 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jim Cruise, Jr. Thank you for allowing me to speak to you tonight. You have a very active Voice of the Faithful chapter at St. Hugh’s. Voice of the Faithful members around Long Island know that this Parish Voice is the most active by far. I don’t live anywhere near Huntington anymore, but I know that all of you have been working very hard. I really appreciate that. We all know why members of this particular Parish Voice have been working so hard. A lot of children were sexually abused at St. Hugh of Lincoln by your former pastor, Alfred Soave. Unfortunately he was not the only priest at St. Hugh’s who abused children. But I am here to talk about Alfred Soave and the problems he caused. Alfred Soave was a dangerous criminal. He may have baptized your children. He may have heard their first confession. He may have given them first Holy Communion. He may have been there for their Confirmation. Maybe he even married them. Maybe he did some of those things for you yourself. All those things were good. But Alfred Soave was a very dangerous criminal. Alfred Soave was a sociopath. There is no denying that. I’m going to tell you some of my story tonight, but before I do I want to share with you a story told to me by a friend. My friend was also abused by Soave many times. He told me some of the details of how he and others were abused. He wanted me to share the story with you. My friend was an altar boy too. One day he and two other altar boys were preparing for Mass when Soave casually cornered them in the sacristy. My friend explained that Soave went from one boy to the next, asking each one how he was doing. As he asked each boy, he would put his hand down the boy’s pants. You see, he needed to be sure that everything really was OK with those children. I want you to think about what those boys were experiencing. Imagine yourself as the third boy in Soave’s sexual abuse production line, watching the first child suffer and hoping with every cell of your body that Soave would stop before he got to you. Think about what your eleven-year-old body would be feeling as Soave moved to the second child and one step closer to you. What would you be feeling if you were that third boy? Now you’re watching Soave abuse a second child. You would be terrified. Your body would be frozen in fear. Adrenaline would be coursing through your veins. Your mind would be paralyzed by confusion. You might feel as if you were going to wet your pants. You would probably be shaking. You would want to cry. But boys know they shouldn’t cry. And then it would be your turn. Your body would go limp as you felt him rubbing against you--his fat belly gyrating against your little eleven-year-old body. You might try to laugh to hide the pain and embarrassment. There would be nowhere to run, nowhere to hide. “What did he just do to me?” you would ask yourself. Over and over again you would ask yourself that question. Over and over, for years and years. Sexual abuse damages people for life. It affects a child’s neurological development. It gets burned into a child’s physiology. You don’t forget sexual abuse. It doesn’t work that way. Your body doesn’t let you forget. My friend explained that as Soave put his one hand down each altar boy’s pants, he put his other hand down his own pants. He was giving himself short-term pleasure as he gave your children lifelong pain. And then it was over. It was time to light the candles. It was time to get on with the show. My friend told me that what stands out most about that episode after all these years is that Soave did not wash his hands. He had his hand down his pants as he molested your children just minutes before celebrating Mass, but he never washed his hands. But his hands were washed. His filthy, dirty, child molesting hands were washed before he consecrated your Communion hosts. His hands were washed by the altar boys. One of the altar boys, who just half an hour earlier had been a victim of felony sex crimes, would have washed Soave’s filthy, dirty, child molesting hands. Another altar boy would have handed Soave a towel, so he could dry his filthy, dirty, child molesting hands. “Lord, wash away my iniquity and cleanse me from my sin.” Those are the words the sociopath would have spoken as the altar boy poured water on his filthy, dirty, child molesting hands. Every Sunday morning I would hear the priest speak those words softly. I never knew what the word “iniquity” meant. I always thought the priest just wanted to be extra sure he hadn’t done anything bad that morning. Maybe he didn’t make his bed. Maybe he forgot to put his cereal bowl in the sink after breakfast. “Iniquity” means “wickedness” or “a wicked act.” “Lord, wash away my wicked act and cleanse me from my sin.” If Soave was at all concerned that he had sinned by fondling altar boys before Mass, he probably would have been confident after speaking those words that all had been forgiven. He had absolved himself of his sins. In his mind, everything would have been clean. But practically speaking, everything was not clean. A few drops of cold water poured over one or two of Soave’s vile child molesting fingers by the trembling hand of an eleven-year-old abuse victim would not have washed away the filth. If Soave had been arrested that day, as he should have been, what would the crime lab have found on