It’s Labor Day weekend, but did anybody see the Oklahoman article on the way too cozy relationship between the OKC Catholic archdiocese and the law firm they hired to do the “independent investigation?” There’s so much wrong with how they are handling this, not sure where to start. Wow.
Definitely worth the read. I can’t believe I’m recommending something at The Oklahoman. But, it IS Ben Felder. I was just complaining how they don’t have any real investigative reporting anymore. This ain’t bad.

https://oklahoman.com/article/5640131/survivor-groups-question-oklahoma-archdioceses-investigation

The Catholic church needs to be shut down and all of the assets sold off to actually, you know, help the poor!! How can anyone even consider being catholic these days? I guess as long as there are republicans there will be Catholics.

^^^ what a ridiculous statement

^^^Agree!

Yeah, Ian, I don’t think that’s going to happen. I have to agree with the other two.

What gets me is how the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City can turn its looking into sex abuse by priests over to a law firm for an “independent investigation” where the the son of the diocesan Chancellor is a partner! Do they think we are stupid? The timeline where the son, Christopher Scaperlanda, is made partner right before his dad is named Chancellor of the OKC Archdiocese and then a few months later, the Chancellor, Michael Scaperlanda, and Archbishop Coakley announce an “independent investigation” will be conducted by the same law firm where his son was just named partner! I mean, that contract must have been worth a mint and the son is profiting and they tell us there’s nothing to see here.

Especially at this point in time, Oklahoma City Catholic leaders should do everything they can to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Instead, they do something that is just so galling and expect US to feel ashamed that we could possibly think there could be anything askew here! It’s the definition of arrogance.

Will they ever learn?

Ben Felder does a good job but that's not investigative reporting; It's one group making claims about another with a few facts thrown in.

Investigative reporting involves a ton of research, usually over the long-term.

Ben Felder does a good job but that's not investigative reporting; It's one group making claims about another with a few facts thrown in.

Investigative reporting involves a ton of research, usually over the long-term.

You are absolutely right. I got so caught up in the story itself I thought this was an investigation by The Oklahoman. I see now, I feel kinda stupid. But the story itself does tell us enough, with facts, that this conflict of interest is so glaring, and makes me wonder how Archbishop Coakley has any credibility at all after this year-long fiasco. And to find out this so called independent investigation has close family ties. No other group in the world could get away with this kind of duplicity. Makes one wonder what we CAN trust Coakley with. He stood there a year ago and lied by omission!
It’s galling. But Pete, you are right The Oklahoman didn’t engage in any investigative journalism and I’m embarrassed that I gave them credit.

^

Haha... I didn't mean to be harsh.

Just pointing out that real investigative journalism takes months with no guarantee it will lead anywhere.

I have 5-6 stories I've been working for a long time... One over several years now.

^

Haha... I didn't mean to be harsh.

Just pointing out that real investigative journalism takes months with no guarantee it will lead anywhere.

I have 5-6 stories I've been working for a long time... One over several years now.

Oh no, it wasn’t harsh. You were just correcting me and I’m glad you did. Strange that the best (real!) investigative reporting in years involved this same thing. Boston Globe. Spotlight.

Julie Brown of the Miami Herald worked for years on exposing the truth about Jeffrey Epstein which led to his recent arrest.

Rich people are very hard to pin down due to their massive legal resources which aides their ability to conceal and hide things they don't want seen.

You usually only find out about big schemes once they collapse (like Bernie Madoff).

Yeah, Ian, I don’t think that’s going to happen. I have to agree with the other two.

What gets me is how the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City can turn its looking into sex abuse by priests over to a law firm for an “independent investigation” where the the son of the diocesan Chancellor is a partner! Do they think we are stupid? The timeline where the son, Christopher Scaperlanda, is made partner right before his dad is named Chancellor of the OKC Archdiocese and then a few months later, the Chancellor, Michael Scaperlanda, and Archbishop Coakley announce an “independent investigation” will be conducted by the same law firm where his son was just named partner! I mean, that contract must have been worth a mint and the son is profiting and they tell us there’s nothing to see here.

Especially at this point in time, Oklahoma City Catholic leaders should do everything they can to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Instead, they do something that is just so galling and expect US to feel ashamed that we could possibly think there could be anything askew here! It’s the definition of arrogance.

Will they ever learn?

To be fair, it is perfectly possible that this could be handled in an ethical manner. Simply because a managing partner is the son of a high ranking executive means that, ethically speaking, he would simply have to be excluded from any information and decision making regarding this particular task. McAfee Taft is the second largest firm in the State next to the Oklahoma Attorney General's office, so I'm sure they would have the manpower to walk and chew gum, i.e., allow their managing partner to manage the firm while an independent team does their work without involving that partner.

