To: american colleen
The quotation from Fr. Groeschel's letter does not refute Serrano's contention that Groeschel questioned why Serrano was hurting Hanley further by bringing charges forward because Hanley was "a sick man." If Serrano is right, Groeschel was more concerned about the priest than about him.
39 posted on
03/06/2003 1:55:23 PM PST by
sinkspur
To: sinkspur
The quotation from Fr. Groeschel's letter does not refute Serrano's contention that Groeschel questioned why Serrano was hurting Hanley further by bringing charges forward because Hanley was "a sick man." If Serrano is right, Groeschel was more concerned about the priest than about him. "I was never involved with such a case before and I was startled by the degree of anger and hurt Hanleys sinful behavior had generated. Since that time I have worked with a number of victims and I accept their anger as appropriate and say so in my book, From Scandal to Hope."
To: sinkspur
The quotation from Fr. Groeschel's letter does not refute Serrano's contention that Groeschel questioned why Serrano was hurting Hanley further by bringing charges forward because Hanley was "a sick man." If Serrano is right, Groeschel was more concerned about the priest than about him.
You're fixated on one quote from a victim utterly divorced from it's context. If you're willing to hang Fr. Groeschel out to dry based on this one unsubstantiated, contextless comment in an agenda-driven article, well... it's pretty clear you had little love for Fr. Groeschel to begin with.
I honestly feel bad for you. Your overriding desire to smear Fr. Groeschel seems to have precluded all rational thought.
57 posted on
03/06/2003 7:48:37 PM PST by
Antoninus
(In hoc signo, vinces †)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson