T
- Status
D
Dale_M
Guest
The priest has admitted to an “inappropriate relationship” with the girl. It may have begun when she was 17, although her parents did not catch them in the act until they installed a video camera in the basement of their home. By then, the girl was 18. However, the parents had long suspected an intimate relationship between the two. They had approached the administration of her school, but had been put off.
This is terrible, all the more so since he was the chaplain at the Catholic high school she attended. Even worse, according to the lawsuit, she had a history of being sexually abused and had mental health problems, making her vulnerable to further exploitation.
The lawsuit alleges that the diocese knew about the relationship, but looked the other way.
This is terrible, all the more so since he was the chaplain at the Catholic high school she attended. Even worse, according to the lawsuit, she had a history of being sexually abused and had mental health problems, making her vulnerable to further exploitation.
The lawsuit alleges that the diocese knew about the relationship, but looked the other way.
S
sojo
Guest
Oh my dear Lord. These men in charge of the dioceses across this nation need to get a grip. Because we moms and dads aren’t going to be able to take this much longer. The family went to their diocese first and they got nothing. Nothing. After all the scandal in the church, this was they best they could do?
Praying for that child and the child’s child and that family. For shame on the Bishop of that diocese.
Praying for that child and the child’s child and that family. For shame on the Bishop of that diocese.
M
MarianD
Guest
Wow. Bishops need to take a more strict approach on this filth. Zero tolerance policies, automatic expulsion from the priesthood if things like this are proven, etc.
O
OKAstro
Guest
I agree, but unfortunately we have too many weak (liberal?) bishops and priests.
All the talk about cleaning things up among the clergy seems to have been just that.
ZERO TOLERANCE - AND TEACH THE FAITH AS ITS SUPPOSED TO BE TAUGHT - GET RID OF THE LIBERAL CLERGY
All the talk about cleaning things up among the clergy seems to have been just that.
ZERO TOLERANCE - AND TEACH THE FAITH AS ITS SUPPOSED TO BE TAUGHT - GET RID OF THE LIBERAL CLERGY
D
DOShea
Guest
Where are all these other facts coming from? The diocese “looked the other way?” The parents “got nothing?”
According to the article, it says very clearly the parents brought their proof (the videotape) to the diocese in November 09, the same month it was recorded. It goes on to say the priest in question was sent to treatment that same month and hasn’t functioned “as a priest” since November.
It sounds to me like the diocese took it seriously and acted promptly. They get proof and the Fr. is stripped of faculties and sent to treatment. What else does anyone want to happen? Should we crucify Fr. on the front steps of the parish church? Is that what it will take to make people realize action IS being taken?
What isn’t reported in this story is what happened when they went to the school and the diocese with their suspicions. It’s not rocket science to see from the story that they had suspicions but no hard evidence until they recorded the tape. Notice once evidence appeared, action was swift; without it, there wasn’t much. That’s what is supposed to happen. We don’t fire people because someone accuses them minus anything to back it up.
Part of what incensed the parents is the priest’s continued contact with the girl, AFTER being sent to treatment and AFTER being stripped of faculties by the diocese. I would find it truly remarkable that a diocese took that kind of action with their priest and did not also warn him to not have any further contact with the girl. The article is totally devoid of any information regarding whether Fr. acted on his own, defying guidance or warnings, or if there were no warnings given. If warnings WERE given, then it paints a totally different picture of the diocese, doesn’t it?
According to the article, it says very clearly the parents brought their proof (the videotape) to the diocese in November 09, the same month it was recorded. It goes on to say the priest in question was sent to treatment that same month and hasn’t functioned “as a priest” since November.
It sounds to me like the diocese took it seriously and acted promptly. They get proof and the Fr. is stripped of faculties and sent to treatment. What else does anyone want to happen? Should we crucify Fr. on the front steps of the parish church? Is that what it will take to make people realize action IS being taken?
What isn’t reported in this story is what happened when they went to the school and the diocese with their suspicions. It’s not rocket science to see from the story that they had suspicions but no hard evidence until they recorded the tape. Notice once evidence appeared, action was swift; without it, there wasn’t much. That’s what is supposed to happen. We don’t fire people because someone accuses them minus anything to back it up.
Part of what incensed the parents is the priest’s continued contact with the girl, AFTER being sent to treatment and AFTER being stripped of faculties by the diocese. I would find it truly remarkable that a diocese took that kind of action with their priest and did not also warn him to not have any further contact with the girl. The article is totally devoid of any information regarding whether Fr. acted on his own, defying guidance or warnings, or if there were no warnings given. If warnings WERE given, then it paints a totally different picture of the diocese, doesn’t it?
C
challam2010
Guest
I agree, but unfortunately we have too many weak (liberal?) bishops and priests.
All the talk about cleaning things up among the clergy seems to have been just that.
