Pa. Monsignor Get 3-6 Years

[zab]

What the heck?!? Did Law think he was living in the 15th century or something?!?

Ostentatious displays of wealth is so “yesterday” in the Church. They don’t all need to be Franciscans but come on!!!

No, but it probably would have been nice to return to a place of retreats as it was once used.

 

[ringil]

No, but it probably would have been nice to return to a place of retreats as it was once used.

Well, the child molesters and predators ruined that, didn’t they?

 

[clem456]

clem

It matters because that’s when many of the administration and coaches are on vacation.
Who knew what is conjecture at this point.

Not to get into a huge deal over Penn State…but this is not accurate. Read the report. This was a well respected defensive coach who was considered the heir apparent at Penn State, or could have had just about any other big coaching job. He was let go after his problem was discovered. AND HE WAS STILL ALLOWED TO HANG AROUND!!! He didn’t need football season to molest at Penn State. Conjecture? I’ll give you 100% odds it is not conjecture. I’ll simply point you to court records and investigative reports that say otherwise.

You can’t ignore the context of the time when these things happened. Just as when you study history you must do so in the context of the time it happened, otherwise you’ll be misunderstanding the judgment of people of those times.

Context gives us clues as to the decision-making process that went on. But context simply never justifies evil or the cooperation with it. Never.
This dialogue illustrates the problem the Church faces fairly well. Crimes happened that cry out for justice. And people want to say “Yes, but, mitigating circumstances! Yes, but the Church’s reputation… But Father was a good priest… But the lawyer says we don’t really know if there was a crime… But the therapist says we can quietly rehabilitate Father.” There are no “buts”. This is the most basic lesson in morality ever. It’s never Ok to do the wrong thing, even if by some miracle you don’t realize it’s wrong, it’s still wrong. And realistically, how many of our Church officials who shuffled these priests can claim moral ignorance?? Can a bishop or other diocesan higher up really claim moral ignorance? Really? Catholic Church officials ignorant of morality? Even 30 years ago?

Evil doesn’t change, but mental understanding of mental disorders does, and during the times when most of the cases of sex abuse by priest occured, it was believed that it was a treatable disorder, and that’s how they treated the priests.

Ok, fine, they believed it was a treatable disorder.Treat the priest. The questin remains, what about the kids??? The Church was it’s own worst enemy in this scandal, because the moral course of action was not taken so often.

 

[lonelypetunia]

I live in the area where Monsignor Lynn was a parish priest. St. Joseph’s in Downingtown PA. I also grew up in Philadelphia, many of my family members worked for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. I have many close friends who are Catholic and I do feel for them in this time.

One of the things I hear from many of my Catholic friends is that they felt betrayed and deeply hurt by all of this and will never set foot in or give another dime to the church. A few say he was the scape goat to give Philly’s legal system someone’s head for the abuses. A few have left the church because of it. Some said they don’t care it doesn’t affect them, that it isn’t as widespread as the news media would like everyone to think. Some feel the Media is going after the church and is persecuting Catholics.

I think the thoughts on the situation are as diverse as people expressing them. The one thing everyone could agree on is that no child should ever be abused and the victims are in their thoughts and prayers.

Far be it for me to judge anyone or their motives. My heart aches for the victims of sexual abuse regardless of who was the abuser, Sandusky, a Priest, a deranged family member. The victims are in my thoughts and prayers as they are the ones that need healing the most.

 

[cmforte]

Except that in the case of sexual abuse, the civil authorities would do nothing if the parents didn’t want to prosecute the offender, which was the usual case. Reason being, parents didn’t want their child to live with the negative stigma. So, without the parents of the child not willing to prosecute, they just accepted that the offending priest would be sent for treatment, which was thought treatable, and then once the doctors gave a clean bill of health, the Bishop would reactivate the priest into a ministry.

So, the priest who obtained knowledge of sexual abuse, would go to the Bishop who would just run the usual course of treatment, then reassignment.

It was wrong, but we have the hindsight of 20-30 years to now know that pedophiles can never be trusted around kids. We also have changes in the law where have rape shield laws where the victims names can be kept from public knowledge.

Jim

20-30 years isn’t that long ago. There were high profile child sexual abuse cases even then. Even if, knowing that pedophiles can never be trusted around kids should have just been common sense no matter the decade.

-Chris

 

[cmforte]

Evil doesn’t change, but mental understanding of mental disorders does, and during the times when most of the cases of sex abuse by priest occured, it was believed that it was a treatable disorder, and that’s how they treated the priests.

