Jailed priest rehired by diocese (as a janitor)

[stumbler]

By Todd Ruger

A priest in the Catholic Diocese of Davenport — recently released from federal prison for possession of child pornography on a diocese-owned laptop — has been rehired by the diocese for janitorial work at its headquarters.

Diocese leaders decided to employ the Rev. Richard Poster, 40, in the maintenance department of its Pastoral Center, 2706 N. Gaines St., as they await a decision from the Vatican about a request to remove him from the priesthood, spokesman David Montgomery said.

“(Poster) has direct supervision without contact with children and without access to computers,” Montgomery said in a written statement. “Father Poster will be assigned job duties that are consistent with special conditions of his release, as required by his probation officer.”

However, Al Burke of LeClaire, Iowa, said employing Poster “is an absolute disgrace” for a diocese that gave no outreach to him and other people who tried in the past few years to report the names of priests who sexually abused them decades ago…

---

Full article

 

[pnewton]

stumbler:

However, Al Burke of LeClaire, Iowa, said employing Poster “is an absolute disgrace”
Full article

Why did the writer quote this uninvolved bystander. Other than being an Iowan, no connection is mentioned.

I really do not see what the big issue is. The man will have no contact with children, there was no mention of evidence that he is a pediphile and he did serve his prison time for the crime he did commit. Sure he needs to never serve as a pastor again, but what’s teh harm in gardening.

 

[stumbler]

Much of the article seems to be complaints from SNAP. I suppose Burke could be with them. But it does suggest that Burke tried to report problem priests earlier.

Remember, the press is about generating controversy, not uncovering truth.

 

[Richardols]

pnewton:

I really do not see what the big issue is. The man will have no contact with children, there was no mention of evidence that he is a paedophile and he did serve his prison time. Sure he needs to never serve as a pastor again, but what’s the harm in gardening.

With you there.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

pnewton - Re The man will have no contact with children, How are children restricted from the Pastoral Center? Is he confined to the building, or does he have tasks that take him outside? How far is it from the nearest school? Do children pass that way on theire way to and from school etc?

 

[pnewton]

Joe Kelley:

pnewton - Re The man will have no contact with children, How are children restricted from the Pastoral Center? Is he confined to the building, or does he have tasks that take him outside? How far is it from the nearest school? Do children pass that way on theire way to and from school etc?

woo, Let me rephrase that. There was nothing in the article that indicates that there would be no more possibility for contact with children than any other place on the planet.

However, direct supervision he would have. That is something few jobs would offer.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

pnewton:

. . .However, direct supervision he would have. That is something few jobs would offer.

I wonder how much direct supervision. Somehow I can’t picture a janitor working under constant supervision. Most janitors work a variety of tasks, many in semi-secluded locations, and far from the supervisor’s desk. Our janitor is usually somewhere on the property and can be summoned in a few minutes by pager, but I doubt that any one could tell you where he is or what he is doing at a particular moment.

Of course we don’t have a job description here so can’t tell what the peculiar circumstances of this job are.

 

[Fitz]

Let me get this straight. The priest served his time, and they are not allowing him to work with children. Are they to totally ignore the priests once they have done their time? I think it is rather sick that people would be able to stalk the priest and find out where he is. I think justice is one thing, but revenge is bad. I think this victim wants to ruin the priests life, as if the humiliation and prison time didn’t do it. This is not the pirest that abused that person. He had porn on his computer. It was wrong, so he paid his dues to society and he should be able to work again. I think it is OK for them to employ him.

 

[2Rollin_Stoned]

Why do they even mention predators in this article? This man is not a predator and the only thing that he has been convicted of is that he had child (homosexual) porn on his computer. I see nothing in this article that says that he has engaged in any activity that sounds threatening aside from that. He has no access to computers, has served his sentence, has undergone (& probably still is under) therapy and is now on probation (that’s what “supervision” means) so that if he violates somehow the court will jail him and/or return him to prison. His employers know that he cannot have unsupervised contact with children and he does too because if he does it will violate his probation. He certainly doesn’t want that. He has to have a job, and like all ex-cons, he has to start over with his life.

I think the author has blown the situation all out of proportion in an effort to inflame public sentiment and sell papers and from the reactions of some on this thread, we can see that it works. We should deal with the truth (the facts), not the rhetorical propaganda of the press in an unbalanced article such as this.

 

[kmktexas]

I agree. This priest has done nothing to endanger children even though he did sin against chastity and might not be appropriate for the priesthood. The diocese indicates it is awaiting a decision from the Vatican regarding that issue.

But one of the bigger questions is what is the Church’s responsibilty to the priest? He evidently admitted to sinning but he also gave up his life to serve the Church and he served his time. Do we really want the Church to just turn him out on the street? Doesn’t the Church share some responsibility regarding helping this priest to make a new life?

There is of course, the even bigger issue in society. More and more companies are refusing to hire anyone with a criminal record, even if the individual has paid his/her debt and the crime is unrelated to the job. What obligation do we, as a society and as Catholics, have to these people. Most are repentant sinners. How do we make sure they are not so abandoned that they have no legal means to make a living and regain contributing citizenship???