his hands? He had his hand down his pants as he abused your children. And he never washed his hands. With his filthy, dirty child molesting hands Soave would have distributed Communion. He would have taken the body of Christ and with his vile fingers placed it in the mouths of the faithful. He would have placed the Holy Eucharist in the mouths of children. He never washed his hands. I think that’s why we’re here tonight. I think that’s why you have been coming here every month for the past three years. Because he never washed his hands. Because they never washed their hands. The bishops and priests who protected and promoted Alfred Soave never washed their hands. They absolved themselves. They forgave themselves. But they never washed the filth of sex crimes against innocent children off their hands. I would like to tell you some of my own story. I was raised in your parish. I was a member of your parish for about twenty years. I went to CCD, made my first Communion and Confirmation, and was an altar boy. I really loved being an altar boy. I was very shy as a child, so being in front of all those people was a real challenge for me. But I could be the star of the show without ever having to say anything. In theory it was perfect. The reality was different. I was the victim of a dangerous sex criminal. One day I was alone in the sacristy preparing for Mass. I had arrived early and was in the sacristy by myself. I walked over to the closet where the altar boys’ vestments were kept. As I was reaching for my robe, I heard someone behind me. Before I knew what was happening, I felt a fat man’s belly pressing into my back and a hand on my buttocks. I was frozen in fear. Soave pinned me in the closet as he groped my buttocks. After he had satisfied his primal desires to grope and feel he very casually said, “Why don’t you go light the candles now?” We were going to get on with business as usual, as if he had not done anything out of the ordinary. Soave abused me several times in the same general way. One time he pinned
me against the counter in the sacristy as I was looking for something
in a cabinet. He grabbed my buttocks and rubbed against me. I have since
learned that the technical term is “dry humping.” I didn’t
know the term “dry humping” back then. It wasn’t in
my pre-adolescent vocabulary. Soave was a criminal genius. When he would see me with my parents after Mass, he would give them a friendly greeting and casually goose me. It was a violent and painful act. It was his way of saying to me “See, I can do it in front of your parents too and it’s OK.” Soave tormented me throughout my childhood with acts of low-grade emotional torture that led to depression, anxiety, hyper-vigilance and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. One day at school I was hanging out with some of my buddies. One of them was joking around in his usual way. He started making fun of Soave. “Soave that fat load,” or something to that effect. Then he started to impersonate him: “Come over here, little boy, and let me squeeze your ass…” I knew then that I was not alone. But I also knew I did not want to talk about it. And so I didn’t. I remember the day I learned that Soave had been removed from St. Hugh’s. My dad came home from church and said there had been an announcement that Soave had to leave for health reasons. Something about a heart condition. I was just about to say “More like a hand condition,” but I didn’t. The voices of friends and family started in my head: “How can you say such a cruel thing about a kind old priest with heart disease? What if he were to hear people were talking like that? He might have a heart attack and die. Then how would you feel?” It was the perfect crime. Soave was old and obese. He probably did have heart disease. But that’s not why he was removed from this parish. He was removed from St. Hugh’s because he sexually abused children. It was the perfect crime. The criminal escaped while his victims went to prison. The priests who lied to the people of St. Hugh’s effectively locked me in a cell of silent shame. I remained in solitary confinement for many years, while the sociopath who abused me was protected and promoted by priests of this diocese. Priests of this parish drove the getaway car for a dangerous criminal. They drove the getaway car for a sociopath and they sent your innocent children to their own personal prisons for his crimes. To this day there is no acknowledgment. To this day there is no apology. When the Boston scandal erupted three years ago, I was furious. All that time I thought it was just me and some others from St. Hugh’s. I didn’t know the Church had been hiding a global phenomenon. I heard that the Diocese of Rockville Centre wanted victims to contact them. I really didn’t want to have anything to do with the diocese, but my parents convinced me that informing the diocese about the abuse I experienced was the right thing to do. I wrote to Bishop Murphy. All I expected from him was a form letter with a rubber-stamp signature showing he at least knew that he should pretend to care about me. I did not get even that. Bishop Murphy did not have the decency to write back. Bishop Murphy handed my case off to Fr. Robert Batule, a member of the
pastoral intervention team. When I spoke with Fr. Batule on the phone
and told him that the priest who molested me was Fr. Soave, he groaned.