Do remember though that the Archdiocese is the client of McAfee Taft, and the firm has no duty to disclose their findings to the public and no duty to have any sort of independent investigation. Those words carry zero legal impetus. If I were to advise the Archdiocese, this is exactly what I would advise them to do--perform an independent investigation, get the results, then make decisions on what to do with those results. One option would definitely be to conclude that there are no results as far as the public is concerned. There may be that there is never a written report because it would be problematic to create such a thing when it might be obtained in discovery at some point through the crime-fraud exception to the attorney client privilege.

But really, this story isn't evidence of anything. It's just some outside groups, not necessarily privy to any information, gritching that they don't think this process is independent or transparent. They're entitled to their opinions. Other than that, aside from the fact that McAfee Taft has been hired to do some kind of internal investigation of the Archdiocese and that outside groups don't like the setup, what other information is there here?

It is important to remember that McAfee Taft's legal responsibility is to their client. Not the public. Not victims of abuse.

And let's attempt to be fair to the Catholic Church. While yes, some children and adults have been abused by predators who were able to use the apparatus of the Church to perpetrate their crimes and get away with them, the Church probably spends more than any other Church in the country for charitable works and organizations like Catholic Charities, Knights of Columbus, etc.

To be clear, a quick check of their website shows that the son is neither managing partner/director nor on the board of directors managing the firm. In fact, he's not even listed among the Practice Group or Industry Group leaders.

There seems to be a lot of "facts" being thrown around as "factual" when they may not be factual at all.

Will this affect the church being built at SW 89th and Shields? I hope not.

To be fair, it is perfectly possible that this could be handled in an ethical manner. Simply because a managing partner is the son of a high ranking executive means that, ethically speaking, he would simply have to be excluded from any information and decision making regarding this particular task. McAfee Taft is the second largest firm in the State next to the Oklahoma Attorney General's office, so I'm sure they would have the manpower to walk and chew gum, i.e., allow their managing partner to manage the firm while an independent team does their work without involving that partner.

Do remember though that the Archdiocese is the client of McAfee Taft, and the firm has no duty to disclose their findings to the public and no duty to have any sort of independent investigation. Those words carry zero legal impetus. If I were to advise the Archdiocese, this is exactly what I would advise them to do--perform an independent investigation, get the results, then make decisions on what to do with those results. One option would definitely be to conclude that there are no results as far as the public is concerned. There may be that there is never a written report because it would be problematic to create such a thing when it might be obtained in discovery at some point through the crime-fraud exception to the attorney client privilege.

But really, this story isn't evidence of anything. It's just some outside groups, not necessarily privy to any information, gritching that they don't think this process is independent or transparent. They're entitled to their opinions. Other than that, aside from the fact that McAfee Taft has been hired to do some kind of internal investigation of the Archdiocese and that outside groups don't like the setup, what other information is there here?

It is important to remember that McAfee Taft's legal responsibility is to their client. Not the public. Not victims of abuse.

And let's attempt to be fair to the Catholic Church. While yes, some children and adults have been abused by predators who were able to use the apparatus of the Church to perpetrate their crimes and get away with them, the Church probably spends more than any other Church in the country for charitable works and organizations like Catholic Charities, Knights of Columbus, etc.

Midtowner, With all due respect, you are mistaken on several things in the above.

The Archdiocese was fulfilling a promise to make all files of priests viably accused of sexual abuse to be made public. The question of whether it was going to be made public was never a question. The Archdiocese contracted with McAfee & Taft one year ago to do a review and further investigation. This was all for the expressed purpose of handing it all over to the laity and the public. It was promised within 12 weeks. It has now been 53 weeks since the announcement on 08-28-2018. Nobody was expecting M&T to release anything, laity and the public-at-large was expecting the Archdiocese to release the information, as promised. Archbishop Coakley said they would do so on a special web page made for that purpose.

For you to try and make sense of the selection of M&T for this "independent review" is appaling. This entire crisis which has swept the country and the world, has been met with efforts to stonewall all of the chicanery used in shuttling abusive priests around, pay off accusers with hush money, the list is endless. When they are supposed to be doing things to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, selecting the law firm where the Chancellor of the Archdiocese (top legal peron) has a son who is partner, and was made partner just months before the contract was given to M&T for this purpose, is hardly anything that anybody can justify. They could be totally on the up and up and it still doesn't pass the test of appearance of impropriety. There are a LOT of law firms in OKlahoma City.

It's not "some kind" of investigation. It was all laid out publicly one year and one week ago.

Let's be fair to the church? Are you kidding? Maybe the single largest, richest entity in the world is not the victim here. Laying out good things the church has done has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Why would you say this? Should any criminal who has raped 15 children (hypothetically) expect for people to be "fair" to them because they volunteered at a hospital or food bank or gave lots of money to charity? We should be fair to him because of that? Misdirection. No passes are given on child rape and molestation because the orginization has done some good things before. Here is a link that I just received word of a little bit ago that might bring you up to speed. It's clear there were some things you didn't understand before you wrote your post. That's ok, but now that you do know, I would hope you could be fair to the victims of sexual abuse and not make excuses for the Catholic Church. This story hit me hard, because I am one of those people. Long time ago, misuse of authority, in the name of all things holy, and it's caused me pain for years. I've only told a few and I have never sought money. I only expect to see justice. Why is that so hard?
https://justpaste.me/okcarchtruth

To be clear, a quick check of their website shows that the son is neither managing partner/director nor on the board of directors managing the firm. In fact, he's not even listed among the Practice Group or Industry Group leaders.

