Posted on 09/19/2002 7:28:23 AM PDT by Incorrigible
Myers left a 'mess' in Peoria, insider says Thursday, September 19, 2002 By The Associated Press
CHICAGO - The archbishop of Newark is leaving a panel formed to implement the church's new sex abuse rules, a newspaper reported yesterday.
Newark Archbishop John J. Myers, formerly bishop of Peoria, is the latest member to leave the Ad Hoc Committee on Sexual Assault, which drafted a policy to punish and expel abusers, the Chicago Tribune reported. It was previously announced that Auxiliary Bishop A. James Quinn of Cleveland and Bishop John McCormack of Manchester, N.H., would leave the panel.
 |
Myers' successor in Peoria, Bishop Daniel Jenky, removed seven priests for alleged abuse last May, and some parishioners said Myers had left the problem for Jenky. Cleveland and New Hampshire also have undergone extensive investigations of sex abuse.
"We're not saying these are bad men," the Rev. Richard McBrien, a University of Notre Dame theology professor, told the Tribune. "But when we're in the kind of crisis we're in, you have to bend over backwards to make sure that everybody who is representing the church - and in this case the bishops - is carrying no baggage whatsoever.
"John Myers left a very messy situation in Peoria," McBrien added.
David Clohessy, national director for the Survivors Network for Those Abused by Priests, said it was wise to remove the bishops.
"It's simply a smart PR move when you have scores and scores of bishops from which to choose to take men like McCormack and Quinn and Myers out of the spotlight on the sexual abuse issue," Clohessy said. "Given what's come to light about (Myers') tenure in Peoria, I think it would be embarrassing were he to be reappointed."
Myers' spokesman, Jim Goodness, said Myers was not asked to leave the committee.
"The real reason was just that he had a specific purpose for being on the committee at the time - to help draft the (policy) document," Goodness said. "Now that that is drafted, it's time for the committee to move on. It naturally would occur that some others would move onto the committee."
Bill Ryan, spokesman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, agreed with Goodness.
"It wasn't anything based on any criticism that any of these individuals had received," he said.
Not for commercial use. For educational and discussion purposes only.
Myers was terrific at reintroducing orthodoxy to the Peoria diocese. I lived there under his predecessor and during the early part of Myers' run there. There was a LOT of heterodoxy going on when Myers came in. He spent most of his time and energy combatting it, and making Peoria one of the most orthodox dioceses in the Midwest.
That being said, this commitee isn't about orthodoxy. t's about properly disciplining priests in specific and notorious circumstances. I don't know all the details, but circumstantially it does appear that he neglected his duty to properly discipline the seven priests in question. Since the thrust of this commitee is to devise policies for properly dealing with situations like Jenkins found when Myers left, Myers would be better served learning from the commitee rather than directing it.
I think Myers has removed some priests from duty in the Newark archdiocese. I don't hear him whining that McCarrick left a mess for him to clean up. Sheesh.
THIS IS A LIE!
Sorry to be so blunt, but I live in the Diocese of Peoria and Archbishop Myers is one of the best men, one of the most well-formed priests, I've ever had the pleasure to meet.
Let's just start with the numbers. Seven. Seven priests out of somewhere around two hundred priests. Moreover, a couple of the priests had already retired, several face accusations stemming from long ago(a decade) before Myers took over, and, I believe, of those who face charges stemming from the time frame of Myers tenure, most, if not all, had already been removed from positions involving children. Fianlly, one of the seven I know faces accusations stemming from a relationship with an adult woman.
But seven? There's been probably around four hundred priests who have served in the Diocese the last forty years. Seven would represent less than 2%. Not perfect, but a heck of alot better than most dioceses I would wager.
Archbishop John Myers is a good and holy man. Perhaps that's why someone like McBrien feels compelled to lie about him.
And I haven't even touched on all the good things he's done for our Diocese such as dramatically increasing vocations, standing firm against heterodoxy, etc.
May God always bless him and may all our Dioceses be similarly blessed.
Do you know what these priests are accused of? When they were accused? Who did the accusing? How it was reported to Myer? When it was reported? What canonical options Myers had available based on the actual evidence he had?
I truly don't know any of the above, so I'm unwilling to start name calling and frothing at the mouth about the situation. Especially in the midst of a media-hyped feeding frenzy.
I recently had the opportunity to meet him and found him to be quite down-to-earth and sincere. He approved a petition for an indult for the Tridentine rite, I thanked him personally for it and he said he hoped it was going well. His sermons are always solidly orthodox.
