Tuesday, February 01, 2005
A READER EMAILS
That I owe the Society of St. John an apology because all penalties are suspended during an appeal.
Let me see if I understand that correctly. The bishops have indicated that a priest accused of sexual abuse and placed on administrative leave can continue to minister as though nothing has happened as long as he is appealing the charges? No, that isn't the way it has been done. A priest on administrative leave receives his pay but may not act publicly in the capacity of a priest until the issue is resolved.
The priests of the Society of St. John have been accused. The Bishop has suppressed the order. But they may continue as though nothing has happened until completion of an appeal? And presumably if there is guilt, the wrongful activities can be ongoing?
Does anyone else see why I have a problem with this?
Had this organization cooperated with investigations from the beginning...
Had the priests who were accused stepped aside until the matter had been resolved as the priests in my former parish who have been accused have done, and as Archbishop Pell also did, I would be willing to consider that the Society is morally within their right to continue operations and fundraising as though nothing had happened. But that has not been the case. The Society fought every accusation tooth and nail and continued to operate as though nothing was wrong, as Dr. Bond has repeatedly pointed out.
So I'm not convinced there is anything to apologize for. The technicalities of Canon Law may have a loophole which permits continued fundraising. The morally upright position would be to cease that fundraising and maintain a very low profile in cooperation with the Bishop's suppression. The Society may win canonically. They are digging an ever-deeper and more sinister hole the more they act counter to the Bishop's decision. I found the solicitation letter to be a slap in the face of a Catholic who wants very much to see the Church healed.