There seems to be a lot of "facts" being thrown around as "factual" when they may not be factual at all.

There is a digital trail these days. https://www.mcafeetaft.com/mcafee-taft-elects-six-new-shareholders-2018/

There is a digital trail these days. https://www.mcafeetaft.com/mcafee-taft-elects-six-new-shareholders-2018/
I didn't say he wasn't a shareholder. However, shareholder does not mean managing the firm.

But when you are looking for a conclusion when there is little more than conjecture at this point betrays your overt bias.

So I won't bother trying to dedicate the effort others have made to try to help put context to the whole picture.

I didn't say he wasn't a shareholder. However, shareholder does not mean managing the firm.

But when you are looking for a conclusion when there is little more than conjecture at this point betrays your overt bias.

So I won't bother trying to dedicate the effort others have made to try to help put context to the whole picture.

He is a partner in the firm. Period. Everything else is gloss. Just the fact they chose a law firm where the Chancellor’s son is a practicing attorney is bad enough.

And for non-Catholics, who may not know, the Chancellor of an Archdiocese is the top legal adviser and counsel to the Archbishop. That’s for context that makes this all so egregious. And the fact that Scaperlanda the son over at M&T has personally done work for Coakley before. There’s so many red flags here, I am actually shocked there are people trying to defend the indefensible. What part of “avoid even the appearance of impropriety” mean if it doesn’t include the Archbishop and the Chancellor handing over the sex abuse “independent investigation” over to a firm where Chancellor’s son is partner? I mean, really!

@Plutonic Panda, no worries. One has nothing to do with the other. The shrine will be beautiful.

@Plutonic Panda, no worries. One has nothing to do with the other. The shrine will be beautiful.

I am glad to hear about the Shrine. I am excited for this development just as much as I am for projects like OAK.

Why don’t we see what is in the report before we damn it and everyone associated with it.

Why don’t we see what is in the report before we damn it and everyone associated with it.

I would suggest that any benefit of the doubt is no longer available to the church. And it is based solely upon their actions over the last half century.

I would suggest that any benefit of the doubt is no longer available to the church. And it is based solely upon their actions over the last half century.
Lol. There have been people wanting to shut down the Catholic Church for centuries, not decades.

So, if we are to shut down institutions that contain bad actors, let’s shut down schools, political parties, all churches, many, many companies, the NRA, virtually every government (including our own Pres) and on, and on, and on.

Lol. There have been people wanting to shut down the Catholic Church for centuries, not decades.

So, if we are to shut down institutions that contain bad actors, let’s shut down schools, political parties, all churches, many, many companies, the NRA, virtually every government (including our own Pres) and on, and on, and on.

Not being Catholic (or really religious, for that matter), I'd say that the Catholic Church has been one of the most egregious of them for decades, if not centuries, so yeah, not much benefit of a doubt is going to be forthcoming from a lot of people. They're leagues beyond the "bad actors" of the NRA, schools, etc.

Not being Catholic (or really religious, for that matter), I'd say that the Catholic Church has been one of the most egregious of them for decades, if not centuries, so yeah, not much benefit of a doubt is going to be forthcoming from a lot of people. They're leagues beyond the "bad actors" of the NRA, schools, etc.
Don’t know if they are leagues above. They certainly have had more attention thrown on them and more people vested in bringing them down. The abuse issue is serious and needs rooted out in the Catholic Church and everywhere. No way can the bad actors be defended. They deserve the harshest punishment possible. But there is a big difference in getting them out and shutting down a faith, which many of their enemies would like to see happen. But that would be like shutting down the Baptist faith because of their followers in the south historically being KKK members.

Not being Catholic (or really religious, for that matter), I'd say that the Catholic Church has been one of the most egregious of them for decades, if not centuries, so yeah, not much benefit of a doubt is going to be forthcoming from a lot of people. They're leagues beyond the "bad actors" of the NRA, schools, etc.

Exactly. And it's not just having bad actors, but that the church as a whole spent decades and millions protecting and covering up for these bad actors. If I was Catholic that fact that money I had donated to the church likely contributed to covering for sex abusers would be enough for me to completely walk away.

Exactly. And it's not just having bad actors, but that the church as a whole spent decades and millions protecting and covering up for these bad actors. If I was Catholic that fact that money I had donated to the church likely contributed to covering for sex abusers would be enough for me to completely walk away.

I have wondered the same. I assume its well over a billion that the church has paid out to not only settle claims, but keep pedophile priests out of prison. Not something I would want to contribute money to.