Yes, and this is key. 'Some parishoners' didn't like Bishop Myers. They were the Call to Action types who were banned from using Church facilities for the purposes of promoting schism and heresy.
With respect to Bishop Jenky, the article makes it sound like Jenky agrees he was left with a messy situation. But I wonder why the reporter didn't ask him his opinion?
I'll tell you why. Because Bishop Jenky has made it clear he feels like he has been extraordinarily blessed to have followed Bishop Myers. He's made it clear in public on numerous occasions.
ELS mentioned that Myers removed priests in Newark.
I don't trust the press and this article smelled of a hit job.
Yes, and just wait until you start getting the priests he gets for his Dioceses'. Solid men in love with Holy Mother Church intent on righting the Ship which has veered off course the last couple of decades. And, yes, he is, shall we say, very tolerant of the Tridentine Mass.
Yes, I forgot to mention that. I had posted an article last year when Myers was appointed archbishop. It quoted both those who agreed and disagreed with Myers. I'll see if I can dig it up when I get home tonight.
Bishop Jenky has made it clear he feels like he has been extraordinarily blessed to have followed Bishop Myers.
Interesting. It appears that the AP reporter is trying to ruin Myers' reputation with innuendo. In the second paragraph the reporter quotes the Chicago Tribune. Is the Trib like the NYT (anti-Catholic agenda)?
Your welcome. Not to worry, we're all on edge during this crisis. Thanks for your most gracious post.
I must say, I don't read the Trib that much. I know it's pro-abortion.
I pray and hope you are right. But then, it is extremely disturbing that he would be bounced from the commission.
But, he wasn't bounced. From the article (emphasis mine):
Myers' spokesman, Jim Goodness, said Myers was not asked to leave the committee."The real reason was just that he had a specific purpose for being on the committee at the time - to help draft the (policy) document," Goodness said. "Now that that is drafted, it's time for the committee to move on. It naturally would occur that some others would move onto the committee."
Bill Ryan, spokesman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, agreed with Goodness.
Why do reporters, with rare exceptions, leave out the word heretic when describing McBrien.
No, but six teenage boys were anally raped weekly over a period of several years in the Catholic elementary school which my younger son attends. The homosexual rapist priest was transferred from place to place by my bishop. My bishop went on summer vacations with his best friend and a teenage boy friend of his friend. On those vacations the boy was repeated molested by the bishop's best friend. The bishop says he knew nothing. The former head of Seton Hall prep and his priest friend, a Catholic high school near us, were arrested a couple of months ago for soliciting sex from a 14-year old boy prostitute in Canada while the Pope was in Toronto. The prestigious Catholic high school which my older son attends has just informed us of accusations of priestly homosexual abuse against two of its faculty. Another Catholic high school in the next town over was almost closed, given a breakout of sexual abuse by homosexual priests against teenage boys. We have been informed in our local NJ papers of many other instances of homosexual abuse in parishes near us. No, my sons have not been molested. But I would be a fool to assume they are automatically safe in the company of priests around here. The Church in my area is deep into the homosexual abuse hellhole it's created for itself.
I don't remember seeing before that McCormack was on the panel! Who would have put him there???
According to the article, "Cleveland and New Hampshire also have undergone extensive investigations of sex abuse," but I'm afraid McCormack's real claim to fame is his former role as personnel director for clergy in the Archdiocese of Boston. He seems to have had an especially cordial relationship with Shanley.
Of course these days you certainly don't want to bend over forwards when there's a priest around
[Yes, I know that there are non-SAD priests, but why take chances that the one near you is not a sexual deviant?]
God Save America (Please)
You pointed out that my sons haven't been molested. I was pointing out that they are among the lucky ones in my area of New Jersey. There have been homosexual molester priests in our local church, in the next town's local church, in virtually all of the local Catholic high schools around here.
Look, I don't know the specifics about Myers, nor have I claimed to. But given that a great, great many of the bishops in our country have been involved in shuffling homosexual molestor priests from parish to parish (those who have not actually had to resign from molesting boys themselves), and given that very, very few took immediate action when they found out about such (i.e., put the welfare of kids last), I would not be at all surprised if Myers did the same. And yes, I DO expect bishops to act instantly to take suspected molesters away from children. They have rarely if ever done so. Their track record is evil and deplorable. As for Myers, I hope that he is guiltless. But of course, we've been lied to so many times by the Church that I really don't believe anything it tells me in regard to this matter.
I would like to assume he has the honor, decency and compassion to act instantly in cases of suspected abuse to shield children from those accused. Given the Church's track record, I don't automatically so assume.
