Rare Kind of Scandal Accord in Spokane Diocese : New York Times
That's rare as in "infrequent" and not "undercooked" -- featuring rare nonfinancial concessions by Bishop William S. Skylstad.
(so does that mean we start calling the priests "guilty" without due process as well?)
The victims, Mr. Kosnoff said, are to be allowed to return to the parishes where they came into contact with their molesters and possibly face them. (how many parishes still have their molester-priests on staff?)
[The victims will be] permitted to write about their experiences in the diocesan newspaper, with a full page devoted to that purpose each month for the next three years.
The bishop will lobby state lawmakers to abolish statutes of limitations on child sex crimes and will go to every parish where any plaintiff was abused, tell the parishioners that an abusive priest had ministered there and encourage them to report any suspicions of abuse.
What's wrong with this agreement? First of all, it makes connecessions that are incompatible in my view with the justice for Church and for the accused priests.
It appears to bind the diocese to a pepetual agreement with the state. A similar sort of concession made in Phoenix. There is justice in a status of limitations. An accusation of child abuse should be allowed until the victim is 30.
An unlimited statute of limitations is a potential source of unlimited mischief.
An unscrupulous person can wait until a priest dies and then come forward and accuse him and demand a settlement from the diocese. The diocese doesn't have a means to defend itself and the accused is no longer around to admit or deny guilt.
Even if the bishop felt like lobbying for this change, why accept the authority of the state to be compelled to do so? Saint Thomas Beckett accepted death rather than this.
No comments:
Post a Comment