Batule said that since joining the pastoral intervention team, he had
fielded a steady stream of phone calls, e-mails and letters complaining
about Soave. But he was also careful to promote “Fr. Soave,”
the priest I knew, to “Msgr. Soave.” I guess even a serial
pedophile deserves to be called by his proper title. I made it clear to Batule that the diocese should reach out to the parish where my abuse occurred, given the extent of the problem there. In a bewildered tone, he said that was an interesting thought, but the diocese had never done anything like that. He said he would pass the idea along to the bishop. Sure he would. Batule did not call me back when he said he would. I had to track him down myself, and when I reached him it was perfectly clear he had no interest in sharing the information he had promised me. He had received the Soave file from the archives, and all he would say was that after being removed from St. Hugh’s, Soave was never again placed in parish ministry. “Msgr. Soave was never again placed in parish ministry. Msgr. Soave was never again placed in parish ministry.” I was talking to a broken record. Batule reiterated that he would have the therapist contact me. And of course I should always feel free to call back if I need anything else. Call as often as you like, but don’t expect us to do anything. That’s essentially what he was telling me. When Sr. Sean Foley, the therapist on the pastoral intervention team, finally contacted me we spoke for about an hour and a half. I recounted to her the abuse I had endured as a child and its aftermath. She mentioned that I might find it helpful to see a psychotherapist, if that was something I would be interested in. I said that would be fine and asked her how to proceed. She asked me if I had insurance that would cover my therapy. I felt a knot in my stomach as I quickly understood that they wanted me to use my own insurance to save them money. When I responded honestly that yes I did have insurance, Sr. Sean gleefully exclaimed how wonderful that was because the diocese would only have to cover what my insurance company would not pay! I was dumbfounded. I asked her why the diocese would not simply pay for the therapy, as the diocese, not my insurance company, was at fault here. “Ohhhh, ” she moaned. “Ohhhh. The diocese does not have a bottomless well of money,” she explained with a pained groan. She argued that the diocese had no money left. They only had a very limited fund from which to pay for therapy. There was no insurance left. The popular perception, she said, is that the diocese has loads of money to use in this area, but that is not really the case. If I paid for my therapy with my own insurance, the diocese would be willing to cover the co-payment. That’s how it was going to be. They had absolved themselves of their sins, but they were not going to wash the filth from their hands. I was being asked to wash their hands. My insurance company was being asked to wash their hands. The diocese would cover the co-payment. A few drops of cold water on their filthy hands. They knew they had no legal obligation to me and they did not understand their moral obligation. That is not my idea of honor. But they had limited financial resources. Of course they did. Shortly after those dealings with the diocese I learned that Bishop Murphy was fixing himself up with a new and opulent residence. Curious that he didn’t have money to pay therapy bills for abuse victims, but he did have plenty of cash on hand for his creature comforts. I wrote to him and let him know what I thought of him and his intervention team. Weeks passed and there was no response from the bishop. I decided I needed some of the information on Soave that I had originally requested from Fr. Batule. I thought it might be more effective to go directly to the source, St. Hugh’s parish. I wrote a letter to Msgr. Rush, your pastor at the time, outlining what had happened to me as a child and what my experiences with the diocese had been. Msgr. Rush called me as soon as he read the letter. He was very apologetic for what I had endured as a child. He offered to tell me everything he knew about the situation, which unfortunately was not a lot. He said they lied to him too. Msgr. Rush explained that when he arrived at St. Hugh’s shortly after Soave’s departure, he heard whispering among parishioners about why Soave had left. At the time, he did not think the rumors were credible. When Msgr. Rush was promoted to pastor a few years later, he was told in his transitional briefing that Soave had been removed for “misconduct.” Period. It was understood, Msgr. Rush explained, that there would be no additional information provided, so no additional questions should be asked. Msgr. Rush said that when the abuse scandal exploded, he finally did receive official confirmation that Soave had been removed for misconduct with children. Beyond that, he said, he knew nothing. “They lied to you, they lied to me, they lied to the whole parish,” he said. Bishop Murphy finally wrote back to me. He said that he wanted to have Sr. Sean reach out to me with an offer of full reimbursement for therapy. You see, the bishop explained, Sr. Sean is authorized to request full reimbursement in situations like this. In situations like what? In situations where the diocese tries to take advantage of someone first but is unsuccessful? When I read the Suffolk County Grand Jury report on how the Diocese of Rockville Centre dealt with the sexual abuse of children by priests, I felt tremendous vindication. It was a huge relief to know that the