Why do we accuse or not accuse? It is not our problem and we don’t have to form an opinion.
IMHO Programs like “STAND” and whatever it is our diocese has are for the insurance companies. They provide the diocese with an appearance (and maybe a reality as well) of ‘due diligence’. Without that they can’t get liability insurance. We had the same sort of thing in the Episcopal Church.
In our parish the doors to the priest’s offices have BIG windows. Often the priest sits where he can be seen while the person with whom he is talking cannot.
What we need,what clergy need, is not paranoia but prudence and decorum, again, IMHO.
In haste ....
In reading through these threads on this specific case, it's very obvious that not many Catholics have known anyone accused - priest or laity - since the Dallas Accord went into effect. I do. Someone I used to work with, who was treated horridly. See my comments on the other thread for what I had to say.
IMO (and this is after seeing about ten popular, good men nationwide who did nothing wrong be accused (in one case by someone he didn't know) and be put on "administrative leave" without any explanation (some stories have been publicized)), the Dallas Accord was put into place so fast, the bishops didn't take the time to think it through. We are seeing in slow, painful motion why the Church has moved glacially over the centuries - to avoid mistakes and injustice. Whether or not the passage of the Dallas Accord was a deliberate attempt to rid the priesthood and diocesan staffs of people more popular than the other clergy, I have no way of knowing, but that's what it looks like it is being used to do.
Now, we have to figure out how the laity can work to explain this to the bishops without bruising the wrong personas....
“Programs like STAND and whatever it is our diocese has are for the insurance companies.”
Yes, for adults. When an adult volunteers for mock trial or football, they take STAND training.
But a 14 year old kid taking STAND training?