- Yes, I have children. Yes, I would call the Bishop first.
I would have to be involved in the process to see what unfolds. I would have to get my child to open up to me to get the details to make a decision if the claim was founded. My children have made up some tall tales in the past about those they though hurt them. I could not in good faith assume the worst immediately. Working with children I would not want to be accused and have to defend myself against an unfounded claim. The scandal is bad in that case also.
How many bishops are experts in this area?
If there is any doubt about a child’s claims - the police are better able to figure it out.
Why?
They are ones who can find interrogators who specialize in interviewing children.
They are the ones who can visit the child’s school to see if the child has ever falsely accused teachers or not.
They are also the ones who can work with the doctors if there needs to by physical confirmation of the alleged abuse.
Bishops are out of their league here.
Besides…you are simpy suggesting we go back to the way it was handled before, and that was a recipe for disaster.
The Church is not capable of self-policing.
If the offender is personally liable the trust issue increases as there is less the Bishop has to protect against for the benefit of all the other parishioners.
Let’s be honest. The priests don’t have a pot to pee in.
Where are the funds going to come from to offer counseling/rehab for the victims?
Many cases involved the personal responsibility on the part of the bishop as well.
Are you suggesting bishops be immune from personal responsibility?
That would be a recipe for disaster.
Perhaps they should have liability insurance that covers something like this, such as medical malpractice
You think you’re upset about the money now?
Introduce liability insurance and you just might see costs that exceed the settlements.
The needs of the victim should be determined by the family.
So…you’re saying the family comes up with a figure and then only goes after the priest? Who probably has nothing.
And what if they find the bishop knew about the priest’s problem and did nothing about it?
The Priest - do we forget that our Catholicism forgives a repentant sinner? Is the Catholic Church a zero tolerance Church against sinners? The Priest/offender has to admit wrondoing in confession and he must make reparations.
This has nothing to do with any forgiveness or so-called “repentance” on the part of the priest.
Let’s say a priest is caught embezzling money. He confesses- he is forgiven.
When he is reassigned - shouldn’t the bishop consider putting him in a posititon where access to money is limited?
How much more precious are children than dollar bills?
Are we required to risk the safety of our children in order to prove how forgiving we are?
No…placing anyone - priest or not- who has shown a predatory tendency towards children should NEVER EVER EVER be placed near children again.
Priests who have committed these atrocities should be stripped of their priesthood.
There is no “cure” for this. When an alcoholic relapses - he/she grabs a bottle of booze. When a child abuser relapses, he grabs an innocent child.
I am trying to look at this through a Catholic lens and not make the Church accountable to government which would have far reaching implications.
I don’t see anything in catholic teaching that claims catholics are not subject to civil laws.
I do not see anything that suggests our shepherds should not be held accountable by civil authorities.
We cannot expect the Church to police itself - this has already proven to be a disaster.