criminal justice system had drawn the same conclusions I had. The Grand Jury report pointed out that the diocese had an Uninsured Perils fund in the amount of $11 million. Let me see if I understand this. They had $11 million and the bishop had a fancy new home, but they had a therapist playing hardball with me to try to save therapy costs of less than $100 a month. The Grand Jury found that the diocese paid a $65,000 gambling debt for Soave, a.k.a., “Priest T.” They could find $65,000 to pay Soave’s bookie, but they couldn’t find less than $100 a month to help someone Soave abused. I wonder who signed the check for $65,000. I wonder who took money that you and I donated to the diocese and used it to pay the gambling debt of a serial child molester. What is the name of the person who signed the check? I would like to know. The Archdiocese of Boston had Fr. John Geoghan. Geoghan was the priest
accused of molesting some 150 children in Massachusetts. His case was
what brought this horrific sexual abuse crisis to light. On Long Island
we had Alfred Soave. I believe he molested as many children as Geoghan
did. But we don’t hear about that. Priests of this diocese have
been more effective liars than their brothers in Boston. What else did he touch, Msgr. Schneider? Soave committed enough sex crimes against children to have been guaranteed death in a prison cell, had he not been protected from prosecution by priests of the Diocese of Rockville Centre. What a disgrace. An official representative of the Diocese of Rockville Centre proudly proclaiming in the most public way possible that Alfred Soave, the John Geoghan of Long Island, had lived a faithful and honorable life and had served admirably as a devoted priest. Schneider effectively absolved Soave in the public arena. But Schneider did not wash away the filth that had accumulated across decades of sex crimes against innocent children. Bishop Murphy wrote a column in the July 30, 2003 issue of The Long Island Catholic. Murphy wrote the column in response to concerns raised at his abuse scandal listening sessions. In that column Murphy proudly described the diocesan seminary as a source of great optimism for the diocese. He explained that one of his first actions as bishop, even before arriving in Rockville Centre, was to invite the acting rector of your seminary to spend time with him in Boston, discussing the seminary and his vision for seminary formation and education. That acting rector was Msgr. Francis Schneider, the same Francis Schneider who whitewashed the criminal career of the sociopath who abused me and many, many others. Bishop Murphy exclaimed:
In that column, Bishop Murphy boasts of the rigorous testing process in place for candidates to the seminary involving interviews, testing and review by the admissions committee. He explains how there “are batteries of psychological tests that are administered and analyzed by two psychologists, each independently of the other.” Murphy states boldly that “No one is admitted to the seminary if there is any negative pathology.” I would argue that participating in a cover-up of sexual abuse counts
as “negative pathology.” Did the rector take those psychological
tests himself? Did Schneider somehow manage to deceive Murphy’s
two expert psychologists? Somehow the rector himself seems to have slipped
through Murphy’s impenetrable pathology shield. This diocese doesn’t need a bishop—it needs an exorcist. The Vatican vice squad forgot someone when they left town a few weeks ago. They need to come back for your bishop. In 1982 Soave was appointed Confessor to the seminarians at Immaculate
Conception Seminary. Think about that. He was abusing children at an alarming
rate but some priest in the Diocese of Rockville Centre appointed him
Confessor to the seminarians. Who appointed Alfred Soave Confessor to
the seminarians? Ask Msgr. Schneider, if you can find him. I’m sure
he can tell you. Soave assisted at Our Lady of Hope in Carle Place. The pastor there was Msgr. Francis Midura. You may recognize that name. Msgr. Midura was appointed by Bishop Murphy to serve as the priest representative on the diocesan review board. The diocesan review board is the group of experts responsible for deciding if a priest accused of sexually abusing children should be removed from the ministry. Msgr. Midura harbored a terrorist of children. Did he know that he was harboring a terrorist of children? Can we trust him now to act in the best interests of children? Maybe we can. But he needs to answer some important questions. When did Msgr. Midura first learn that Alfred Soave was a child molester? How did Soave come to show up on Msgr. Midura’s doorstep? Maybe he was looking for a lost puppy. Maybe he needed some kids to help him. Did Msgr. Midura invite Alfred Soave to serve at Our Lady of Hope or did the diocese force him on that parish? Ask Msgr. Midura to answer those questions. As the priest representative on your diocesan review board, he owes you an explanation. Ask Msgr. Schneider too, if you can find him. Msgr. Schneider was the chancellor when Soave was shuffled into Our Lady of Hope—surely he can answer the questions. When Soave was removed from St. Hugh’s for sexually abusing children, the diocese did not turn him over to the police. No, they gave him a promotion. They made him Vicar for Senior Priests. Then they made him Coordinator of the Latin Mass. They presented him back to the people of this diocese as a symbol of faithful tradition. They absolved him, but Soave never washed his hands. He never apologized
to the children of this parish and other parishes. He never made restitution