Exactly. And it's not just having bad actors, but that the church as a whole spent decades and millions protecting and covering up for these bad actors. If I was Catholic that fact that money I had donated to the church likely contributed to covering for sex abusers would be enough for me to completely walk away.
There’s a difference between the church and bad actors in the church. That’s like saying we should shut down the Republican Party and/or US government because of Nixon, Trump, and all their co-conspirators.

There’s a difference between the church and bad actors in the church. That’s like saying we should shut down the Republican Party and/or US government because of Nixon, Trump, and all their co-conspirators.

In this case the church itself is the bad actor.

There’s a difference between the church and bad actors in the church. That’s like saying we should shut down the Republican Party and/or US government because of Nixon, Trump, and all their co-conspirators.

Rover, I respect your viewpoint. However, I think you keep talking about something in almost every one of your posts that's not the issue. I know of nobody who seriously thinks the Church should be shut down. I know somebody way upthread said something along those lines, but you respond to every post by acting like there's some big push to shut it down.. Why? Nobody (except way upthread when Ian Clark said something like that and was criticized for it) has suggested anything of the sort.

I agree with Jerry on this. When there is evidence linking the Vatican to cover-ups of child rape and molestation, Popes that chose to protect Cardinals, Bishops, on and on - at that point, it IS the Church as the bad actor. Literally, if you look at it theologically from a Catholic viewpoint. The Church is based on a hierarchy that people trust to do what's right. This same hierarchy has failed time and time again on this issue. In this case locally, it's just more of the same! Nothing to see here? If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, no matter how it is spun - it's a duck.

And look, I'm aware that pedophiles go where the children are, and you can't always blame the organization, but when the organization becomes complicit, then that changes. I'm one of the biggest supporters of the BSA I know; Lifelong scouter, Eagle Scout, Adult Leader, etc. Both of my sons were in scouting, as was my father and my grandfather. So I'm always a defender of them even when I've disagreed with some of their policies (although they've started to evolve them). HOWEVER, there's been information coming out that the BSA has also participated in covering up and in some cases protecting pedophiles. There have been reports of people who have (with the active knowledge of the BSA) been known abusers and allowed to continue their involvement with scouts. At the least, they seem to have prioritized image over the victims, keeping much of the information hidden about how bad and pervasive the abuse has been within scouting. At this point to me, the BSA has become a bad actor, and I know I've cut any of my personal giving to scouts until I feel like this is resolved. First 3 words of the scout oath... "On My Honor".

All this being said, I don't think the BSA's behavior has come close to the active cover-ups and in some cases, enabling of child sexual abuse that's come out of the Catholic church.

The thing about the Catholic Church and the current situation is that some are wanting to hold an organization responsible today for things which occurred quite some time ago by now. The same people are not in charge. There are new rules of the road to protect the congregation from pedophiles. This is as if your the President of the Delta house, and Dean Wormer wants to kick you off campus because the Deltas have been on double secret probation because 20 years ago, some of your brothers may have ruined a perfectly good homecoming parade. This is why in most situations, we have statutes of limitations. Sometimes justice delayed can only mean justice denied. And this is why I can understand not going public despite promises to the contrary. Don't like it? Go sign up with the Episcopals. They're basically Catholics with lady priests.

The thing about the Catholic Church and the current situation is that some are wanting to hold an organization responsible today for things which occurred quite some time ago by now. The same people are not in charge. There are new rules of the road to protect the congregation from pedophiles. This is as if your the President of the Delta house, and Dean Wormer wants to kick you off campus because the Deltas have been on double secret probation because 20 years ago, some of your brothers may have ruined a perfectly good homecoming parade. This is why in most situations, we have statutes of limitations. Sometimes justice delayed can only mean justice denied. And this is why I can understand not going public despite promises to the contrary. Don't like it? Go sign up with the Episcopals. They're basically Catholics with lady priests.

What rules? Are there similar rules in place to protect nuns from sexual abuse?

If the Deltas were raping women and children, they would deserve punishment, too. Oklahoma needs a version of this:

N.Y. suspended its statute of limitations on child sex abuse. A flood of claims emerged (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/n-y-suspended-its-statute-of-limitations-on-child-sex-abuse-a-flood-of-claims-emerged)

The thing about the Catholic Church and the current situation is that some are wanting to hold an organization responsible today for things which occurred quite some time ago by now. The same people are not in charge. There are new rules of the road to protect the congregation from pedophiles. This is as if your the President of the Delta house, and Dean Wormer wants to kick you off campus because the Deltas have been on double secret probation because 20 years ago, some of your brothers may have ruined a perfectly good homecoming parade. This is why in most situations, we have statutes of limitations. Sometimes justice delayed can only mean justice denied. And this is why I can understand not going public despite promises to the contrary. Don't like it? Go sign up with the Episcopals. They're basically Catholics with lady priests.

Except no one (reasonable) here is calling for them to be punished. Just explaining why they don't get the benefit of the doubt.

That being said, child sexual abuse should have no statute of limitations.

