Posted on 04/12/2011 6:47:17 AM PDT by Carpe Cerevisi
When the Boston Globe exposed massive wrongdoing in the Boston Archdiocese in 2002, Catholics were understandably angry. And when more horror stories surfaced elsewhere, we were furious. But now our anger is turning on those who are distorting the truth about priestly sexual abuse. That some are exploiting this issue for ideological and financial profit seems plain.
Every time a new wave of accusations surfaces in one diocese, not coincidentally we see a spike in accusations in other dioceses. What is not often reported is that the vast majority of new accusations extend back decades. For example, for the first quarter of this year, 80 percent of the cases of alleged abuse involve incidences that occurred before 2000.
In March, an 80 year-old man came forward in St. Louis claiming he was abused 70 years ago by a priest who has been dead for a half century. This is not an anomaly: the same phenomenon has happened in other dioceses. Unfortunately, too often bishops have been quick to settle, thus inspiring more claims. When $225,000 is dished out to a Michigan man who claims he was abused in the 1950s by a priest who died in 1983—and the diocese admits the accusation is unsubstantiated—it encourages fraud.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicleague.org ...
Since the 90s, any priest who gets even the smallest whiff of suspicion gets suspended (which can be overkill but is needed now) and if proven is tossed out on the street (where he belongs)
yet the perspective that only 0.53% of priests have been convicted, that only 2-3% have even been accused is forgotten. yes, 2-3% being accused is too high, yes, 0.53% convicted is too high, but why blame the 99.47% of all priests for the sins of these few?
Also, I note that the majority of cases were in the liberal hellholes of Philly and Chicago -- hellholes for sham-priests too it seems.
Curses on the false priests but pity and sympathy for the truly holy priests maligned by all for the sins of 0.53%
Chicago Breaking News
Pfleger blames conservatives, NRA for troubles
By Manya A. Brachear
Tribune reporter
4:45 AM CDT, April 12, 2011
The embattled pastor of St. Sabina Roman Catholic Church told radio show hosts Tavis Smiley and Cornel West this weekend that he would look outside the Catholic Church if offered no other choice but to work at a Catholic high school.
The Rev. Michael Pfleger also said on the “Smiley & West” public radio program that he had been banned from speaking at events in the archdiocese and blamed pressure from conservative Catholics and the National Rifle Association for his most recent clash with Chicago’s Cardinal Francis George.
Chicago Breaking News
Pfleger blames conservatives, NRA for troubles
By Manya A. Brachear
Tribune reporter
4:45 AM CDT, April 12, 2011
The embattled pastor of St. Sabina Roman Catholic Church told radio show hosts Tavis Smiley and Cornel West this weekend that he would look outside the Catholic Church if offered no other choice but to work at a Catholic high school.
The Rev. Michael Pfleger also said on the “Smiley & West” public radio program that he had been banned from speaking at events in the archdiocese and blamed pressure from conservative Catholics and the National Rifle Association for his most recent clash with Chicago’s Cardinal Francis George.
good riddance to bad rubbish.. out with the lib priests. He can become an ECUSA guy if he wants.
“Perhaps no reform made in Dallas has proven to be more intrinsically dangerous than demands for “zero tolerance.”
Made by WHOM in Dallas? It was the U.S. bishops that passed the “zero tolerance” standard for priests and leaving the enabling bishops in place.
Tossing out a priest that patted a fanny fifty years ago won't “cure” anything when the compliance “audits” can give a clean bill of health to a diocese even as the diocesan bishop enters a plea bargain for failing to report sexual abuse of minors.
AMEN!
The U.S. bishops have no power to depose a fellow bishop. Only the Pope can do that, and he uses that power very sparingly.
I recognize the bishops couldn't on their own remove a bishop but they could request he be removed or made an auxiliary or at the very least make the negligent bishop take a “voluntary retirement”.
Let the bishops be held accountable too, no quietly retreating under cover of the darkness “personal reasons”.
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.