Posted on 07/17/2002 6:58:26 AM PDT by Polycarp
That may be, but nothing would happen then if homosexual priests refused such forwardness. Again, priests should not be allowed to be alone with our children. I know my sons will NEVER be allowed to be alone with a priest again. If 30-40% of the priests are homosexual (as various estimates have indicated), and a goodly percentage of those are ACTIVE homosexuals, and given that many active homosexuals are strongly sexually attracted to teenage boys, why would I ever, ever, ever turn my son over to a potential active homosexual priest with such inclinations? Since I do not have any way of knowing who is who, and in order to protect my children, they will not EVER be alone with a priest again. The Church has grossly failed the child protection test in my view (and of that of every parent of sons I know).
By all accounts he is a solid man. My suspicion is that he was handed stacks of papers to sign (remember Radar and the Colonel?) and he asked a few perfunctory questions before executing the documents.
MOST likely that his staff was a bunch of complicit rats, up to their eyeballs in the scene.
Law will be an object lesson to Bishops: you better get to know your priests VERY well, and fast--or you will be blindsided.
There certainly is.
I get the very strong impression that his primary objective in all of this was to protect the Church from scandal. I get the very, very, very strong impression that the welfare of children was not uppermost in his mind. At the very, very least, an honorable bishop would at some point tell his subordinates (ratty or not) that they were never to let him sign off on a situation where a child could be placed into danger. Law should have the courage and honor to resign, immediately.
"Let's put this another way: does anyone you know run over to a murder scene and ask questions? Of the very small percentage of people who do such things, how many have no apparent relationship with the victim outside of social acquaintance?"
Last fall, the middle-aged daughter of a friend died. Within a short while, many friends were at her home, as the police investigated, to see what had become of their friend, and to comfort the family of the deceased, also our friends. The friend died of natural causes, but the police told us little in the first hours after her body was found. Their refusal to give any information made some of my friends ask their questions all the more insistently.
The article says little about the relationship between Cardinal Bernadin and the murder victim. Except, he seems to have been a senior faculty member at Loyola University, in the cardinal's archdiocese. I quote:
"Pellegrini had also served as chair of the Sociology Department of Loyola University of Chicago."
Knowing a little how the relationships work between chanceries and Catholic universities (I graduated from the Catholic University of America, and met our own archbishop several times at campus events - as a student - not even as a faculty member, or the CHAIRMAN OF A DEPARTMENT.), I would find it entirely unsurprising to find out that the two men knew each other.
Thus, it may have not been so odd, after all.
sitetest
Let's be very clear about this.
The largest group of child sex abusers are NOT natural fathers (or mothers) but step-parents and/or 'live-in' common-law parents.
My stats come from the Rockford Institute and are a bit old, but not likely significantly changed.
That "relatives" descriptor is a deliberate fudging...
"I personally wish the teenage boys would stay away from the priests, they are probably coming on to the priests. Who needs them anywhere near the priests.
"I think the teenage boys want a father figure and money and that is why some of them get involved with the priests."
This is a fairly vile thing to say, especially in the cases where the victims were still quite young. Evidently, many of these homosexual predator priests were quite undiscerning in their age preferences. Some, like Shanley and Porter, appeared to be just as happy with six year olds as with sixteen year olds. Do you think that the six year olds were just playing hard to get, and that just took the priests over the edge?
Perhaps you may wish to rethink your post.
sitetest
I think the teenage boys want a father figure and money and that is why some of them get involved with the priests.
Gosh. Do you blame rape victims for rape, too?
Teenage boys who seek out a father figure ought to be able to seek out a priest without having to keep their butt cheeks squeezed the entire time they're with him.
Priests ought to be adults; teenage boys are not.
But on the Last Day, when we stand in judgement, and the Judge points out that in giving the benefit of the doubt, in acting charitably toward others, we were sometimes fooled by evil-doers, what do you think will be His judgement of us for that?
Now THAT is a good question. I imagine it will depend on our duty of state. As a member of the laity that would be different than as the father of a child who was abused. I can tell you as a parent, my obligation and willingness to act charitably towards those I entrust my children to is tempered by my awareness of my duties of state as a father. I do ask tough questions, I do show up at odd and unexpected times and I do listen to what otherwise I would ignore as gossip, at least to the extent of determining wether or not I need to investigate further.
Hear, hear.
There is a real difference between the benefit of the doubt that is withholding judgement on the guilt or innocence of a fellow human being, and putting our children at risk.
I have no reason at all to suspect my own parish priests of any untoward acts or desires. They give every appearance of being good, decent, and holy men. In charity, I can make no accusation against them, and wouldn't.
Nonetheless, I know that the bishops have largely been failures in protecting our children from the 1 in a 100 or 1 in 50 priest who is a predator, and I don't take that risk. My sons don't spend time alone with priests.
That isn't a judgement of my priests, in particular. It is a judgement of the lack of wisdom shown to us by our bishops.
sitetest
I think a lot of people are indeed leaving the liberal parishes - just like the Episcopal Church is withering slowly away. The best thing (if that could ever be said) about this scandal is that it will cause many to return to their Catholic roots and the True Faith.
I spent a number of years at Marquette U. During the period, the Archbishop of Milwaukee (Cousins) lived ACROSS THE STREET from MU and I NEVER saw him on campus.
Loyola, like Marquette, is a Jebby school. On the other hand, CU is a school run by the US Bishops, and the Bishop of Washington DC can be found there often, as you have related.
Further, your analogy re: Pelligrini v. your family friend is similarly flawed. For openers, your friend had a family; Pellegrini seemed to live alone and certainly was not married with children. BIG difference.
In the case at hand, Bernardin seemingly had no one to whom to offer 'help.' This is not like offering to bring a meal for the sake of the mother.
He just showed up at a murder scene.
Well put.
Look what happened to Weakland.
We have all been forced to act suchly.
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.