tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post7053614947516760679..comments2024-03-14T11:50:14.761-04:00Comments on DarwinCatholic: We Must Not Be A Church of LiesDarwinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-87979845609514829392021-07-29T13:43:42.254-04:002021-07-29T13:43:42.254-04:00No sin of any Church leader can be as harmful as t...No sin of any Church leader can be as harmful as the covering up of those sins. I thought this doesn't need to be said any more, like you said. And it's not a question of whether we would enjoy finding out how deep the festering wound is (to reflect on your last quote). I'm a physician so the metaphor is really close to me. Sick people and the multitude of seemingly healthy people who have just the very insignificant symptom of... (some slight chest pain at exercise, because I'm a cardiologist, but take your pick) don't get better outcomes by not going to the doctor and not exposing their disease, therefore not asking for treatment.<br />So, it boils down to this: do we, all of us Catholics, really believe that this behavior is like a sickness needing treatment, or do we think we can use cosmetics for cover-up?Agneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00047890626000373572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-68646685492352228172021-07-22T21:04:52.045-04:002021-07-22T21:04:52.045-04:00mandamum, I think you have it exactly correct. The...mandamum, I think you have it exactly correct. The "seeing someone enter an adult bookstore" analogy is apt. I don't know it for a fact, but I don't believe this priest was a target of the investigation, but rather someone bought the location data and then painstakingly sifted through it to find anonymized IDs that seemed to travel to all the USCCB meeting locations. I wouldn't be surprised if they found more than one and are still putting together the other reporting.Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15706375351999428103noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-36697402795776592082021-07-22T12:31:02.652-04:002021-07-22T12:31:02.652-04:00Thank you, Darwin Catholic. The priest in question...Thank you, Darwin Catholic. The priest in question is committing grave sins; he needs to be told to stop and repent. If he's in a position of power and influence (which he was), then those sins need to be exposed to his authorities. If they don't respond to recuse him of his role of authority, then the public needs to know. I think Pillar followed all the proper ethical steps. In fact, if Pillar were to hide this information or simply let it rest with the Bishop's Conference, it would be doing something unethical, imo. A sin of omission.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04217582208518313097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-60581627129773103252021-07-22T11:17:42.935-04:002021-07-22T11:17:42.935-04:00Sorry - I guess there was an "if" in fro...Sorry - I guess there was an "if" in front of the "publicly available" in your "other hand" :-) I will say instead that my overwhelming understanding from the reporting was that they just gathered the publicly available (for a fee? That's what commercially available means, right?) info waiting there for the taking, with no hacking. mandamumnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-17203926378544362412021-07-22T11:14:29.769-04:002021-07-22T11:14:29.769-04:00As has been pointed out, this was not hacking but ...As has been pointed out, this was not hacking but rather collecting publicly available information. If anything, the "privacy" lesson we should be taking is that we need to read more carefully what we agree to when installing such tracking apps.<br /><br />I think the point about clergy being public figures is important.<br /><br />More generally and low-tech, if we were to see and recognize a particular person at our local ... embarrassing place (adult bookstore etc etc) would you say they have a reasonable expectation of privacy there? If no, then if someone were to run into this particular person while using a questionable app, does he still have a reasonable expectation of privacy? <br /><br />Personally, I am glad the Pillar is doing this kind of reporting, rather than waiting for those who want a bite out of the Church to stumble on it - after all, it is publicly available. I just wish it wasn't there to report in the first place...I guess it's time to double-down on praying for our priests and other leaders, for holiness and faith.mandamumnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-72413378011582268772021-07-21T22:22:55.971-04:002021-07-21T22:22:55.971-04:00The most important detail of this story is that th...The most important detail of this story is that the priest in question is responsible for handling sexual abuse policy. How did McCarrick get away with so many vile acts? Because other clerics covered up for him in fear that their own vile acts might be exposed. This priest is the LAST person who should be in his position. I'm sure that he was ready to enforce the Church's moral laws to the fullest extent--NOT.<br />The Church seems to be just great at background checks and "training" for lay people, but apparently the bishops have to draw the line at making sure that the clergy are behaving appropriately. No, the clergy need their "privacy." <br />I keep praying that the filth in the hierarchy will be cleansed.Ladyhobbithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02668460460851427837noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-89684968475644597232021-07-21T21:51:30.481-04:002021-07-21T21:51:30.481-04:00For sure the institutional church had myriad chanc...For sure the institutional church had myriad chances to police itself and I've come to see that transparency is the only solution. I saw where Msgr Bransfield tweeted a link to the book about the abuses of power in the church and other organizations and the author argues that transparency and accountability are keys. TShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17118362963139092279noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-10641910782124295372021-07-21T19:33:16.862-04:002021-07-21T19:33:16.862-04:00But, as the late Jerry Pournelle would have said, ...But, as the late Jerry Pournelle would have said, on the gripping hand...<br /><br />If it is the case that the priest in question used a publicly available 'app' to arrange for his assignations, and someone else collected that publicly available information, then it would seem that there was no violation of the priest's privacy, and the only one he had to blame for his situation was himself.Bernard Franklin Brandtnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-73424765966766928252021-07-21T16:58:17.011-04:002021-07-21T16:58:17.011-04:00What I find interesting is the assumption, involve...What I find interesting is the assumption, involved in some (although possibly not all) of the privacy arguments, that bishops and priests are in no way public figures in a public office. The general principle of journalistic ethics with respect to privacy is that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in matters that do not directly concern public interest or public office. Bishops and priests, like everyone else, have aspects of their lives that are not concerned with either. But bishops and priests do have a public office, and repeated behavior inappropriate to that office directly concerns public interest, and once that's the case, I think the real ethical question is simply whether the evidence is adequate to go public with the story.<br /><br />As you say, if people keep *not* exposing repeated inappropriate behavior relevant to public office, even where they have evidence in hand of it, the result is simply that a serious problem grows and grows without anybody knowing how serious it is.Brandonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06698839146562734910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-7293491272522315282021-07-21T14:53:45.422-04:002021-07-21T14:53:45.422-04:00Darwin:
Hear, hear!
Clerical omerta is the order...Darwin:<br /><br />Hear, hear!<br /><br />Clerical omerta is the order of the day otherwise.DPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12249117106906577345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-64375727495784171952021-07-21T14:03:14.315-04:002021-07-21T14:03:14.315-04:00On the one hand, Darwin, I am in entire agreement ...On the one hand, Darwin, I am in entire agreement with you that such cases as the unfortunate ex-Cardinal McCarrick's should be exposed, using all proper methods of exposure, which are available in the public record, or on the basis of sworn testimony. I believe, as a matter of fact, that I have been ahead of the curve of most Catholic weblogistas in pointing out the derelictions of many RC clergy, and in calls for reform.<br /><br />On the other hand, under both civil and canon law, I believe that all individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy, which it is both illegal and immoral to violate. I point out in particular Canon 220 of the Latin Code of Canon law, which reads as follows: "No one is permitted to harm illegitimately the good reputation which a person possesses nor to injure the right of any person to protect his or her own privacy."<br /><br />While I applaud the efforts of private individuals and of Church Militant in making use of all legitimate means of inquiry to discover the failings of spoiled priests, I draw the line at hacking. I believe that I am supported in this distinction by both civil and canon law.<br /><br />My point in writing this is that if it is found that there was an injury to this priest by the violation of his right of privacy, that redress should be found in civil and canon courts, up to and including monetary awards, and the decertification of the news service in question as 'Catholic'.Bernard Franklin Brandtnoreply@blogger.com