Needed: Clear Thinking!
February 29, 2004

The Los Angeles Times' February 7th, 2004 article, regarding ten priests accused of sexual molestation who continue in ministry because of a lack of sufficient or credible evidence to support the accusations, provides several examples of the lack of clear thinking in such stories.
First: the story says, the archdiocese is also battling prosecutors and civil litigants over access to personnel files on accused priests. The Times knows that these files have been turned over by the archdiocese to a judge to determine the First Amendment rights involved. The archdiocese has pledged to abide by the judge's ruling. It is not clear thinking to link that with this story, as if the archdiocese were hiding something.
Second: the article quotes John Manly, an attorney whose firm represents about 80 alleged victims, who says, The problem is not false allegations- The problem is child rape. When are the bishops going to get that through their thick ecclesiastical heads? Not one of the ten priests is accused of child rape. Is it thickheaded to consider a person innocent until proven guilty? The problem is to verify whether the accusations are true or false. That demands clear thinking.
Third: Mary Grant, regional director SNAP, says, I don't believe church officials are in a dilemma. They know exactly what they are doing in stonewalling and protecting priests. Seeking verifiable evidence for an allegation is not stonewalling or protecting; it is presuming innocence until proven guilty. Such statements do not help us find solutions here.
Nor does the picketing of parishes involved. What are the pickets picketing in these instances? The effort for due process? Not much clear thinking there.
Our common goal is the protection of children and adolescents from abusive behavior by others, including priests. To attain that goal, we need to work together, and think clearly together.

-Rev. Anthony Scannell, OFM Cap.
Executive Publisher, The Tidings Corporation