Ninenot - Get off your very high horse. The fact is, the majority of bishops appears to have been involved in shuffling molestor priests around. All of them certainly knew fully well that there was a huge homosexual molestation problem in the Church, and all of them certainly knew that a huge contingent of Catholic priests are practicing homosexuals. They have all been collectively SILENT about all of this for years - until forced to admit to it by the press. Now, they can't even admit that homosexuality has something to do with the problem. There are some good bishops to be sure. I don't know which ones they are, given all the lies from the Church.
No, I do not believe that. And clearly, some bishops have been more guilty than others. But - again, this homosexual putrefaction has been going on in the Church in America since the 60s and 70s. We've got a fair number of seminaries which are homosexual brothels and which are now unfriendly to normal men, we have 1/3 of the priesthood which is actively homosexual, we have thousands of homosexually molested boys across the country (and in many other countries as well), we have molestors shuffled from one place to another. In response to this, the bishops collectively have done, prior to their recent conference, just about NOTHING. The American bishops wanted, if you will remember, more power to govern themsevles collectively - hence the American bishops' conference. Well, the Pope (foolishly) allowed them some latitude, and the result is the queerized, molestatory Church we now have. While some bishops are more heavily slogging through the deep doo-doo of total hypocrisy and lies and a total disregard for the welfare of children, I DO believe that ALL of the bishops bear significant responsibility for this situation. I have'nt heard of bishops who were fighting tooth and nail to bring to light the homosexualization of the seminaries, or the teenage boy molestation problem. Only one, I repeat one bishop at the recent conference had the guts to submit that this entire sorded affair even had something to do with homosexuality. C'mon. The bishops collectively, even if not directly involved in abuse or shuffling themselves, have known fully well of this situation for years. They are, collectively, moral cowards, who, for the greater part, should not be in charge of our Church. Of course, not a one has been removed. Says something, doesn't it?
I don't paint all the bishops with the same color. But even the 'good' ones have soiled colors right now in my opinion. I am still outraged that that wonderful bishops conference couldn't even admit that homosexuality has something to do with all of this. Do you realize how dishonest that is? Do you realize that they are treating you and me and all the rest of American Catholics like morons? The reason I push what I see to be the truth about this is that the bishops don't. I firmly believe that if we collectively give the bishops a pass on this (which is what many are already doing), the situation will NOT be cleaned up, and many more kids will be injured. As for what the enemies of the Church think, I could care less. When you wound yourself deeply with a saber, the fact that your enemy is encamped on the other side of the forest seems to be less relevant. Worse yet, we can't even admit to the nature of the saber or of the wound. I'm a devout and loyal Catholic, and that's precisely why I don't feel like giving the apologists and feel-gooders the time of day. I want to see some truth about this situation (which I haven't); I want to see some real results (which I haven't); I want to see some preventive measures for boys who are exposed to priests (which I haven't); I want to see the resignations of the shuffler priests (which I haven't); I want to see crystal clear words from the Pope about what is going to be done about this (I haven't); I want to see the Church dequeerized (which I haven't); I want to be able to trust priests with the care of my children (which I can't); I want to trust the hierarchy and the priests to teach authetic Catholicism (which I can't); I want to be able to trust the Church to teach my kids authentic Catholic sexual morality (which I most certainly cannot). Not too much to ask for, is it?
I'm with you, the Dilg.
I don't want to fight Catholics either. But I think we have all been sheeple for far too long. It's amazing what the bishops have tolerated, and what we have tolerated.
We should be formulating our own agenda,the other side has been travelling across the nation holding their agenda up for disgruntled Catholics to adopt. Most of us know that would be the death knell for the Catholic Church in this country.
We need to use our brains to come up with catchy slogans that reflect the truth because the truth reflects the solution to the scandal.
Number one,the Catechism should be taught and followed.Number two,our Bishops and Cardinals must be in union with the Holy Father and the teaching,universal Magisterium.Number three,official documents from Popes and the sacred Congregations must be obeyed.
And Yendu,I think you have come up with a good number four.The published natterings of the bishops in collectivity should be disregarded,this goes for matters catechetical and liturgical and geopolitical.And since no one should pay the least mind to what they issue the USCCB should be disbanded and their properties sold,ther staffs terminated and the money saved,put in funds to take care of whatever other trouble they may have gotten us into that we don't know about yet.
Yendu,you need to take a positive attitude,we,with the help of our just and merciful God can turn the tables on them and we need to start now.What do you think?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.