for the years of suffering he caused so many people. He never went to
prison. Lord, wash away my wickedness and cleanse me from my sin. Priests of this diocese were all too willing to offer private absolution and public deception for the dangerous sex criminal who was your pastor. But those priests have been unwilling to take the practical step of washing away the filth Soave left in his wretched path. Priests of this diocese today are only too willing to offer private absolution to brother priests who have engaged in corrupt and criminal behavior. The silence of priests in this diocese effectively perpetuates a public deception. Your priests have failed to take the practical step of washing away the filth that corrupt diocesan officials left in their own wretched paths. Once again, the altar servers have to do the dirty work. Earlier this year Bishop Murphy wrote a letter to the people of this diocese. In it he explained that the diocese is continuing to defend itself against lawsuits that claim the diocese acted with “intentional fraud.” He does not believe that the diocese acted with “intentional fraud.” Fraud, by definition, is intentional. That’s the only kind of fraud there is. Murphy is suggesting that whatever the diocese did in the past that may appear to have been dishonest was done with the best intentions of the people of this diocese at heart. He would have you believe that any fraud that occurred was accidental. When Msgr. Schneider was quoted in Soave’s obituary as saying that "Monsignor Soave loved life, good food, people and especially his priesthood," maybe what he really said was that “Monsignor Soave loved taking little boys to the swimming pool and molesting them there.” Maybe it was a typo. When Msgr. Schneider was quoted as saying that Soave “touched the lives and hearts of many people and priests during his lifetime," maybe what he really said was that Soave “touched the genitalia and buttocks of many children during his lifetime.” Maybe Newsday misquoted him. Maybe we should blame Newsday. The diocese took a serial child molester and made him a Monsignor. Was
that an accident? Did someone mistakenly fill out the “Application
for Monsignor” form instead of the “Application for Defrocking”
form? Of course not. Soave made money for the diocese. Soave saved money
for the parish. He was good with money. He was Monsignor material. So
they told more lies. They told more lies and they stamped a habitual sex
offender with the official seal of quality. They stamped a habitual sex
offender with the official seal of quality and they sent him out to work
with your children. The Soave problem is a very difficult one. Some of you probably had what seemed to be normal, healthy relationships with him. You probably respected and admired him. But he was living a double life. That is how child molesters operate. The term used by psychiatrists is “doubling.” Child molesters have normal, healthy, very public relationships with some children so that they can abuse other, more vulnerable, children in secrecy. Bishop Murphy’s handling of the abuse scandal in this diocese is similar to the doubling of a child molester. With his expensive public relations experts, Murphy crafts an outward appearance of caring for victims. The practical reality for many abuse victims who have dealt with the diocese has been much different. Murphy focuses very aggressively on the many positive things we can expect from the Church in the future, without acknowledging the corruption of the past that is still very much evident in the present. It is very easy for me to understand how Bishop Murphy enabled the sexual abuse of children in the Archdiocese of Boston. He really doesn’t care. He is not a man of honor. He is doubling. Unfortunately, it’s not just Murphy who is doubling. Murphy and the bishops who preceded him never had to look very hard to find priests and laypeople willing to lie and deceive. There is an institutional pathology in the Diocese of Rockville Centre. They don’t know how to stop lying. They don’t know how to tell the truth. So what do we do? As Christians we should like to see truth and reconciliation. Not half-truths and reconciliation, but truth and reconciliation. A recent editorial in the National Catholic Reporter calls for a commission that would bring the secret documents detailing sexual abuse of children by priests and the cover-ups that followed out into the open. The editorial explains that the Church must name its sins in order to move forward with any degree of trust and honor. But realistically, I don’t think we are going to see anything like that anytime soon. So what do we do? A practical alternative is legislative action. A bill has passed in the New York State Assembly that would extend the statute of limitations for sex crimes against children. It was sponsored by Assemblywoman Margaret Markey of Maspeth. It would also open a one-year window for people who were abused outside the statute of limitations to bring civil lawsuits against their perpetrators. That legislation, if passed, would force the Diocese of Rockville Centre and all other institutions and individuals involved in protecting and enabling child abusers to finally begin to clean up the filth that has accumulated across decades of sex crimes. It would give us our day in court. It would allow attorneys to depose those who lied to us. Smooth-talking official spokespersons could no longer protect them. There would be nowhere for them to hide. The bill passed the Assembly by a vote of 130 to 1. 130 Yes and 1 No.
