The article linked above demonstrates one of the major problems with the Roman Catholic Church and the part of the process which has become more about money and buisness than what should be one of the most important things about the Church. While I am a Roman Catholic there are times when I am not proud of my church. Nor is this the first time money and property has become more of an issue than what the true goals of the Church should be. We've experienced that locally as well.
Father Marek Bozek has been declared to not be a "priest in good standing". He and many others are now facing excommunication. What is the terrible crime he committed?
He said Midnight Mass on Christmas Eve.....
Because of a squabble with the St. Louis diocese and the Church board of St. Stanislaus Kostka that revolved around property and the dicoeses desire to control what had been given since the 19th century to the parish of St. Stanislaus Kostka this all began. In what can only be considered an act of vengence and punishment, St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke removed both of the priests assigned to that Parish in the summer of 2004 and never replaced them.
Some of the members of St. Stanislaus Kostka joined another parish, others did not. They held on to what to them was their spiritual home for decades. The diocese did not have the nerve to close the Parish, but taking away the priests was an underhanded way of doing so. I'd like to say the Vatican supported the Parish of Stanislaus Kostka, but it hasn't. It has supported the St. Louis diocese.
Father Bozek doesn't even disagree with the Diocese and Vatican demands as far as the property/money aspect goes. He went to St. Louis because he believes very strongly in what is (or at least should be) a more important reason than power or control. The salvation of souls....
"In a statement Friday, Burke reminded St. Louis Catholics that to "participate knowingly and willingly in the celebration of the Mass by a suspended priest is gravely sinful."
Yet they came...by the hundreds... close to 2,000 attended.....
Bozek quotes from part of Canon 1752, the final law in the Catholic church’s law code, which reads in part, "the salvation of souls, which must always be the supreme law in the Church, is to be kept before one’s eyes."
"I think it’s significant that the code ends that way," he said. "There are many canons, and I am breaking some of them. But to me, in that last canon, the word ‘supreme’ means it precedes all the other ones. To me, it’s about saving the souls of the people of St. Stanislaus."
In this time period when the Church laments the lack of good priests....I ask again...How do you excommunicate a man like this?
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The Details...
Financial resources & Fun!
Financial Resources:
Corporate Recovery
With a shaky stock market, now's a great time to invest in diamonds.
Fun!
Yard Signs Cheap
Yard Signs Cheap
Corporate Recovery
With a shaky stock market, now's a great time to invest in diamonds.
Fun!
Yard Signs Cheap
Yard Signs Cheap
Regular Reads
History Mike's Musings
Toledo Tales
Hooda Thunkit
Aaron's Blog
Along the Tracks
The Glitch
Roland's Ramblings
Judy's Jewels
I think about by Valbee
Toledo Speaks Out
Maggie Thurber's Thoughts
Color Orange Art
The Yippie Show
Progressive Toledo
Thoughts on TPS
Shanahan Select
Make A Difference
Toledo Perspectives
Toledo Tales
Hooda Thunkit
Aaron's Blog
Along the Tracks
The Glitch
Roland's Ramblings
Judy's Jewels
I think about by Valbee
Toledo Speaks Out
Maggie Thurber's Thoughts
Color Orange Art
The Yippie Show
Progressive Toledo
Thoughts on TPS
Shanahan Select
Make A Difference
Toledo Perspectives
Blog Archive
...
...
Thank you!
Thanks for visiting Liberal Common Sense...
8 comments:
As a Catholic, I am appalled at some of the actions the Church has taken in recent years, Lisa.
Justapose this story with the Blade article today on Church efforts in the Ohio legislature to squelch any state efforts to extend the stature of limitations on abuse cases.
I actually can understand the reason behind the Church not supporting the extension of lifting the limitations on civil suits for abuse cases. There is a statue of limitations for a reason, and if we are going to allow a change in Ohio law for only those abused by priests why not others? If you only are allowed a very small window of years to sue a doctor for contributing to the death or injury of a loved one, allowing people to go back 35 years for this one situations creates a huge imbalance. Why should one victim have more rights than another?