Jim

It doesn’t matter if the Bishops believed pedophile priests could be treated or not. Alcoholism can be treated, but you wouldn’t want a former alcoholic walking into a bar every night. In the same way, common sense would tell you that you don’t put a person who was sexually attracted to kids, now treated or not, back with kids.

-Chris

 

[JimR-OCDS]

It doesn’t matter if the Bishops believed pedophile priests could be treated or not. Alcoholism can be treated, but you wouldn’t want a former alcoholic walking into a bar every night. In the same way, common sense would tell you that you don’t put a person who was sexually attracted to kids, now treated or not, back with kids.

-Chris

It wasn’t a case whether the Bishops believed pedophilia could be treated or not, that’s not their area of expertise. They relied on the advise of doctors and followed their recommendations.

Remember, a priest is a priest for life, even one who sins, still remains a priest.

Also, the Bishops think was that it was better to keep such a priest under their control, than let him loose without any oversight.

Jim

 

[clem456]

It wasn’t a case whether the Bishops believed pedophilia could be treated or not, that’s not their area of expertise. They relied on the advise of doctors and followed their recommendations.

Remember, a priest is a priest for life, even one who sins, still remains a priest.

Also, the Bishops think was that it was better to keep such a priest under their control, than let him loose without any oversight.

Jim

Well that’s real nice, but that’s why we have jails.
Are we exhausting the excuses yet?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Well that’s real nice, but that’s why we have jails.
Are we exhausting the excuses yet?

Well if you’re content judging how Bishops handled the issue without looking at the context of the time and how these issues were handled by all the institutions, fine.

Jim

 

[clem456]

Well if you’re content judging how Bishops handled the issue without looking at the context of the time and how these issues were handled by all the institutions, fine.

Jim

So here’s the elephant in the living room::
Given the context of the time and the fact that others handled it poorly also, do you think the priests and bishops are accountable to justice for the harn caused to children? Or not? I hear you saying they are not. Is that the case?

 

[pnewton]

So here’s the elephant in the living room::
Given the context of the time and the fact that others handled it poorly also, do you think the priests and bishops are accountable to justice for the harn caused to children? Or not?

I will say they are not accountable for all harm caused to children. I would not distinguish between clergy and others, but rather say that all are responsible for the harm they do others, at least in restitution. I would say they owe a debt to the justice system if they caused harm deliberately, knowingly recklessly or negligently, with the amount of punishment due subject to their culpability.

I am not a big fan of scape-goating.

 

[CatholicBoy1957]

You guys might have been thinking of John J. Geoghan. Paul Gauguin was an artist.

 

[cmforte]

It wasn’t a case whether the Bishops believed pedophilia could be treated or not, that’s not their area of expertise. They relied on the advise of doctors and followed their recommendations.

I doubt any doctor ever told them that a treated pedophile can now be trusted around kids. Not just 20 years ago, anyways. And even if so, why would a Bishop risk it?

-Chris

 

[St_Donatus]

I am sorry, but a lot has changed in the last 20 to 30 years, I lived through it. The thinking was a lot different back then. People in authority in general were looked on with much greater admiration and many things they did were just swept under the rug. Look at John F Kennedy’s many adulterous relationships which were not exposed until more recent times. I can probably come up with 20 more good examples. Unlike many of these other authorities, Priests were handled in the fairest way they thought they knew back then. They didn’t just sweep it under the rug, but tried to treat them and put them back to work.

And yes, psychology was considered a magic pill for mental issues back then and the thought was that any man that was sexually attracted to children had mental issues. Once resolved, they were allowed to go back to work. I remember several instances were Day Care owners were caught sexually abusing children and were never shut down.

Don’t tell me that the authorities knew better. It was a very different time.

 

[cmforte]

I am sorry, but a lot has changed in the last 20 to 30 years, I lived through it. The thinking was a lot different back then. People in authority in general were looked on with much greater admiration and many things they did were just swept under the rug. Look at John F Kennedy’s many adulterous relationships which were not exposed until more recent times. I can probably come up with 20 more good examples. Unlike many of these other authorities, Priests were handled in the fairest way they thought they knew back then. They didn’t just sweep it under the rug, but tried to treat them and put them back to work.

And yes, psychology was considered a magic pill for mental issues back then and the thought was that any man that was sexually attracted to children had mental issues. Once resolved, they were allowed to go back to work. I remember several instances were Day Care owners were caught sexually abusing children and were never shut down.

Don’t tell me that the authorities knew better. It was a very different time.

