I suppose you think it is a coincidence that of all the psychologists and advisors who have screwed up on this stuff, this author chooses to single out Fr. Groeschel?
This is pretty transparent, and pathetic advocacy journalism, with a lot of paraphrasing.
I'm not saying that Fr. Groeschel is beyond criticism; I'm just saying that this is the only article thus far making these accusations (I've searched), and we are oddly not told how many cases he dealt with in which he was successful in preventing future abuse.
Horrible things were done in the past, and every effort to heal those who were abused must be made. That said, we have a pretty good policy on this stuff now, with a lay review board. The primary remaining issue is convincing the bishops to embrace the Church's teachings on sexual morality. This article seems to be an effort to prevent that, by calling into question the competency of those advocating same, and smearing conservatives with the alleged mistakes of one priest. It seems disingenous to me to pretend that the general moral atmosphere embraced by much of the Church in the 60s and 70s wasn't a major part of the cause of the ambivilent attitude some took towards these crimes.
I guess we'll see that Fr. Groeschel has to say, as he will probably respond to this at some point, I'm sure.
This article seems to be an effort to prevent that, by calling into question the competency of those advocating same, and smearing conservatives with the alleged mistakes of one priest. You overrate the power of Brooks Egerton. He's a writer for a newspaper, for heaven's sake.
Let's not get paranoid here. If the Church's effort to spread the truth is going to be stymied by printing a factual article about one priest, then we're in real trouble.
"I suppose you think it is a coincidence that of all the psychologists and advisors who have screwed up on this stuff, this author chooses to single out Fr. Groeschel?"
Not at all - I hold no candle for bum bandits, and I am certain that this one has singled out Groeschel to further his own agenda. This does not alter the fact that many good conservative priests have wittingly or unwittingly "colluded" in the slide of the American Church into depravity.
Many have known full well what their colleagues have been doing, and what their congregations have been doing with contraceptives, but have kept silent rather than speak out and become unpopular.
"The primary remaining issue is convincing the bishops to embrace the Church's teachings on sexual morality."
I think you are quite right here, but that will probably not happen until the laity repent and embrace the Church's teachings on sexual morality.
The bishops have been getting the message from the laity for the last 30 years that sexual morality doesn't matter and that they are not prepared to embrace the Church's teaching. Consequently the laity have produced and been given the bishops and priests that they deserve.