BishopAccountability.org
|
||||
Time Won't Heal Catholic Bishops' Sins By Mark Stricherz GetReligion February 10, 2008 http://www.getreligion.org/?p=3165 Columnist Bill Nemitz of the Portland Press Herald wrote a story that blasted Catholic Bishop Richard Malone for reinstating a sexually deviant priest. Nemitz was too easy on the bishop. Instead of blasting Malone as irresponsible and tone deaf, Nemitz might easily have accused him of violating Church doctrine. Nemitz's story was interesting, if numbingly familiar: Bishop Malone had allowed the Rev. Paul Coughlin to resume his priestly duties, only to backtrack when local Catholics howled in protest. Nemitz's summary is concise and revealing:
The volunteer, John Skinner, actually lived with Coughlin in his South Portland rectory from 1999-2001 — 10 years after Coughlin first heard the abuse allegations and failed to alert his superiors. (In fact, Skinner became certified in youth ministry while living in the rectory.) What's more, Coughlin himself was accused in 2002 of sexual misconduct with a minor in 1985. While that never led to criminal charges, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland conceded last week that "it is reasonable to believe that there was inappropriate physical contact at that time." So why did Bishop Malone reinstate the priest? Here is Nemitz's answer:
He felt wrong. Maybe the backlash stemmed from Malone's initial promise to keep Coughlin away from South Portland, Bangor and Wells — all places where he associated with Skinner — because his "presence could cause divisiveness within these parishes." Sound familiar? Back when they still thought they could contain the sex-abuse scandal, the bishops used the same shell game to keep offending priests one step ahead of the angry congregations. According to Church teaching, time doesn't heal a person's sins; God's mercy does, as mediated through a priest. Coughlin needed to reconcile his sin first, then he could be allowed back to ministry. Yet since the sex-abuse crisis erupted, Church officials have taken a dim view even of reinstating priests guilty of abuse. Nemitz missed this essential point. Perhaps he doesn't grasp Catholic doctrine about sin and forgiveness. Or perhaps, and more likely, Nemitz overlooked Bernard's answer. Nemitz's oversight or ignorance is no small matter. Had he seen through the Bishop's false rationale, he might have connected it with the U.S. Bishops' cover-up of priestly sex abuse. Here is how Philip K. Lawler, author of The Faithful Departed, a new book about the decline of American Catholicism, explains the situation:
|
||||
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution. |
||||