Rebuttal of the PA grand jury report

  • Thread starter Thread starter Casilda
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
How is not reading it being a coward? Bishops recommended reading this? Personally I try to avoid depictions and stories of abuse and sex. I don’t think it is good for the soul to read details of sex abuse unless for a very good reason. Knowing some of what is in this report I would recommend most people not read it.
 
I don’t think you are trying to understand what I am saying at all. Of course there is a requirement for a secret archive. That was my point.
 
If you feel like reading it would cause you near occasion of sin or threaten your faith than do not read it, but reading it will open your eyes to the truth of what has happened and allow for you to recognize the problem and make room in your heart for healing and progress.

Because right now nothing you are saying is helping our Church.
 
I thought it worth sharing the statements from the Pennsylvania dioceses:
Not that these “rebut” the grand jury report, but I think it’s natural to look at what they have to say about it.
 
I know about the truth without reading it. It will add nothing to my understanding. It wouldn’t threaten my faith. I just don’t think it is good to read about abuse the same as I don’t like to watch cruel or excessively violent programs. I don’t need to be reminded of the awfulness of people.
 
exnihilo said:
I have no interest in reading it beyond the first few pages I read. The intro tells me enough about the report to know what it is, a hit piece.
Click to expand...
I too started to read it. I said in another thread that calling a study was generous. So I looked up the architect of this, Josh Shapiro. It is he who chose to give this grand jury this task and filtered the information they receive. As it is in keeping with the finding of a scientific study, the John Jay report, I do not doubt it accurately reflects what we already knew happened across the country.

As to why Josh Shapiro wanted the amateurish attempt to document this specifically in his state, I will let those who read about this attorney turned politician to decide.
 
anikins said:
These are not just allegations. They are substantiated in official diocesan documents which appear in the report,
Click to expand...
I am not sure what you mean by “substantiated”, but if you mean “credible”, then you are wrong. From the rebuttal article in the OP (see part II) there are several examples of allegations in the grand jury report that had been examined and were not found to be credible. From the John Jay study, this was about 7% of allegation; but of the 93% referred to police less than half led to charges and of those ~ two-thirds led to convictions.
 
pnewton said:
As to why Josh Shapiro wanted the amateurish attempt to document this specifically in his state, I will let those who read about this attorney turned politician to decide.
Click to expand...
“Amateurish”?

Josh Shapiro has gotten himself all over the national news for days now. Crusading State AG looking out for the interests of victimized children! Mission Accomplished! Miller time!

I fully expect to see a congressional or gubernatorial bid from Shapiro in the near future. And with what passes for politicians in PA, he’d have a great shot.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
“Amateurish”?
Click to expand...
The amateur part was for the grand jury, as they are twelve amateurs.

It amazes me how many people here and elsewhere believe everything politicians say, and this report is just a political extension of one man’s ambition. We had the same thing happen here were a local DA indicted both Congressman Tom Delay (acquitted) and Governor Rick Perry (dismissed). DA’s are politicians. I for one am ready to move our capital out of Austin and Travis County.
 
Donahue does correct many distortions in the GJ report. He nailed the elephant in the room of the homosexual predation. He also glosses over horrible crimes. I don’t really care if it was not 300 guilty Priests, I don’t care if some were groped and not sodomized, I don’t care if they were post pubescent instead of children, I don’t care if many things are changed for the better now than in 2002. I do care that it is still being covered up, that there is no transparency, that Bishops are falling and failing and protecting each other. Bill is protecting Cardinals that have a lot of splaining to do. Of course those Cardinals are the reason that Bill is making $500k per year too. Yes, the Grand Jury report is a “hit piece” on the Church. But Bill rebuttal is a “hit piece” on the GJ report. The truth is in the middle. And the truth is horrible and wicked assaults to human dignity perpetuated by priests, “mostly” cleaned up since 2002 but not nearly cleaned up enough. And it continues to be covered up and denied!.
 
Last edited:
bullish1 said:
And it continues to be covered up and denied!.
Click to expand...
I do question this, though. Is it still being covered up? Hasn’t all this information already been listed on bishop-accountability.org for a long time? I don’t necessarily fault a bishop for not pulling out documents from 75 years ago to publicize them again and again. I would fault a bishop for pushing aside a current allegation (even if it was from an event that took place 75 years ago).

Just because the grand jury report included information that was new for many people to hear doesn’t necessarily mean that the information wasn’t already out there.

Or maybe there was new information. I don’t know. I haven’t done extensive research. I’m just hesitant to think that simply because I hadn’t heard a particular story that it therefore means that some bishop or priest was actively preventing me from hearing it.
 
