I do not agree with you on everything but do ask the same question,"why did Groeschel return known homosexual predators to the priesthood"?My son's were there .Trust no- one with your kids and hold your money if you are not happy.
Some Catholic journalists and bloggers have risen to the defense of Fr. Groeschel; they assail the Dallas Morning News stories that I sent you yesterday and today.
The links, and the relevant quotes, are below, as a counterpoint to the stories that I sent earlier.
First, Michael Dubruiel:
AOL link: Annunciations
Text URL: http://michaeldubruiel.blogspot.com/2003_03_01_michaeldubruiel_archive.html#90027344
Care to Comment?Feedback Father Groeschel
There is a story about Father Groeschel in a certian metro paper today that I will not link. In many ways the story which ignores much of what Father Groeschel says about the clergy scandal and intimates that his reason for his slant on the crisis is because of his own role in working with such priests.
--One priest featured in the story, I know as an a very holy priest who had been living at the retreat house that Father Groeschel runs for "troubled priests" as well as for priests seeking spiritual renewal. This priest whose story I knew has been living a life of complete penitence since his crime. In many ways he has been imprisoned in the retreat house. How anyone can find anything wrong with that is beyond my grasp.
--A reference is made that Father Groeschel lives in a mansion. In fact Father Groeschel lives in the half of the garage of what once was a large house that is now coverted into a retreat house. I've been there, stayed there and in no way is it palatial or to be confused as a "mansion." It is usually overfilled with retreatants and others who are there for a lengthy period.
--Father does attack the media. And he does. After reading the Dallas piece I would tend to agree with him. What is the purpose of this piece? To question why a priest who has been removed from ministry is living in a retreat house for other priests like himself? Would they rather that he be living in an apartment complex unsupervised? Much is made of Father Groeschel's failures in using pschology to remedy priest who had abused. Guess what he acknowledges this in the book, apologizes for the stupidity of the field of psychology and its past mistakes. He never claims that he was any different than others in the field. So where is the story here?
--Father includes prayers in the book for victims, bishop and perpetrators. He apologizes profusely for those who have been hurt by the church. What he does in Scandal to Hope is calls for reform. How could anyone find fault with that?
-- posted by Michael at Sunday, March 02, 2003
Next, Mark Shea:
AOL link: Catholic and Enjoying It!
Text URL: http://markshea.blogspot.com/
"I pretty much agree with him. I think Fr. Groeschel's worst failing has been his tendency toward over-the-top "blame the press" rhetoric. If it weren't for the press, the Scandal would not have come to light. Period. He need to quit talking as though this is primarily the press' fault.
That said, I also hasten to add that if it weren't for the Assyrians, Israel would not have been punished for their sins. This does not, however, transform the Assyrians into saints and they did indeed have their own judgement to face. Israel survived it's judgement. Assyria did not. In short, it's obvious to me that Groeschel is right that the press *is* profoundly hostile to the faith. So it's silly to talk as though one must pick between two truth: the hostility of the press to Catholic Faith vs. the corruption of the Church. Both are true.
As Dom Bettinelli and Mike Dubruiel both showed, the Dallas Morning News' attempted hatchet job was a typical case of that. "Mansion" indeed. The man lives in half a garage. And today's DMN is another example, to my mind. And a worrisome one for what it portends for the Church's doctrine of redemption and mercy. Frs. John Hardon and Groeschel are, in essence, tried and found guilty because they were "willing to help anyone, including abusers, and believed deeply in rehabilitation." Dear Heaven, as pastors and healers, they actually took seriously the mercy of Christ? What further evidence do we need? Off with their heads!
Call me crazy, but from what I can see, these men did the legitimate work of Christian healers in giving the guy his dignity the best they could and finding some way he could live out his vocation in a way that was not a danger to anybody. They were not his bishops. It was not their task to give him his walking papers. It was their task to extend mercy and healing to a miserable sinner. Are we going to press on until we've annihilated the doctrine of redemption entirely? I don't want a Church that coddles abusers or endangers children. But even less do I want a Church where, when I sin gravely (oh, I know *you* haven't, but I have), I have to watch my back because somebody is keen to discover and publicize, not only my sin, but to expose any believer who was kind enough to have mercy on me when everybody else had written me off. I fear we are in danger of becoming a Church of Javerts from Les Miserables ("Financial Scandal engulfs French diocese: Priest admits giving priceless silver candlesticks to known escapee"). Every damn one of us has skeletons in our closets we regret and saintly people who have extended grace to us when we deserved nothing but disdain. In our zeal to find and expose the sinner, are we really doing Christ a favor when we create a climate where a penitent and the people who have tried to help him are treated as the DMN treats Groeschel today?