The thing about the Catholic Church and the current situation is that some are wanting to hold an organization responsible today for things which occurred quite some time ago by now. The same people are not in charge. There are new rules of the road to protect the congregation from pedophiles. This is as if your the President of the Delta house, and Dean Wormer wants to kick you off campus because the Deltas have been on double secret probation because 20 years ago, some of your brothers may have ruined a perfectly good homecoming parade. This is why in most situations, we have statutes of limitations. Sometimes justice delayed can only mean justice denied. And this is why I can understand not going public despite promises to the contrary. Don't like it? Go sign up with the Episcopals. They're basically Catholics with lady priests.

So, remove yourself from the situation and all is good. Is that what you seem to be saying? And, Midtowner, why do you think new “rules in place” are any more effective than prior “rules in place.” And by the way, WHY should there be a need for “rules” before priests (!) keep their hands off young boys? You don’t get it. Are you Catholic? If you think just leaving is the answer, you are completely lost as to what justice really is. If I close MY eyes to it, it is still happening. And yes, it’s STILL happening. Kids shut down when there is authority abusing them. I’m just shocked you - a lawyer - can’t seem to grasp this. Or, maybe it’s why you can’t, I don’t know.

I have wondered the same. I assume its well over a billion that the church has paid out to not only settle claims, but keep pedophile priests out of prison. Not something I would want to contribute money to.

To be fair, Chaucer didn't write the Canterbury Tales for no reason. Almost every religious organization has its fair share of criminals, grifters and vagabonds.

To be fair, Chaucer didn't write the Canterbury Tales for no reason. Almost every religious organization has its fair share of criminals, grifters and vagabonds.

Nobody questions though that it is systemic in the Catholic Church. Whether its celibacy, clericalism, lots of internal fights about why, but nobody seriously questions that it is not a systemic problem in the Church. Big, big difference. To me, the outdated Church dogma regarding celibacy and forbidding priests to marry must go or this will continue.

So, remove yourself from the situation and all is good. Is that what you seem to be saying? And, Midtowner, why do you think new “rules in place” are any more effective than prior “rules in place.” And by the way, WHY should there be a need for “rules” before priests (!) keep their hands off young boys? You don’t get it. Are you Catholic? If you think just leaving is the answer, you are completely lost as to what justice really is. If I close MY eyes to it, it is still happening. And yes, it’s STILL happening. Kids shut down when there is authority abusing them. I’m just shocked you - a lawyer - can’t seem to grasp this. Or, maybe it’s why you can’t, I don’t know.

Shocked. Just shocked! Seriously though, what theory of justice do you assert here? How is it just that victims of crimes from the 60s, 70s, 80s, be compensated with monies donated to the Church by people in 2019? Or that assets being utilized in 2019 be sold in order to compensate victims when the crime happened 20-30 years ago? How exactly is that just? It's just spreading the misery around to other innocent victims.

But yeah, there's really no great legal avenue for a lot of these victims, for criminal prosecutions, the statute runs 12 years after the victim's 18th birthday, or from the discovery of the crime.

Yes, it's still happening. So long as we have churches, pedophiles will exploit the access it gives them to children. That is not limited to Catholics. What was extreme with Catholics was the measures by which the higher ups hid the abuse and continued to place pedophiles into situations where they could reoffend. For what it's worth, I was raised Catholic, and might be persuaded to return to the Church.

Nobody questions though that it is systemic in the Catholic Church. Whether its celibacy, clericalism, lots of internal fights about why, but nobody seriously questions that it is not a systemic problem in the Church. Big, big difference. To me, the outdated Church dogma regarding celibacy and forbidding priests to marry must go or this will continue.

That is not exactly settled science. Celibacy is not mandatory in the B.S.A. or the Jehovah's Witnesses, yet sex abuse was occurring on a large scale and was largely covered up. I think it had more to do with the state of psychological research in the 50s and 60s and 70s when this behavior was more prevalent. Research regarding treatment of pedophiles wasn't really a thing until the 1980s. The prevailing thought at the time these crimes were being committed was that offenders could be treated and put back into service. In retrospect, a tragic mistake, but at the time, that would have probably seemed the correct course of action.

In this case the church itself is the bad actor.
Obviously you don’t understand the Catholic Faith vs people in the church

Midtowner, Do you not realize the irony of your complaint about holding Church hierarchy responsible for things 20, 30, 40 years ago? The faith itself is from something that happened 2000 years ago, many Church teachings are almost as old. Sacred tradition is based on Church thought back to the earliest Church history. There is Church dogma that we still uphold today because someone thought of it 900 years ago, if you were raised Catholic, you obviously know this. But, we can’t hold the hierarchy accountable for crimes against children just 30 years ago? Surely this irony is not lost on you?

I’m a little taken aback by your flippancy about a topic that is as serious as any topic can be. Your answer so far is “if you don’t like it, go join the Episcopalians, they’re basically Catholic with Lady priests.” Really?

