Frankly, I don't know how this got missed, back when it was published. I know that anti-Catholics here on FR were railing against the Church at that time. This article is presented as balance, and as an open look at information that is freely available, and often ignored.
Furthermore, it is apparent from the article that this minister's abusive activities were condoned by his superiors, and that he was moved to other locations where he continued his predatory abuse.
This is not a case of "they did it too," this is simply a clear indication that many of the Catholic Church critics on FR are hypocrites. It is to be hoped that the PCUSA will take financial responsibility for the care and treatment of those defenseless children who were treated like dirt by this scum.
One of my favorites priests at my church gave a very brief sermon one Sunday. He said, “priests who do not keep their vows makes me sick.” This was before the huge scandals regarding pedophaelia broke. He died a couple of years later from a brain tumor. If the tumor didn’t kill him, hearing about those pedophiles would have.
2) It looks like the secular authorities dropped the ball, in addition to any malfeasance on the part of PCUSA. That's a familiar theme ...
Evidently, there are no Presbyterians here that will explain why this minister was allowed to sexually abuse disabled children for NINE YEARS.
>> This is not a case of “they did it too,” this is simply a clear indication that many of the Catholic Church critics on FR are hypocrites.
Dredging up an article from 2002? Never heard of the guy, and am not sure I should have.
I am neither Catholic nor Presbyterian, so approach this as a member of an outside denomination in both cases. The guy’s a scumbag. He should be excommunicated and imprisoned for the better part of his life, and anyone that covered-up should be excommunicated, fired, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
This is exactly the same position I have taken with regard to any Catholic priest involved in abuse or anyone involved in an intentional cover-up. How, exactly, is that position hypocritical?
SnakeDoc
This will get Mason in more trouble than the sex abuse charge.
Oh, dear, and here I thought only priests did these horrid things................<darcasm off
I can not imagine the police not issuing an arrest warrant had they found any physical evidence to support the allegations of sexual abuse.
As is typical in so many of these cases there is a sizable gap between the alleged incidents and the filing of a civil suit. I could argue for understanding this in those cases where abuse took place in the 60’s and 70’s but in the 1990’s when society was well informed of the danger of child predators? When parents and other care givers were cautioned over and over about the sexual exploitation and abuse of children. Told that it was not just a matter of stranger danger?
I almost hate to say it, but something does not smell right about ths story. And if it does prove to be a credible accusation then a lot of people charged with the protection of these chidren have much to answer for. And that includes their parents.
You wrote:
“There may be some here who object that this is an old article, given the date it was published, but considering that dates mean nothing when the Catholic Church is being criticized for the same thing, I don’t think the date should make a difference.”
TOUCHE!
NOW if I wanted to spin this like an atypical religion basher I have seen on FR I would ask/exclaim indignantly and righteously:
Where is the compassion for these innocent children from the Presbyterians here on FR -are they so preoccupied defending thier Church that they care nothing for the victims? Ohhhh... the HUMANITY!!!!
You know Judith there are perverted men everywhere, the issue is how it is handled I think..
I wonder what ever happened with this case ?