The Contra Costa Times: Priests served despite abuse complaints

  • Thread starter Thread starter yessisan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Y

yessisan

Guest
contracostatimes.com/ci_8748784?nclick_check=1

And you should see the paper publication of today’s paper! :mad: They have pages and page of this and even include photos of those priests who were accused of child abuse, and not just that, the photos include priests who have been found innocent :mad:

It seems that this newspaper is going to publish something against the Church every single day of this week.
 
No news paper could do what they are doing if The hierarcy had been compleatly honest, As they would not have had a story to feed off
 
LDNCatholic said:
Its a fairly big deal for the innocent priests whose faces are being put up there alongside those of convicted child abusers wouldn’t you say?
Click to expand...
Yeah, don’t get me wrong. It’s bad, but after all the more serious attacks on the catholic church, I could care less about this one.
 
yessisan said:
contracostatimes.com/ci_8748784?nclick_check=1

And you should see the paper publication of today’s paper! :mad: They have pages and page of this and even include photos of those priests who were accused of child abuse, and not just that, the photos include priests who have been found innocent :mad:

It seems that this newspaper is going to publish something against the Church every single day of this week.
Click to expand...
First of all, the link does not work. To find the article, I had to just go to the paper’s website contracostatimes.com and then find the link from there. That may not work after a day or two.
Secondly, it is stated to be the second of a four-part series, which by definition could not run “every single day of this week”.
Thirdly, as I had to view the article online, I could not see how it was laid out in print. Still, the pictures included in the article for today did not have anything that could be construed as various mug shots of innocents comingled with the guilty. However, the accompanying poll (though only about 100 have responded so far) does show a 3-to-1 public support of naming all the “accused” priests which means they’re probably equating an accusation with a conviction.
Finally, until the Church admits full culpability and rectifies the multitude of errors made in these scandals, we will not be able to move on. This article rightly points out the depth of the sin as a systematic failing of the Church.
"From the article itself:
For most of its 46-year history, the Diocese of Oakland was led by two men. One did not want even his closest advisers to know that his priests had molested children. The other, his subordinates say, was happier not knowing.

Bishops Floyd Begin, who served until his death in 1977, and John Cummins, who took over for Begin and served until 2003, had vastly different leadership styles, but the result was identical: Priests accused of child molestation were allowed to serve in parishes after they were reported to diocese officials. Some of them continued to abuse again and again.

In a series of depositions obtained by MediaNews reporters, former diocese leaders described a system that allowed at least 10 accused priests to remain in ministry for years – sometimes decades – after sexual misconduct was reported.
Click to expand...
 
The Contra Costa Times is a newspaper I have seen before with some controversial stuff.

Thanks for reminding me.
 
From the article:
As for Ponciroli, he finally was pulled from ministry in 1995, after a lawsuit was filed against the diocese accusing him of abuse committed 20 years earlier.
Click to expand...
Proof positive that the lawsuits against offending dioceses are indeed a good thing.

Nohome
 
Strummer said:
First of all, the link does not work. To find the article, I had to just go to the paper’s website contracostatimes.com and then find the link from there. That may not work after a day or two.
Secondly, it is stated to be the second of a four-part series, which by definition could not run “every single day of this week”.
Thirdly, as I had to view the article online, I could not see how it was laid out in print. Still, the pictures included in the article for today did not have anything that could be construed as various mug shots of innocents comingled with the guilty. However, the accompanying poll (though only about 100 have responded so far) does show a 3-to-1 public support of naming all the “accused” priests which means they’re probably equating an accusation with a conviction.
Finally, until the Church admits full culpability and rectifies the multitude of errors made in these scandals, we will not be able to move on. This article rightly points out the depth of the sin as a systematic failing of the Church.
Click to expand...
I think there may be a different reason for this other than just outright condemnation without evidence. Perhaps many folks, parents especially, want to know who has been accused because they are afraid of more cover ups by the Church. In other words, so many guilty priests went unreported that perhaps they fear this will again occur so want to be able to avoid even those who have only been accused - I’m not putting this well - does this make sense? Let’s try this: Say I’m Mom and I found out about how many priests went scott free for years. Now I hear of more abuse. Some priests are guilty, some only accused. I think, “well, how can I be sure these guys aren’t guilty too. After all, so much has been covered up for so long who can I belive? Better be on the safe side and make sure my son is never around any of them!” It’s wrong but it’s hard to blame them. 😦
 
Swan said:
Let’s try this: Say I’m Mom and I found out about how many priests went scott free for years. Now I hear of more abuse. Some priests are guilty, some only accused. I think, “well, how can I be sure these guys aren’t guilty too. After all, so much has been covered up for so long who can I belive? Better be on the safe side and make sure my son is never around any of them!” It’s wrong but it’s hard to blame them. 😦
Click to expand...
I made a point of never leaving my kids, or anyone else’s kids when I could help it, alone with a particular priest who set off all my alarm bells. There was never a whisper about him and I never said anything to anyone, as a matter of fact I liked the man, but there was just something about him. I simply kept my eyes and ears open and volunteered to look after the altar servers and always accompany them on field trips.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top