Sorry, but I was around 20-30 years ago and not that young at the time. I know better. This “it was a dfferent time,” “the authorities didn’t know any better (what happened to the Holy Spirit?),” and “they were just following the expert’s advice,” doesn’t fly.

-Chris

 

[cmforte]

I am sorry, but a lot has changed in the last 20 to 30 years, I lived through it. The thinking was a lot different back then. People in authority in general were looked on with much greater admiration and many things they did were just swept under the rug. Look at John F Kennedy’s many adulterous relationships which were not exposed until more recent times. I can probably come up with 20 more good examples. me.

That’s not even ONE good example. The era of JFK was way back in the '60s and his infidelities started being brought to light in the late 1980s. 20-30 years ago is only the 1990s, not the Dark Ages. I remember the '90s like yesterday. In fact, it was in the late 90s that the sex scandal started unfolding. Some people have short memories!!

-Chris

 

[clem456]

Sorry, but I was around 20-30 years ago and not that young at the time. I know better. This “it was a dfferent time,” “the authorities didn’t know any better (what happened to the Holy Spirit?),” and “they were just following the expert’s advice,” doesn’t fly.

-Chris

It’s but another excuse. The serious part of this is:

The attempt to withhold justice from the injured.

The loss of souls due to scandal. People have an innate God-given sense of justice that certain in the Church have violated with these excuses. This scandal is one of the prime reasons used (incorrectly) for not being Catholic. Nonetheless, we should not be an instrument for driving people away from the Church.

The faulty logic being used here can be used to avoid culpability for all sorts of evil. For instance, many who are raised in our culture do not value life. They could make the case they are not morally culpable, in fact the law in the USA justifies abortion. Do I hear some of you saying abortion is justifiable in individual circustances through ignorance? if ou are going to be intellectually consistent, this is the quicksand this morality rest on.

 

[pnewton]

The faulty logic being used here can be used to avoid culpability for all sorts of evil. For instance, many who are raised in our culture do not value life. They could make the case they are not morally culpable, in fact the law in the USA justifies abortion.

Catholic theology says that this may diminish or eliminate culpablity. Abortion is an inexact comparison because it is an objective mortal sin.

Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man.

old.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect1chpt1art8.shtml

It may be that people here are not so much making excuses as trying to abide by Catholic moral teaching.

 

[cmforte]

pnewton:

It may be that people here are not so much making excuses as trying to abide by Catholic moral teaching.

So now putting convicted/treated or just treated pedophile priests back in with the same type of people (kids) they were treated for for victimizing is somehow “Catholic moral teaching.”?? Again, I go to the analogy of a treated alcoholic going back to the bar every night. “Catholic moral teaching” or not, where was the common sense?

-Chris

 

[St_Donatus]

That’s not even ONE good example. The era of JFK was way back in the '60s and his infidelities started being brought to light in the late 1980s. 20-30 years ago is only the 1990s, not the Dark Ages. I remember the '90s like yesterday. In fact, it was in the late 90s that the sex scandal started unfolding. Some people have short memories!!

-Chris

You have a good point. I guess I was thinking more like in the 1970s era. I guess that would be 30 to 40 years ago at this point.

I am not saying that people don’t have responsibility for their actions. But we still need to look at these things through the eyes of history and how slowly the church changes. Yes, it would be great if the Catholic Church would make changes instantly but they don’t. Look how long they have been getting sued for this stuff and the changes are just starting to occur.

Yes, I would love things to be different, if none of the children had been molested, if these priests were not put back into churches, but I am sure the Catholic Church wishes the same thing. Much of this needed to happen to get the Church to change their processes.

The issues I have with all this is that some seem to look at the Catholic Church as some kind of Evil Monster. They love to harp on this stuff without end. The fact is that the clergy of the Catholic Church still has the lowest rate of child abuse of any institution, religious or non-religious, and yet we continually hear the media and Catholics harp on this issue, causing thousands of Catholics to leave the faith. As Catholics we know that the Catholic Church is the path to Salvation and when we are instrumental in causing Catholics to become Atheist, Agnostic, or some false religion, we hold some responsibility. Just as those pedophile priests caused spiritual ruin for many of those children, we to have responsibility for others who leave. I know that these men deserve to pay for their sins and God will make sure of that. What I don’t know is how taking the hard earned money I donate to help Gods church, closing down churches and leaving thousands of Catholics without parishes and priests, takes away the evil that has occured. If anything, it adds to it as the church doesn’t have the funds to perform its ministry and save souls.