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....
i guess he is hoping to millions from his new book, i guess a beachfront house won’t behind.
**Now, we have to figure out how the laity can work to explain this to the bishops without bruising the wrong personas....**
And change WILL come from the laity.
In the case which I have spoken of many times, the jury went into the deliberation room and one of the jurors announced, “Well, he’s a Catholic priest, he has to be guilty.”
There were state recrods to prove that the priest was NOT guilty, but it sure took a toll on our own communities of faith.