L
Lepanto
Guest
Please see the link in post #576.Deo Gratias for the Diocese of Saginaw!!!
What is the Curricula Vitae on the new Bishop?
Please see the link in post #576.Deo Gratias for the Diocese of Saginaw!!!
What is the Curricula Vitae on the new Bishop?
I don’t know anything more than what is on his CV (and it sounds like he doesn’t know much about us either). Read Bishop Cistone’s statement from the the Whispers in the Loggia blog that lepanto’s first linked to earlier today.Are there thoughts on this appointment?
I would assume it’s based on the high need in Saginaw. Bishop Carlson probably asked His Holiness Pope Benedict to fill the spot ASAP so that business can continue.This assignment came extraordinarily fast after the announcement that Bishop Carlson would be moving on. Any thoughts on why the speed in filling the vacancy when others have been waiting much longer for a new shepard?
A 2005 Philadelphia grand-jury investigation into clergy sexual abuse in the archdiocese concluded that Cistone, while assistant vicar for administration, was complicit in 1996 in silencing a nun who tried to alert members of St. Gabriel’s parish about an abusive priest.
The grand jury also found that, among other things, Cistone in 2002 took no action to warn a suburban school district that one of its teachers was a former priest known to abuse children. It said he had taken no action against a parish priest despite reports that he sometimes made boys strip and pricked some with pins.
In an e-mail to The Inquirer in 2005, Cistone expressed his “sorrow” for “any mistakes in judgment made by those of us . . . with responsibility for these matters.”
Hi Singerlady,Does anyone have any thoughts on the link that Frommi posted? I’m sure there is more to that story than what the media has reported. The quotes around the word “sorrow” tend to imply that the writer of the article has a bias. But given what our diocese went through in 2002, I am troubled by the story of a cover up in Philadelphia.

I’m just curious…is the thesis of your post that we should ignore the grand jury report because the archdiocese of philadelphia says so?The archdiocese responded pretty strongly to those accusations at the time
“The grand jury report purports to portray the attitude and behavior of the Archdiocese toward sexual abuse of minors. In fact, however, its content is nothing more then an attempt to convict in the court of public opinion those whom it does not indict in a court of law. This is reckless rhetoric, dispensed from any burden of proof, and is not responsible law enforcement.”
bishop-accountability.org/reports/2005_09_21_Philly_GrandJury/Response.pdf
As always, there are two sides to every story.I’m presenting the response of the archdiocese, which was not given in the article you linked.
No, but because is seems +Benedict places more credence in the archdioceses’ report than the grand jury’s.I’m just curious…is the thesis of your post that we should ignore the grand jury report because the archdiocese of philadelphia says so?