ZERO TOLERANCE - AND TEACH THE FAITH AS ITS SUPPOSED TO BE TAUGHT - GET RID OF THE LIBERAL CLERGY
Reply With Quote
This particular priest looks young (in the original article), but your remark about “liberal” bishops and priests and liberal clergy may be misplaced here, considering that the majority of the abuse cases were perpetrated by priests long before so-called “liberalism” reared its head. I wonder how “liberal” the priests in Ireland, Belgium and Germany were.
Your anger is misdirected.
According to a statistical summary I heard on Catholic radio, there were only six new cases reported last year – I personally think the American Bishops and the rest of the Church has done a remarkable job with the new safeguards in place.
All the talk about cleaning things up among the clergy seems to have been just that.
ZERO TOLERANCE - AND TEACH THE FAITH AS ITS SUPPOSED TO BE TAUGHT - GET RID OF THE LIBERAL CLERGY
Reply With Quote
This particular priest looks young (in the original article), but your remark about “liberal” bishops and priests and liberal clergy may be misplaced here, considering that the majority of the abuse cases were perpetrated by priests long before so-called “liberalism” reared its head. I wonder how “liberal” the priests in Ireland, Belgium and Germany were.
Your anger is misdirected.
According to a statistical summary I heard on Catholic radio, there were only six new cases reported last year – I personally think the American Bishops and the rest of the Church has done a remarkable job with the new safeguards in place.
C
challam2010
Guest
*I agree, but unfortunately we have too many weak (liberal?) bishops and priests.
All the talk about cleaning things up among the clergy seems to have been just that.
ZERO TOLERANCE - AND TEACH THE FAITH AS ITS SUPPOSED TO BE TAUGHT - GET RID OF THE LIBERAL CLERGY*
This particular priest looks young (in the original article), but your remark about “liberal” bishops and priests and liberal clergy may be misplaced here, considering that the majority of the abuse cases were perpetrated by priests long before so-called “liberalism” reared its head. I wonder how “liberal” the priests in Ireland, Belgium and Germany were.
Your anger is misdirected.
According to a statistical summary I heard on Catholic radio, there were only six new cases reported last year – I personally think the American Bishops and the rest of the Church has done a remarkable job with the new safeguards in place.
All the talk about cleaning things up among the clergy seems to have been just that.
ZERO TOLERANCE - AND TEACH THE FAITH AS ITS SUPPOSED TO BE TAUGHT - GET RID OF THE LIBERAL CLERGY*
This particular priest looks young (in the original article), but your remark about “liberal” bishops and priests and liberal clergy may be misplaced here, considering that the majority of the abuse cases were perpetrated by priests long before so-called “liberalism” reared its head. I wonder how “liberal” the priests in Ireland, Belgium and Germany were.
Your anger is misdirected.
According to a statistical summary I heard on Catholic radio, there were only six new cases reported last year – I personally think the American Bishops and the rest of the Church has done a remarkable job with the new safeguards in place.
O
OKAstro
Guest
I guess we “people” want our clergy to man up and do what they’re called to do. If they can’t then they should resign. The CC has taken enough of a beating and we’re tired of it.
Forgiveness yes - but this behavior has got to stop
O
OKAstro
Guest
Should be zero cases. Apparently some still haven’t gotten the message.
D
DOShea
Guest
Are you referring to the behavior of the priest or the Bishop and his staff at the diocese? No one argues the priest’s behavior wasn’t dead wrong. I am simply taking issue with the claims that the diocese (apparently) didn’t act. Using only the facts reported in the article, it appears they did act, and promptly at that.
It seems some have the expectation that because someone is suspicious of a priest, he should be locked up or something until an investigation proves otherwise. That’s now how justice works. I’ve seen with my own eyes more than a few times good, decent people have what appears on its face to be a valid suspicion that turns out to be not what they thought it was. Think how disruptive your own life would be if any time anyone suspected something about you, you got suspended from your job and had to stay at home until someone else figured it all out. Yet some expect our priests to be held to a bizarre standard like that.
O
OKAstro
Guest
My anger is mostly with the Priest. I know false accusations are made, and action should be taken when warranted. I’ll back-off my criticism of this Bishop
But, I wish every Bishop in every diocese would notify all their priests that a zero tolerance policy is in force…no ifs ands or buts…any sexual misconduct and you’re out…any false teaching of what the CC teaches and you’re out. Like Fr Phlegler in Chicago - Catholics cringe at this man’s behavior.
I’m sorry- I’m just tired of it all. I need to remember that it’s not as bad as it seems, but the secular media is more than happy to broadcast any and all bad Catholic priest behavior.
Peace
K
KostyaJMJ
Guest
On the bright side at least the priest is interested in women of legal age.
J
JReducation
Guest
But the bishop did use the “you broke the rules, you’re out.” He suspended the priest, removed him from duty and sent him away. The Church has no more authority than that.
