Posted on 09/12/2018 6:31:21 PM PDT by marshmallow
It’s rare that BCI finds ourselves in agreement with the Boston Globe, but here’s once where we do mostly agree: their editorial in today paper, Probe of St. Johns Seminary needs independence.
The editorial is excellent–it says the the allegations of “immoral unprofessional misconduct by faculty and students” and a “toxic culture” of bullying and threats need to be properly examined, but the group brought together by Cardinal O’Malley has conflicts of interest: it’s stacked with St. Johns Seminary board members, including Sr. Janet Eisner and Assumption College president Francesco Cesareo, and the other members of the group also have conflicts of interest. Have you heard this same concern voiced elsewhere recently? Check out BCI’s post of last Monday, September 3, “Is Cardinal O’Malley Whitewashing the Gay Scandal Investigation of St. Johns Seminary?” We raised the same concerns a week before the Globe’s editorial came out, plus more. Alert readers who compare the two will notice some striking similarities. What a coincidence!
What the Globe carefully avoided saying was the word “homosexual,” and they also avoided mentioning the conflicts Sr. Eisner and Francesco Cesareo have over their colleges sponsoring groups that affirm homosexual activity is just fine and dandy.
(Excerpt) Read more at bostoncatholicinsider.wordpress.com ...
There are literally a hundred times more child molesters in government schools, but we must not speak of that.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/forgotten-study-abuse-in-school-100-times-worse-than-by-priests
agreed, but the biggest target is/has/will always be, the catholic church....
Sex abuse by the clergy has been going on for centuries.
Making a big todo about it now may be part of the plan to normalize it.
If I were a parent whose child was in public schooling I would be doing a private check on every single individual within my child’s sphere. Not just teachers, either. From the Principle on down to the Janitor. Then again, I’m the type that advises everyone I know to run security checks on everyone they’ve ever thought of dating. I’ve been on the paranoid side of the street for DECADES. LOL Better safe and dateless than dated and dead. Not meaning to be flippant, either. And people need to run private checks of the parents and siblings of those they let their children near. Yeah, I’m pretty much a person who doesn’t trust people a lot. Seen too much.
There are some parents who want to send their kids to private/charter schools and are married to folks who still believe in the All Good Public School System and short of a divorce end up with their child/children in Public Schools. That’s who my comments were intended for... Not to demean anyone person, as I understand relations are complicated.
Yikes,you really ARE paranoid.
.
I like to think of myself as Ultra Observant. LOL
TIME to go on meds
Forgot to add this: !
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.