Your thinking this was all more prevalent “back in the 50s and 60s and 70s” is just wrong. Not an opinion, it just flies in the face of all we know. This is a current problem stacked on past problems stacked on other problems and have been used for blackmail on clerics for financial fraud, it is everywhere. Globally, Mid. This is a problem that must be dealt with this time. Some of us will not be happy until we see Church leaders being led out of “sovereign” territory of any Archdiocese involved in conspiracy, in shackles and cuffs. The robe can no longer hide the gross criminality that has become a part of Church culture in many places for far too long.

Midtowner, Do you not realize the irony of your complaint about holding Church hierarchy responsible for things 20, 30, 40 years ago? The faith itself is from something that happened 2000 years ago, many Church teachings are almost as old. Sacred tradition is based on Church thought back to the earliest Church history. There is Church dogma that we still uphold today because someone thought of it 900 years ago, if you were raised Catholic, you obviously know this. But, we can’t hold the hierarchy accountable for crimes against children just 30 years ago? Surely this irony is not lost on you?

We can't hold anyone accountable for crimes 30 years ago because that's the law. We can't be sure about the accuracy of accusations 30 years in the past. We know that there were issues, but are we to start writing million dollar checks to just anyone who claims they are a victim? It's not irony, it's pragmatism. What.. are we to start compensating victims of the Crusades next? Or victims of the Church's WWII complacency?

I think you're being a bit dramatic. The Church is handling its issues. It has compensated credible victims.

Do you have any evidence that this issue is as prevalent as it was 50 years ago?


I’m a little taken aback by your flippancy about a topic that is as serious as any topic can be. Your answer so far is “if you don’t like it, go join the Episcopalians, they’re basically Catholic with Lady priests.” Really?

I'm a little taken aback by your need to see leaders being led out of churches in shackles and cuffs. Most of the leadership of the current Church has nothing to do with these transgressions. Of course, show me any institution the size of the Catholic Church, and there are going to be individuals with issues. If you believe the Church today still suffers from the systemic issues of the past, let us know exactly what you're talking about.

^

And the very structure of the church and the nature of their rules absolutely contribute to a worldwide problem that has ruined the lives (and those of their families) of hundreds of thousands of people. Over 100,000 (that we know of!) in the U.S. alone.

I know of this matter personally and the church absolutely should be viewed with healthy skepticism and even suspicion.

The "few bad apples" argument is absurd.

The thing about the Catholic Church and the current situation is that some are wanting to hold an organization responsible today for things which occurred quite some time ago by now. The same people are not in charge. There are new rules of the road to protect the congregation from pedophiles. This is as if your the President of the Delta house, and Dean Wormer wants to kick you off campus because the Deltas have been on double secret probation because 20 years ago, some of your brothers may have ruined a perfectly good homecoming parade. This is why in most situations, we have statutes of limitations. Sometimes justice delayed can only mean justice denied. And this is why I can understand not going public despite promises to the contrary. Don't like it? Go sign up with the Episcopals. They're basically Catholics with lady priests.

A bunch of frat boys ruining a parade and the molestation of children that was covered up by the organization are far and away non-comparable, and need to be answered to no matter who long ago it was.

^

And the very structure of the church and the nature of their rules absolutely contribute to a worldwide problem that has ruined the lives (and those of their families) of hundreds of thousands of people. Over 100,000 (that we know of!) in the U.S. alone.

I know of this matter personally and the church absolutely should be viewed with healthy skepticism and even suspicion.

The "few bad apples" argument is absurd.
Few or many, they all need rooted out and dealt with. But we still need to separate the faith from the people in the church. Be vigilant,be thorough, find the perpetrators and punish them to the full extent that is permissible. Heal where, when, and as fully as possible. But let’s not stop with people in the Catholic Church. Let’s do reparations for slave families and the whole race persecuted by many, including prominent church members posing as KKK. And, let’s make reparations for native Americans. We need to make everyone who has been harmed as right as possible. And we need to set up control for it to stop and never happen again. But let’s be thorough.

Investigations of past AND current abuses are not mutually-exclusive - BOTH can be investigated, and should be. Some states have amended laws to increase the statutes of limitation on sexual assault, and nothing prevents Oklahoma from doing this.

The Catholic church's rigid hierarchy is almost without parallel. A priest follows the rules of the parish, which follows the diocese, and the archdiocese, and so on, to the pope. And because the popes have refused to investigate, abuse continues all the way down to the parish level, and so victims must seek justice through police and prosecutors. Just as they do when abuse is alleged by a scout leader, camp counselor, school teacher, neighbor or family member.

The Catholic church has been given the opportunity to fix this. They haven't. They can't be expected to. I hope that recent Oklahoma victims of abuse seek justice through police & prosecutors, and that victims from longer ago work to reform statutes of limitation for those crimes.

A bunch of frat boys ruining a parade and the molestation of children that was covered up by the organization are far and away non-comparable, and need to be answered to no matter who long ago it was.