Given most of these cases from decades ago (not all but most) end up being about money with some of the priests being either deceased and not able to defend themselves or witnesses no longer available the true desire of many who are trying to bring this about is based on wanting to destroy the Church.
If it were really about trying to make sure a priest who had abused was punished, that would be one thing, but it's not. If it were really about child abuse in general that would be one thing, but it's not. The majority of sexual abuse of children in the past 50 years has not been at the hands of Catholic Priests so why should one group be selected?
I don't believe the Church handled the intial claims of sexual abuse properly. Thru their attempts to hide and cover up some of the abuse they have brought this upon themselves. Yet to pretend that other religions/school systems, etc have not participated in the same cover-ups and shuffling of personnel suspected of sexual abuse in the past 50 years is not realistic.
So, unless they open up this civil liability to all cases of sexual abuse to school systems, non-profit groups, other religions and even private family members? While I would still believe it would be difficult to present cases in which people would have died or memory would be an issue? At least then it would be fairly applied when it came to sexual abuse anyway.
I realize I am biased on this issue, as a former victim of sexual abuse I understand how hard it is to live with it. That said I also know money won't solve the pain nor do I feel that the mere fact that I was not abused by a priest should change anything. In my case it was that very same Roman Catholic church that some want to sue that got me thru those days. I took no legal action at the time, I was young and I was afraid. That person is dead now but should I have the right this many years later to sue his family? Should I be able to make them responsible for his behavior? Should I be able to take their home in the same manner that parishes will be forced to close because of the financial damage done to the Church thru civil suits? These people aren't trying to sue the priest directly because of course that's not where the money is.
I asked Denny that at one point on WSPD when he was in one of his anti-Catholic rants...He couldn't answer me.
Good point about the statute of limitations; I just find it ironic that the Church approaches the issue from this angle.
You also raise a good point about the motivations of some victims. Without going into detail there have been any number of difficult things I have faced in my life that physically and emotionally scarred me, and that I never chose to exploit for a financial settlement.
Besides, some things might have been better settled with a Louisville Slugger, anyways...
(tongue only slightly in cheek)
I'd like to believe that the person that hurt me I don't have to worry about meeting in the afterlife.
:-)
Glad to see that this man was keeping his eye on the prize. It should never be about denomination, canon law, evangelical trendiness or ritual...it should be about bringing lost souls to the feet of Jesus the savior.
Looks to me he passes the test.
Lisa,
”In this time period when the Church laments the lack of good priests....I ask again...How do you excommunicate a man like this?”
To maintain control, (Sarcasm Alert!) to insure blind loyalty, to enforce discipline, assuring compliance, much like the Mafia (another pseudo “Christian” organization… (Yes, they are more similar that they are different.)
Regarding your response to historymike:
”There is a statue of limitations for a reason, and if we are going to allow a change in Ohio law for only those abused by priests why not others?”
The primary reason for requesting the extension is because of the special relationship that exists between priests and parishioners that often kept the parishioners from speaking out sooner. I (also a former practicing Catholic) can certainly understand that, in this case.
”If it were really about trying to make sure a priest who had abused was punished, that would be one thing, but it's not.”
It’s REALLY about punishing the Catholic Church for their (blind eye) mishandling of a very long-term problem. They would routinely move priests, rather than deal with the crimes and sweeping everything under the rug, so to speak, and then denying/lying about it.
”I don't believe the Church handled the intial claims of sexual abuse properly.”
Bingo!
”Thru their attempts to hide and cover up some of the abuse they have brought this upon themselves.”
Another BINGO!
”Yet to pretend that other religions/school systems, etc have not participated in the same cover-ups and shuffling of personnel suspected of sexual abuse in the past 50 years is not realistic.”
This isn’t about other religions, it’s about the Catholic Church (we were taught to believe that it is/was the “GOLD Standard…”)
”That said I also know money won't solve the pain nor do I feel that the mere fact that I was not abused by a priest should change anything.”