This legislation is a no-brainer, but unfortunately the Assembly and Senate
are having difficulty coming up with a compromise bill. There are political
forces at work here. Please contact your state senators and ask them to
support compromise legislation. People have asked me why I am speaking out now. Isn’t it a little late? In the words of Martin Luther King, Jr., “The time is always right to do what is right.” Now is my time to speak out. Now is the right time to speak out. Alfred Soave and other priests who abused children chose their victims carefully. They exploited our weaknesses. They chose children who would not talk. They chose children who could not talk. They chose children who would be told they should not talk. They chose children who would not be believed even if they were to talk. The priests who abused us chose the most vulnerable and exploited our weaknesses. Priests who implemented cover-ups exploited those same weaknesses. Bishop Murphy’s carefully crafted public relations campaign of half-truths exploits our weaknesses today. He knows how painful it is for us to speak publicly about the sexual abuse we suffered. He knows the grave harm that speaking out can cause for us and our families. It should not puzzle you that so few victims have come forward publicly. It should not surprise you that it took a sexual abuse survivor with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder three and a half years to speak out after the scandal became public knowledge. Bishop Murphy’s tactics pit survivors against their families and friends. Tonight we are banned from meeting on Church property. Bishop Murphy and other priests in this diocese fear those who speak the truth. So they use tactics that prevent us from even thinking about speaking out. Bishop Murphy knows our weaknesses. Bishop Murphy exploits our weaknesses. And most of his priests say nothing. How can priests look at the situation in this diocese and not take meaningful action to wash away the filth of corruption and lies? How can priests not work for healing? The Archdiocese of Boston has been working very hard at healing. Priests in the Archdiocese of Boston came to their senses very quickly and realized that there needed to be reconciliation. They knew there had to be significant restitution. They knew they could not have a common criminal as their spiritual leader, so they demanded that Cardinal Law resign. And now they have the beginnings of something that resembles healing. What is different about the Diocese of Rockville Centre? What is different about Bishop Murphy and his priests? What puts the Diocese of Rockville Centre on higher moral ground than the Archdiocese of Boston? What is Bishop Murphy’s plan for truth and reconciliation? What about the priests who lied to this diocese and this parish? Will they slither off into the night or will they act with courage? Will they slither off into the night or will they act with honor? What is their plan for truth and reconciliation? For decades, the Diocese of Rockville Centre had no use for man’s law. Priests who sexually abused children were protected from prosecution under man’s law by their brother priests. Bishops in this diocese considered themselves to be above the law. But today, Bishop Murphy and his legal experts cling to New York State’s pathetically weak statute of limitations with a death grip. Escaping through a loophole in man’s law is Murphy’s misguided strategy. With hands filthy from scandal he hangs on for his legal life. But Murphy cannot hang on forever. He forgets that God’s law does not have a statute of limitations. Where is the honor in this diocese? Where are the gospel values? Day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year—priests of this diocese bring their gifts to the altar with filthy hands. With hands filthy from the sins of corruption, lies and the sexual abuse of your children, and without being reconciled to their brothers and sisters, they feed you spiritual food. Years ago the U.S. bishops had a slogan that was used in many Catholic social justice efforts: “If you want peace, work for justice.” I wonder if Bishop Murphy and his fellow bishops even remember that. They certainly haven’t spoken those words lately. But the bishops were right. In order to have peace, we need to work for justice. No more private absolution and public deception. No more empty and meaningless apologies. A few drops of cold water will not wash away decades of corruption and lies. A few drops of cold water will not restore trust and honor. Now is the right time to tell the truth. Priests of this diocese must act with courage and with honor. Public acts of deception require public acknowledgment and public apologies. It’s that simple. We all want peace. We all need to work for justice. We all need to work for justice now. Thank you. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Home | Join
Us | News | Library | Contact Us | About Us | Goals | Meetings | Reports/Minutes | Parish
Voices |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