I thought it was a humorous analogy, but it holds. The fact is that most of these events occurred many years in the past. Most of the perpetrators are dead and the statute of limitations has long since run. If there are current offenders, let's roll out the lynch mob. Until then, I don't expect a law firm whose client is the Church to willingly expose their client to millions or billions in liability because of some P.R. promise they made months ago. Again, if there is current misconduct, then the victims can step forward and report to the authorities and things will be handled from there.

Until then, we can't go back and right every wrong. The Catholic Church is not alone in having these issues. And true, there are many egregious historical wrongs which haven't been righted. And when these claims are 30-50 years old, there's no way to verify whether they are true claims or folks looking for a pay day. In the meantime, no one is really owed anything. The Church's exposure here is that they may lose members, and the calculus here is how many members do they lose if they report to the public vs. how many do they lose if they don't--and not reporting may have the added benefit of not exposing them to huge liability, both civil and potentially criminal.

Let’s do reparations for slave families and the whole race persecuted by many, including prominent church members posing as KKK. And, let’s make reparations for native Americans. We need to make everyone who has been harmed as right as possible. And we need to set up control for it to stop and never happen again. But let’s be thorough.
No thank you. Reparations are just hand outs. Plain and simple. Paying out to say "hey we're sorry here you go take some money" doesn't solve the problem and arguably will make it worse. Not to mention there are many more pressing needs to spend our tax money on, the right way is to move on and make amends through better treatment and inclusive policies.

“I thought it was a humorous analogy...”
Nothing about this is funny. Nothing.

Midtowner, you are so dismissive! And tone deaf.
You actually sound like the PR. Your thoughts on responsibilities of the Church are so framed around what’s best for them, their liability, etc.

“If there are current offenders, let’s roll out the lynch mob.”
“If there is current misconduct, let the victims report it...”
The victims are CHILDREN, Midtowner. We all know most don’t report abuse by those in authority until years later, if at all.
You haven’t been paying attention. You act like this is just all a big nuisance. Your lack of empathy and compassion is astounding.

In this case the church itself is the bad actor.

No... the hierarchy responsible are the bad actors... not the parishioners, not the priests who have done nothing wrong, not the deacons who have done nothing wrong and certainly not church teaching. There are thousands of priests in the United States. Are you saying 100% of them are abusers? Parishioners including myself bare hoping for those guilty of abuse pay for what they did by being prosecuted and serve prison time. But to say the church itself is the bad actor is too broad of a statement to make.

Nobody questions though that it is systemic in the Catholic Church. Whether its celibacy, clericalism, lots of internal fights about why, but nobody seriously questions that it is not a systemic problem in the Church. Big, big difference. To me, the outdated Church dogma regarding celibacy and forbidding priests to marry must go or this will continue.

Men who took the vocation of priesthood and used it to abuse young children are predators. How is giving access to a woman’s body through marriage going to solve the problem? The church warns sternly when considering to become a priest that if you can’t handle celibacy then you shouldn’t become a priest.

^^ I'm not gonna get into some pissing arguments, or on topics of faith (since those have no relevance to me). If we were talking about a typical corporation, say Microsoft, if there were policies put in place by the Executives and the Board, and carried out under the leadership/auspices of the company, that were illegal, then it would be fair to say that Microsoft was the bad actor in that scenario. Doesn't matter how good the employees are.

What we saw in the Catholic Church was implementation of church policy, from the top down. It was the actions of the church itself which set itself as a bad actor.

I stand by my comment.

It wasn't only children being abused. And, it wasn't only happening 20-50+ years ago, either. Stories from February 2019:

Pope admits clerical abuse of nuns including sexual slavery
(https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47134033)
Sexual Abuse of Nuns: Longstanding Church Scandal Emerges From Shadows (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/06/world/europe/pope-francis-sexual-abuse-nuns.html)

“I thought it was a humorous analogy...”
Nothing about this is funny. Nothing.

Please spare us the virtue signaling.


Midtowner, you are so dismissive! And tone deaf.
You actually sound like the PR. Your thoughts on responsibilities of the Church are so framed around what’s best for them, their liability, etc.

No, this is a thread about a law firm which answers to the Church maybe having second thoughts about releasing the results of an investigation. This is a thread where I explained that it's expected that if the results of the investigation might create liability for the Church, those results may be withheld, or the firm might deliberately avoid putting pen to paper regarding the results.

Churches are businesses. Even the Catholic Church is a business. They can't save your immortal soul if they can't make payroll.


“If there are current offenders, let’s roll out the lynch mob.”
“If there is current misconduct, let the victims report it...”
The victims are CHILDREN, Midtowner. We all know most don’t report abuse by those in authority until years later, if at all.

It's time to educate our children better about sexual abuse and boundaries. I'd have no problem if groups like the Abbott House were placed in our schools to educate students about these things.


You haven’t been paying attention. You act like this is just all a big nuisance. Your lack of empathy and compassion is astounding.

