Indiana follows Pennsylvania

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jezra
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The light is not suspicion, but prudence.

A group of boys, in this day and age when priests go through a lot of psych testing before seminary and other background checks, sure. But if one started requesting a lot of alone time with one of my children, or my children said he made them feel weird, or other creepy stuff that set off my radar, I would not ignore it just because he’s a priest. That’s exactly how we got into this mess.

We have intuition for a reason.
 
Completely agree. I am also bothered by the releasing of a list of deceased priests who are accused but have absolutely no way to defend themselves. Each and every single incident has it’s own sad story and as someone else said, why do we need to drag these priests through the mud without them being able to speak in their own defense. If they were a threat now okay, let justice be done but digging names out of the past makes no sense to me.
It could also be very damaging to their families who are still alive.
 
You keep talking out of both sides of your mouth. You say you want people to be aware and have things thoroughly investigated, but then declare that priests are, as a group, the holiest men alive and you don’t want any suspicion. You can’t simultaneously say you want people to be aware and prudent and declare that priests are per se above suspicion.
 
A failure to abide by normal boundaries is a red flag.

You keep saying “culture of suspicion,” but nobody is saying that. It’s more a matter of good fences and good neighbors.
 
Total trust until something undeniable? This is, at best, painfully naive. What kid is going to trust his or her gut that something seemed fishy when the other party is a priest that everyone “totally trusts”?

It’s like you’re deliberately trying to create an environment for a pedophile to exploit.
 
Last edited:
I agree with all you said but you may have overlooked:
My words:

in most cases I read the priest admitted wrongdoing
 
Last edited:
Theo2, just to be clear, that is your OWN words. Not a quote of mine. I haven’t done a check on every case I read to see what the priest admitted or didn’t admit and counted up a list.

Please kindly remove the quote making it look like my words. Thank you.
 
But you’re advocating for a culture in which no one would believe the kid, and the kid would likely doubt his or her own (poorly developed) instincts because they’ve been raised to always be hyper deferential to priests. If you put priests on this impossibly high pedestal, you’re creating the perfect conditions for some poor kid to think, “wow, it was weird that Father Bob wanted me to change in front of him, but he is a priest after all, so it must be alright, I guess…”
 
Guys, why does one poster’s remark have to be taken as “Advocating For a Culture”?

It’s a moot point as (name removed by moderator) is not going to be driving the “culture”. The current “culture” is in place and is being driven by many factors including current laws, mandatory reporting, liability concerns, public relations concerns, Safe Environment policies, and the bishops in charge.

People are still going to “trust priests” to different degrees. The policies in place are supposed to protect kids whether or not their parents are trusting, distrusting, or simply absent/ preoccupied with their own problems and not watching out for their kid.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
Guys, why does one poster’s remark have to be taken as “Advocating For a Culture”?
Click to expand...
Because that’s what it sounds to me like he’s doing.

As to the rest, I tend to think the problem is more about the culture than it is about having the right policy in place. The right policy is necessary but not sufficient, to get all LSAT about it.
 
I think it would be difficult to have some sort of weird cultlike “Father is always right” culture in this day and age, when society is finding predators under every bush and we have had umpteen investigative reports and public scandals. Our culture solved a lot of this problem with changed attitudes and more knowledge, resulting in changes to law and policy.
 
I’m at a loss as to how you can’t see the contradiction in your posts. Let’s imagine we were talking about cops instead of priests.

Now imagine someone said “of course people should report police misconduct. I just think we should also remember that cops are sterling public servants who virtually never do anything wrong, who always work for the greater good, who don’t engage in corruption, and who generally should be taken at their word by the rest of us.” Surely you’d see how that person isn’t exactly setting the conditions for people to feel confident coming forward with allegations that a cop has done something wrong.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
I think it would be difficult to have some sort of weird cultlike “Father is always right” culture in this day
Click to expand...
I would think so too, but some people seem to be managing.

And (name removed by moderator), before this gets too barbed, let me just say while I think you’re being super naive, I fully believe you mean well. I’m not accusing you of malice.
 
Last edited:
That’s something that should be addressed in crimes like these.
As does this propensity for a kangaroo court and trial by media.

If a male is accused of a sex crime, even if he is innocent, he is tarred for life.
It’s the sin of calumny
 
Here priests and men, just don’t touch to comfort. Even that can be misconstrued
 
It’s the society we live in. Don’t touch unless invited. Keep your hands to yourself.

I can’t discuss the charges against Cardinal Pell, but they will come out. And this issue might be highlighted.

We are also forgetting, those lists also include laity . As is the experience in these historic experiences.
I am in Aus, we love lots of personal space!
 
Last edited:
In many of these cases, it wasn’t uncommon for the priests to already know.

The key is that the public be aware of credible risks to safety, and that an appropriate balance be struck between the right to the presumption of innocence of defendants and the cost of hiding abuse for victims. Also, as a parent, I’m aware that it is difficult to prosecute sexual crimes, so the likelihood of a guilty person being let go is almost certainly higher than that of an innocent one being slandered.
 
yep unfortunately we are at that point, all males are suspect, you don’t have to be a priest to be suspect.

but the protection of children is the priority so these measures ensure their safety one hopes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top