Suing for money (or, civil lawsuits) is the only legal method left to get the Maf…, Church’s attention. It is what they care about most, it is what they worship by their very being… You have to hit them where it hurts (them) or they will learn nothing, and change nothing.
”That person is dead now but should I have the right this many years later to sue his family?”
And that would teach the person that molested you, exactly what? Unfortunately, the same applies to the deceased priests that are/were guilty of molestation, but the organization that permitted those molestations to knowingly occur still lives…
”These people aren't trying to sue the priest directly because of course that's not where the money is.”
Thanks to the way that the Catholic Church operates, the “money” rests with the Dioceses and with Rome, not with the priests.
The Toledo Diocese settled with Tony Comes for $ 55,000, complaining loudly that he was the only one and that they could afford no more, lest parishes would have to close, yadda, yadda, yadda. At the time, the Toledo Diocese’s “portfolio” was valued at $ 112,000,000.00… (and, they’re still collecting money at each mass…)
Tell me again that it’s NOT about the money. It is about the money, to the Catholic Church…
The Doermann Theater’s showing of “Twist of Faith” a while back was a partial eye opener…
The Catholic Church is a very big business, and it is all about the money. Just watch for the signs for a while and you’ll see it too.
And Jesus wept.
I wonder why...?
Hoodathunkit --
Thank you for your very heartfelt response to Lisa Renee's position on these lawsuits.
Lisa Renee -- I've read the toledotalk home page for months and I've often wondered where your perspective comes from on these matters related to the church and how they have covered for sex perverts.
Changing the statute of limitations can help in ways that you are not fully considering and contrary to what you believe it is not just about the money.
Take the issue of Dennis Gray -- the man who molested Tony Comes. Despite having 10 mediated settlement agreements against him for sexually abusing children, he still maintains a valid state of ohio teaching license. The State of Ohio is not able to legally revoke his teaching license.
John Shiffler -- another priest pervert -- against whom there are at least 3 mediated settlement agreements also has a valid teaching license. The State can't do anything with his license either.
There is a former priest who used to be from the Youngstown diocese, against whom there are at least 20 mediated settlement agreements. He has a valid Ohio Counselor license. That may be soon revoked be however, but not before this moron sexually harrassed and sexually exploited at least two of his mentally ill clients.
Legally, there people are able to retain their licenses because the accusations that had been settled by mediated agreements are not part of the official court record.
That is how this bill could help.
If these cases are part of the official court record, their outcomes can be taken to the Ohio Department of Education and the Ohio Counselor Board and who knows whatever board and these people's access to children and other vulnerable adults could be at least thwarted. Without temporarily lifting the statute of limitations and allowing some of these case to proceed, there is little that anyone can do.
Dear anon,
You actually make my point of making this just be about priests being wrong by what you describe. There are other professionals out there who are able to retain their licenses that have sexually abused children.
If the priests were the largest number of sexual abuse cases I could understand why the focus would be on them. The statue of limitations was changed for criminal charges to 20 years after reaching age 18 which would be another method to deal with this issue if the real goal was as you stated to remove professional licensure.
If criminal charges were filed rather than civil ones there would be less likelihood of "secret" settlements. Yes, there would be no financial settlement at all in a criminal case but if the goal is to punish these priests? You are not punishing them by creating a situation where a diocese pays out settlements.
I realize it's harder to prove a criminal case, which is why many prefer a civil case. It is much easier to get a civil ruling for guilt. Especially when that much time has passed and the evidence in some of these cases would never stand the muster of a criminal trial.
So while I appreciate your comments, I don't agree with you that this is a fair or evenly applied solution given other categories of abusers who will be given a free pass.
HT, I have seen the movie. It caused me quite a bit of pain knowing that so many have been abused yet despite the sharing of the victim part of the experience that is where takes a different turn if it is not related to a priest. As much as many may disagree with me, if there is not equal justice for all victims than that is not my idea of justice if it only applies to a select few.
Post a Comment