I've paid plenty of attention. If there are claims within the statute of limitations, it would seem victims would have until they reach age 30 to come forward in this State. If there are offenders, prosecute them. That's how this is solved. Virtue signaling on the internet doesn't help a lot either, unfortunately.

Re the nuns being used as sex slaves, again, if there are offenders, prosecute them. Those stories, thank God, seem to be limited to Europe, and considering the average age of the American nun, I would be surprised if that was going on over on this side of the pond.

It wasn't only children being abused. And, it wasn't only happening 20-50+ years ago, either. Stories from February 2019:

Pope admits clerical abuse of nuns including sexual slavery
(https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47134033)
Sexual Abuse of Nuns: Longstanding Church Scandal Emerges From Shadows (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/06/world/europe/pope-francis-sexual-abuse-nuns.html)

And the stories are about Benedict shutting these things down. If the story was that the Pope knew this was going on and didn't act, that'd be a different story.

And the stories are about Benedict shutting these things down. If the story was that the Pope knew this was going on and didn't act, that'd be a different story.

This thread is about yet another Archdiocese having an “independent investigation” and it looks rotten. The Chancellor is named in Jan of 2018, the son is named partner in Jan of 2018. The Archbishop and the Chancellor stand up before their review board a few months later and announce they are giving the contract for this “independent investigation” to that same law firm. This thread has also been about the tribulations inside the Church. You have been antagonistic, seemingly dismissive of all that’s going on, trying to laugh things off, telling parishioners if they don’t like what’s going on to just “go join the Episcopalians.”

Virtue signaling? If standing up to you and calling you out on your defense of the indefensible — guilty as charged.

I think this thread was started to discuss that local church leadership hired a "friendly" legal firm to investigate claims of sexual abuse against them. I believe that is what they did.

I think that falls into an all too human trap of deciding "I know we are honest and we need honest people we know and trust to be honest to get the facts out. Real facts and honest information. We are honest and we need to make sure that trustworthy people work on this." The church wants to control the investigation without admitting (possibly even to themselves) that they want to do so.

The leadership of the Catholic Church in Oklahoma could have gone to Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter, Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater, as well as other law enforcement agencies in the state and ask their recommendations. An abundance of caution would have required that the investigating firm not be locally based and operate at arms length. Because the church is only interested in the truth and reporting it accurately.

This thread is about yet another Archdiocese having an “independent investigation” and it looks rotten. The Chancellor is named in Jan of 2018, the son is named partner in Jan of 2018. The Archbishop and the Chancellor stand up before their review board a few months later and announce they are giving the contract for this “independent investigation” to that same law firm. This thread has also been about the tribulations inside the Church. You have been antagonistic, seemingly dismissive of all that’s going on, trying to laugh things off, telling parishioners if they don’t like what’s going on to just “go join the Episcopalians.”

It looks rotten, but then again, it's also completely predictable.


Virtue signaling? If standing up to you and calling you out on your defense of the indefensible — guilty as charged.

You may want to review what's been said. I've defended no one. I've simply expressed that none of this should surprise anyone. Churches have to be businesses first, so every decision they make is about filling the pews. It shouldn't surprise anyone that the Church is doing this. Engaging in flailing histrionics on the internet isn't going to change anything.

Literally the thing which would stop this sort of behavior is the action I suggest. If people started leaving the Church in droves, only that would be a lever which might trigger actual change. Go be an Episcopal--it's an actual solution. And bonus--their baptism and other sacraments are accepted by the Catholic Church, so you get to keep your secret decoder ring and everything. Also bonus--their clergy can marry, be gay, and be female--and in any combination of those things imaginable.

I think this thread was started to discuss that local church leadership hired a "friendly" legal firm to investigate claims of sexual abuse against them. I believe that is what they did.

I think that falls into an all too human trap of deciding "I know we are honest and we need honest people we know and trust to be honest to get the facts out. Real facts and honest information. We are honest and we need to make sure that trustworthy people work on this." The church wants to control the investigation without admitting (possibly even to themselves) that they want to do so.

The leadership of the Catholic Church in Oklahoma could have gone to Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter, Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater, as well as other law enforcement agencies in the state and ask their recommendations. An abundance of caution would have required that the investigating firm not be locally based and operate at arms length. Because the church is only interested in the truth and reporting it accurately.

And it stands to reason that what they wanted was the appearance of truth, not the existence of truth. Not a surprising development as it turns out. That's basically the definition of organized religion, right?

No thank you. Reparations are just hand outs. Plain and simple. Paying out to say "hey we're sorry here you go take some money" doesn't solve the problem and arguably will make it worse. Not to mention there are many more pressing needs to spend our tax money on, the right way is to move on and make amends through better treatment and inclusive policies.
So, if someone does something wrong that gets you fired and keeps you from earning money, and you sue them successfully, the award you get is just a handout?

So, if someone does something wrong that gets you fired and keeps you from earning money, and you sue them successfully, the award you get is just a handout?
I don't agree those two things are comparable.