Yes, there is no doubt in my mind that there are still coverups going on. Here is one article about Cardinal Wuerl. These are not recent events as he was Bishop of Pittsburg at the time. Sure, it can be dismissed as a hit piece, but is there truth in it? Sure seems like truth and cover up to me. Certainly it has not been the transparency we need to believe in our Church hierarchy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...c9042272f07_story.html?utm_term=.9cd9a2d0fd43
 
Last edited:
That title is ridiculous. What is it that Wuerl did that makes him a con man? This is a witch hunt as it is devoid of reason and fairness. Being a witch hunt doesn’t mean bad things didn’t happen. It does mean the people calling for ‘justice’ are not so good themselves.
 
I keep seeing mixed things about Wuerl. I have seen some articles that mention how he actually went to Rome back in 1993 or 1994 in order to argue that one of his priests who was accused of abuse needed to be laicized (the officials in Rome originally denied his request). He was able to convince them, and the priest was laicized. This sort of runs counter to the picture being portrayed of him trying to cover everything up and just shuffle priests around.

It’s hard for me to believe I’m getting an accurate picture of him based on news articles. When stuff like this comes out, I feel it’s difficult to get objective information.
 
I saw that too. It seems to me if your name is in the report, for whatever reason, you are condemned. I think that was the goal.
 
Some people just refuse to believe the truth ever. Wuerl fired a priest who refused communion to a woman while in the state of mortal sin. That is just wrong. In fact, it’s contrary to Church teaching. Wuerl eulogized a predator homosexual priest that was part of a Child porn ring. That is scandal.

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Cardinal Wuerl, coward and alleged enabler of child molestation, downplays Church sex abuse scandal - Washington Examiner

The Catholic Church is sick. The cancer of clerical abuse has buried itself deep within the institution, causing indescribable pain and suffering to thousands of victims. The Church needs leaders who will rip out this evil with a ruthless, single-mindedness. Cardinal Donald Wuerl has shown he is...
www.washingtonexaminer.com www.washingtonexaminer.com
 
Last edited:
I too have a hard time reconciling the contrary acts that people do. Wuerl has done and said some things that can be considered saintly. He has done and said some things that are heretical. But it is long past the time when the Pope should accept his resignation. Probably time to do much more in the way of disciplinary action but I will let an honest investigation into the facts occur by our Church and hope the result is fair. I doubt that will happen though.
 
I find it very difficult to believe that any bishop would dismiss a priest (someone the Church invested much time and money in forming as a priest) solely because he denied Communion to someone. There has to be more to that story.

As for the eulogy for a predator priest, I would be interested to hear his explanation. Was the priest actually guilty, or just accused? Did Wuerl know of his actions at the time he gave the eulogy?

My main point is that, when I hear reports of scandal, I feel like I am getting only one side of the story. And I feel like asking for the other side of the story implies I don’t believe victims of abuse and/or have no concern for them. I am interested in the truth of the matter, and I agree with your desire for an honest investigation. I am willing to suspend judgment of specific people because I know I do not have all the facts and am not in the best position to render a true judgment.

I do hope any investigation is done quickly. But I also want it done well, which I know takes time.
 
Joe_5859 said:
As for the eulogy for a predator priest, I would be interested to hear his explanation. Was the priest actually guilty, or just accused? Did Wuerl know of his actions at the time he gave the eulogy?
Click to expand...
Yes he was guilty. Yes Wuerl knew about it. In fact, this was one of the predatory priests that the Wuerl diocese covered up by transfer etc until he was accused by so many that he was permanently removed. This priest was the very worst type of abuser. The reports of his behavior by multiple victims is gut wrenching and despicable. It’s fairly obvious that many here are not going to do their own research and wont be willing to accept information from others who are providing it. Instead, they will mock those efforts or in some cases, make their own accusations about those providing it. God knows the truth and those who are guilty will get the only judgement that matters, God’s alone.
Joe_5859 said:
I find it very difficult to believe that any bishop would dismiss a priest (someone the Church invested much time and money in forming as a priest) solely because he denied Communion to someone. There has to be more to that story.
Click to expand...
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/articl...-only-thing-faithful-catholic-priest-could-do

www.lifesitenews.com

Cdl. Wuerl censured priest who denied lesbian Communion, but let predatory clergy remain active - LifeSite

Issues were handled drastically different in Pittsburgh vs. Washington, D.C.
www.lifesitenews.com www.lifesitenews.com
 
Last edited:
Just to add; this incident you posted was not the only time Cdl. Wuerl removed a priest for denying communion that was only following Church teaching. There have been several incidents that have made the news locally and nationally within the last several years (I am in his Archdiocese).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top