Dear sinkspur,
Ah, but it is you who assured us in this thread that things are "working quite well" in all these parishes.
Apparently, that's not quite true.
Frankly, I think Fr. Hawkins' actions were very serious, and he should have been suspended for a period of time for his offense, and then denied a pastorate for the rest of his days.
In our archdiocese, it is we laypeople who have paid the heavy price for the mistakes of the priests and especially the enabler bishops. It is we laypeople who operate under ridiculous strictures because the bishops, after having given all manner of every conceivable benefit of the doubt to soul-murdering priest-molestors, deny us even the most basic human consideration.
But here we have a case of a priest throwing all caution to the wind, POST SCANDAL, and inviting someone down under the suspicion of sex abuse to minister in his parish.
The only defense you have is that Fr. Hawkins is no worse than some other priests.
Hardly an endorsement for a married priesthood.
sitetest
Hardly an endorsement for a married priesthood.
You are guilty of hoc ergo propter hoc thinking.
There is no relation between Hawkins actions and the fact that he's married, and you know it.