Sorry, but the more the DMN does this, the less over-the-top Groeschel will sound."
And then, Domenico Bettinelli, who is with Catholic World Report:
AOL link: Bettnet.com - Musings from Domenico Bettinelli Jr.
Text URL: http://bettnet.dyndns.org/blog/weblog.php
"The Dallas Morning News has unloaded both barrels on Fr. Benedict Groeschel. For those who dont know, Fr. Groeschel is a Franciscan of very strict observance. His order lives in true Franciscan poverty. Hes a crotchety grandfather sort, but very well-educated with advanced degrees in psychology. Hes also had TV shows on Mother Angelicas EWTN cable network.
But this is what the News had to say about him.For all his commentary on the crisis, Father Groeschel has revealed few details about his role as a player in it: He has been a key figure for 30 years in the loose-knit nationwide network of therapists who have helped troubled priests keep working.Thats a little deceptive. Yes, hes a key figure in the network of therapists who treat priests with various ailments, and yes, some therapists kept risky priests in ministry, but although B is a subset of A, A is not equal to B. Not all therapists kept sex-abuse priests in ministry.
The Franciscan friars base is a mansion on Long Island Sound, where he runs the Archdiocese of New Yorks spiritual development office and Trinity Retreat Center for clergy. There, according to his own written account, he has counseled hundreds of his brethren and happily, 85 priests have returned to the active ministry. A mansion? Its a large building owned by the Archdiocese of New York, probably a former mansion donated to the Church by a wealthy and long-dead Catholic. But by pairing it with his title as Franciscan, they make him sound like a hypocrite. As for the 85 priests who have returned to ministry, we dont know what their ailments were. Maybe most were treated for depression or insomnia or other common mental health ailments. There is nothing to suggest those priests were perverts.
All the News has done is reinforce Fr. Groeschels thesis that the Scandal is an anti-Catholic fiction created largely by the media. For myself, I think Fr. Groeschel underestimates the magnitude of the Scandalnot in numbers of actual sex-abuse priests, but in the damage done by erring bishopsalthough hes dead on in saying that many in the media have approached the work of exposing the hyposcrisy and cover up with way too much glee.
Even then, the News article overstates Fr. Groeschels objections.In the world according to Father Benedict Groeschel, the Catholic Churchs sexual abuse scandal is largely the stuff of fiction. Reporters doing the work of Satan are driven to lie, the New York priest says, because they hate the churchs moral teachings.Yes, the media hates the Churchs moral teachings; they certainly dont embrace them. And he never said that most reports of abuse are fiction, just that the media overemphasizes the cases that do exist, casting aspersions on the vast majority of good priests.
Father Groeschels 2002 book warned that Catholics would still face a crisis after the media monster ... slither[s] away to attack other victims. He prescribed a return to conservative moral teachings, saying that nothing would restore confidence in church leadership better than a firm stance against pornography, extramarital sex, abortion, euthanasia and the general moral decline of the United States. ... Tough topics like contraception and autoeroticism need to be consistently and publicly addressed."I dont disagree with any of that. The cause of sexual sin and crime among the priesthood is sexual sin and crime in society. You can help everyone by bringing about a return to the Gospel.
He said that the news media fail to mention that most priests arent pedophiles, that cover-ups occur in other denominations, and that abusers are among the most penitent people Ive ever met in my whole life."Perhaps they are the most penitent people. Hes not saying that they should be patted on the head and sent on their way.
As for the charges that Fr. Groeschel referred three priests for reassignment, only one of the cases raises a red flag (Picardi) and even that one looks ambiguous as far as the friar is concerned.
Posted by: Domenico Bettinelli on Mar 03, 03 | 10:26 am | Profile"