion works counter to that goal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top