What other action would you want that does not violate the sacrament of Holy Orders? The Church cannot say to a man, “You’re no longer a priest.” You and I know that even if the Church said that, it’s not true. You are a priest forever.
The Church does not have prisons, so she cannot incarcerate these individuals.
The individual has a right to be presummed innocent until proven guilty. This is what happened. When the video was presented, he was proven guilty and the bishop complied with the law of the Church. The priest was suspended and removed.
The other statements in the post about the girl having mental health issues and being manipulated, etc, that’s the lawyer speaking. We have to remember, lawyers are going to manipulate language to win their case either in civil court or in the court of public opinion. It’s their job. This lawyer is doing a good job, because people here are being influenced by him and not seeing that the bishop did exactly what the USCCB promised they would do.
Notice that the suit is a civil suit for damages. It’s not a felony charge for abuse of a minor or abuse of a disabled person. This raises questions about how mentally ill this young lady truly is.
What Father did was as wrong as the Holocaust. But I refuse to judge the bishops guided by the eloquence of a good lawyer who is trying to win a civil suit, not push forward a prosecution for abuse of any kind, be it of a minor or a mentally disabled person.
If there were proof that this girl is mentally disabled, don’t you think that the lawyer would have asked the DA for an arrest warrant?
Again, Father was horribly wrong. But I don’t see the bishop or the school doing anything wrong. What usually happens in these cases is that the suspension will not be lifted. When the five-years are up, he will be dismissed from the clerical state. Sometimes it goes faster; but that depends on the Pope. He will still be a priest. That cannot be changed. The only thing that can be done by the Churh is to laicize him. That means that he remains a priest who must live out his life as if he were a lay man, except in an emergency, in which case he may hear a confession or annoint the sick.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
O
OKAstro
Guest
Hey - lighten up. I said I retract my criticsim of this Bishop!!But the bishop did use the “you broke the rules, you’re out.” He suspended the priest, removed him from duty and sent him away. The Church has not more authority than that.
What other action would you want that does not violate the sacrament of Holy Orders? The Church cannot say to a man, “You’re no longer a priest.” You and I know that even if the Church said that, it’s not true. You are a priest forever.
The Church does not have prisons, so she cannot incarcerate these individuals.
The individual has a right to be presummed innocent until proven guilty. This is what happened. When the video was presented, he was proven guilty and the bishop complied with the law of the Church. The priest was suspended and removed.
The other statements in the post about the girl having mental health issues and being manipulated, etc, that’s the lawyer speaking. We have to remember, lawyers are going to manipulate language to win their case either in civil court or in the court of public opinion. It’s their job. This lawyer is doing a good job, because people hear are being influenced by him and not seeing that the bishop did exactly what the USCCB promised they would do.
Notice that they suit is a civil suit for damages. It’s not a felony charge for abuse of a minor or abuse of a disabled person. This raises questions about how mentally ill this young lady truly is.
What Father did was as wrong the the Holocaust. But I refuse to judge the bishops based guided by the eloquence of a good lawyer who is trying to win a civil suit, not push forward a prosecution for abuse of any kind, be it of a minor or a mentally disabled person.
If there were proof that this girl is mentally disabled, don’t you think that the lawyer would have asked the DA for an arrest warrant?
Again, Father horribly wrong. But I don’t see the bishop or the school doing anything wrong. What usually happens in these cases is that the suspension will not be lifted. When the five-years are up, he will be dismissed from the clerical state. He will still be a priest. That cannot be changed. The only thing that can be done by the Churh is to laicize him. That means that he remains a priest who must live out his life as if he were a lay man, except in an emergency, in which case he may hear a confession or annoint the sick.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
JReducation
Guest
I didn’t mean to be hard on you. We just crossed posts.
Shake :hug1:
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
S
StrawberryJam
Guest
Can I ask some of you here any questions about this, or make any commentary regarding this?
O
OKAstro
Guest
Peace, brotherI didn’t mean to be hard on you. We just crossed posts.
Shake :hug1:
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
D
Dale_M
Guest
I’m sorry to say, the story gets more complicated.
The girl, now 19, has moved in with the priest.
The girl, now 19, has moved in with the priest.
readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=244723
J
JReducation
Guest
- Is Fr. Bonilla guilty of violating several moral laws? Guilty
- Is Fr. Bonilla guilty of abuse? Good question.
- Is the High School guilty of anything? No.
- Are the bishops guilty of anything? Apparently not.
- Does this lawyer have a case? Now now.
Fr. Bonilla will most likely be dismissed from the clerical state. That’s his fault.
The relationship will most likely not last. There are several reasons for that.
Base on this information, the bishop did what the USCCB promised to do.
Had there been grounds to call this abuse, this would not be tried in a civil suit, but as a felony.
The Church cannot guarrantee that any human being will not commit a sin. She can only guarrantee that she will respond and in this case, it appears that she has done so.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
- Status