Accused Kentucky Bishop Resigns

AP | 6/11/02 | AP

[malakhi]

ping

[maryz]

I don't know Williams, but the article also mentions Bishop Daily. From today's Boston Herald:

Bishop's joke angers alleged abuse victim

A former Boston bishop cracked a joke about mentally ill people during a deposition dealing with the clergy molestation scandal yesterday, infuriating an alleged victim who sat in on the deposition.

Bishop Thomas V. Daily, now head of the Diocese of Brooklyn, "was sitting there cracking up, laughing at his own joke, and I'm saying to myself, 'What are these people, monsters?'" said Patrick McSorley. . . .

McSorley refused to repeat the joke saying it was too tasteless for publication.

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

BISHOPS' MEETING IN DALLAS
by Bishop Gerald A. Gettelfinger

In recent days at public meetings I have registered my concern about the unreal expectations that many have for the meeting of the Bishops of the United States in Dallas, Texas next week. National and international media attention has fueled this to frenzy.

In that context, I have repeated my personal anxiety about the ability of the body of bishops of about three hundred to meet expectations of the members of the Catholic Church and the citizenry of the United States, not to mention the world. That number is a little less than that of the Congress of the United States. The task must be accomplished in virtually one and one-half days. Votes of a significant nature require two-thirds majority of the members. I am one of the members.

Communications and documentation to us bishops this week has changed my position. Those have reduced my anxiety. They have given me hope for positive and clear outcomes. They are as follows:

-- The Issue of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Clergy is the only item on the agenda. All others have been deferred.

-- There are three subjects to be considered:

o Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People
o Essential Norms for Diocesan Policies
o National Day of Prayer on September 14, 2002

Each bishop has received the text of the proposed Charter. Note that it provides a framework or pegs upon which to build or hang clear policies for dioceses. Each of us has had a chance to submit amendments. I have done so.

Each bishop has also received the text of the proposed "norms." Note that these items, if approved by the bishops and with the "recognition" by the Holy See, will become law particular to dioceses of the United States. As in the former, I have submitted amendments to text and issues in want of clarification.

The latter is a very significant matter. If the norms are approved by the bishops of the United States and are acceptable to Rome, each bishop in charge of a diocese, of which there are 186, will not be free to deviate from it. I am a "bishop in charge of a diocese" as distinguished from assistant or auxiliary bishops. I will faithfully abide by such a law.

Popular language like "one strike" and "zero tolerance" do not appear. The effects of the proposed actions, however, have the same effect. It is in this area that I have some grave reservations.

The first is the concern for painting every failure with the same brush. I accept failure as part of the human condition. I believe in forgiveness and possibility of conversion for those guilty of single failure. Those who have sinned and repented have a capacity for compassion that the self-righteous do not understand. Conversion is the key element.

The second has to do with full acceptance of the responsibility of the wrongdoing of a cleric, particularly the incurable or habitual sexual abuser. I do not find "full acceptance" reflected in any of the texts. Dismissal from the clerical state, may provide for the separation of the cleric from the diocese, but it does not keep him "off the street." There is no mention of "clerical incarceration" (for lack of a better term).

If, indeed, the Bishops of the United States are concerned for the protection of children and young people from pedophiles and sexual predators of teenagers, there must be more than simple "expulsion" from the clerical state known as "laicization." I am concerned.

Lastly, I am distressed that the "Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People" seems to infer by the term "dioceses" that this charter refers only to the responsibility of the bishop.

There is a "National Advisory Council" to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. I am hopeful that its response will be available to us as we convene.

A diocese is a local church; it includes each and every member. Each and every member must assume responsibility for eradicating this horrendous abuse of children and young people. Pastoral Councils at the diocesan and parish levels must be proactive in dealing with this concern.

I leave the reader with this question: "Where do child abusers come from?"

http://www.evansville-diocese.org/bishop/forum.htm

[Askel5]

He should have repeated the joke.

(But perhaps after Bush's "Oh please don't kill me" send-up of Karla Faye Tucker was so well-received, he figures he better leave it at innuendo just in case.)

[ArrogantBustard]

Here's the man to sort out this mess... (heh heh heh)

[Askel5]

Where is the Homosexuality in the priesthood topic?

Where is the liberalism and lack of discipline in the seminaries and religious orders?

Got to strike at the head of the snake.

[Campion]

this particular Bishop was vigorously defended here in Louisville.

But not by knowledgeable Catholics on FR. The Lexington diocese has been notorious for some time for its entrenched modernism and disobedience. (It's not as bad as Milwaukee, Rochester, or Albany, however.)

First Weakland, now this guy. Quite a few more coming, I think. Let's get all the pus out of the Amchurch abcess.

[patent]

Good to see him go isn't it?

[yendu bwam]

Where is the Homosexuality in the priesthood topic? Where is the liberalism and lack of discipline in the seminaries and religious orders? Got to strike at the head of the snake.

They're going to try to cage the snake. But the snake will remain, as venomous as ever.

[Cicero]

The removal of bishop Kelley is one more small step toward rehabilitating the Church in America. Homosexual priests are central to the scandal, but they would be powerless to do their dirty work, expand their networks, and corrupt the seminaries and other organizations without the weakness and sometimes the complicity of diocesan bishops.

Archbishop Thomas C. Kelly of the Louisville archdiocese said Williams will be missed, and called his resignation "a personal loss for me as well." Williams served as a priest in Louisville under Kelly for about two years. "He has been a brother, counselor and friend to me for 20 years," Kelly said. "May God bring peace to his pastor's heart as he looks to the future. May we always remember the blessings that have come to us through his ministry."

In the circumstances, this comment by the Archbishop of St. Louis is atrocious. I agree that he certainly looks like part of the problem, and probably is among the bishops who should be removed.

Guidelines mean nothing unless they are implemented, and that can only be done by good, solid, faithful bishops who are dedicated to their duties as apostolic shepherds. Weak, cowardly, dissenting, or corrupt bishops must be removed. They have track records, and it's all too obvious who most of them are. I didn't know until the latest scandal broke that Weakland was a homosexual, but it was obvious for decades that he was a bad bishop, disloyal to the Church, eager to publish his dissenting views in the secular press, and destructive to his flock. Much the same can be said about people like Cardinal Roger Mahoney and, it seems, Archbishop Kelly.

[cubreporter]

Monsters who have infiltrated the church all these years. Throw them out.

[Cicero]

Whoops, not St. Louis, but Louisville, and not Kelly dismissed by Williams. Mea culpa.

[Dr. Scarpetta]

In Evansville, Ind., Bishop Gerald Gettelfinger, who has allowed two priests to remain active despite sexual improprieties, said he opposes zero tolerance. He said two priests in his diocese who were rehabilitated and assigned to new parishes after sexual misconduct are examples of successes that would have been impossible under such a policy.

Bishop Gettelfinger has taken a risk in reassigning two priests who committed sexual misconduct. What about the little boys in those parishes? How can Gettelfinger have peace of mind?

[bloggerjohn]

Let me put my flak jacket on hyar.

You know, there's going to be a really terrifying movie coming out about all this homosexual scandal. My insiders tell me it will be titled: "The Bum of All Queers."

;')