ADVERTISEMENT

Providence

All the problems the Catholic church has had over the past several decades and you still have guys like this hanging around. How many more are there? What else continues to be swept under the rug?

What brings this to the height of hypocrisy is this. My son tested to go to Providence although he chose Lockport instead. During the orientation McGrath went on and on about Providence teaching "right from wrong." Here was the face of that school giving us this "holier than thou" speech while doing this stuff?

I love and trust my spouse completely. She has such a great sense about people when she first meets them. When we left the school with our son that day she and I talked about him possibly going there. She said there was something about McGrath she didn't trust. She said he seemed kind of creepy. I, more or less, blew it off. You can imagine what she said when I showed her the article today in the Sun-Times. Really she didn't say anything...she didn't have to.

Before some of you guys jump down my throat let me say this. I am an "innocent until proven guilty" guy 100%. But this guy's resignation sure is suspicious as hell. Nothing will surprise me now.

It's not a sad story as one poster said...it is a sick and disgusting story.
 
Moral of the story. Listen to your wife LT. sound advice for all.

This is a sad story. Hope Provi recovers from this.
 
All the problems the Catholic church has had over the past several decades and you still have guys like this hanging around. How many more are there? What else continues to be swept under the rug?

What brings this to the height of hypocrisy is this. My son tested to go to Providence although he chose Lockport instead. During the orientation McGrath went on and on about Providence teaching "right from wrong." Here was the face of that school giving us this "holier than thou" speech while doing this stuff?

I love and trust my spouse completely. She has such a great sense about people when she first meets them. When we left the school with our son that day she and I talked about him possibly going there. She said there was something about McGrath she didn't trust. She said he seemed kind of creepy. I, more or less, blew it off. You can imagine what she said when I showed her the article today in the Sun-Times. Really she didn't say anything...she didn't have to.

Before some of you guys jump down my throat let me say this. I am an "innocent until proven guilty" guy 100%. But this guy's resignation sure is suspicious as hell. Nothing will surprise me now.

It's not a sad story as one poster said...it is a sick and disgusting story.

The only thing I would add here is that it's a much larger issue than just the Catholic church unfortunately....
 
One might think paying the extra thousands of dollars for private school tuition might provide better insulation from this kind of flawed leadership.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LTHSALUM76
Before some of you guys jump down my throat let me say this. I am an "innocent until proven guilty" guy 100%. But this guy's resignation sure is suspicious as hell. Nothing will surprise me now.

LTHSALUM76:

Let's not allow our imaginations run riot just yet.

I'd hasten to point out the story only describes "inappropriate" content was discovered on his phone, but does not elaborate any further. We are at the early stages of a civil probe, but some, such as you, have already indirectly offered apocalyptic visions of horrifying images uploaded onto his mobile phone.

For all we know, a complaint could have been lodged over images of teen girls in bikinis and not grotesque pictures of 14-year-old boys showering in the school locker room.

So before you or any other poster serve up any above-it-all moralizing, I would suggest we wait and see what the inquiry produces before sending this man to the gallows.

I'd also like to remind members here there are over 40,000 Catholic priests serving in North America and approximately 200 have been accused of sex crimes, some of which (Joseph Bernardin, for example) were later to be exposed as completely groundless. However, the low number of accused priests have never halted the traveling circus of anti-Catholic agitators from revealing this important statistic, nor has it ever provided a word of absolution for the hundreds of thousands of priests globally who perform acts of kindness or charity every day.

For those who ignore these words and choose to pile on with pitiless ad hominem attacks, do so at your pleasure or risk.
 
LTHSALUM76:

Let's not allow our imaginations run riot just yet.

I'd hasten to point out the story only describes "inappropriate" content was discovered on his phone, but does not elaborate any further. We are at the early stages of a civil probe, but some, such as you, have already indirectly offered apocalyptic visions of horrifying images uploaded onto his mobile phone.

For all we know, a complaint could have been lodged over images of teen girls in bikinis and not grotesque pictures of 14-year-old boys showering in the school locker room.

So before you or any other poster serve up any above-it-all moralizing, I would suggest we wait and see what the inquiry produces before sending this man to the gallows.

I'd also like to remind members here there are over 40,000 Catholic priests serving in North America and approximately 200 have been accused of sex crimes, some of which (Joseph Bernardin, for example) were later to be exposed as completely groundless. However, the low number of accused priests have never halted the traveling circus of anti-Catholic agitators from revealing this important statistic, nor has it ever provided a word of absolution for the hundreds of thousands of priests globally who perform acts of kindness or charity every day.

For those who ignore these words and choose to pile on with pitiless ad hominem attacks, do so at your pleasure or risk.
Yours is a well thought out post. But, answer me this. Why would he resign if there is"nothing here to see?" If he truly is innocent of anything why leave? This is why I am speculating, because I do believe in innocent until proven guilty. People don't resign all of a sudden for no reason...and especially in the middle of the school year. Something is up.

I don't care what anyone says, I believe there is something there. I also believe we may never know all of the truth. This may very well get swept under the rug like so many other incidents. Everyone is mum which is typical. Just don't say anything, let time pass, and it will go away.

I am sorry but pointing out there are 40,000 Catholic priests and saying that there are "only" 200 having been accused doesn't justify this action. To me, it's 200 too many.

I am just as Catholic as anyone on this board which is why this is especially troubling to me...and aggravating if anyone couldn't tell. All the trouble we have in getting people into church and this continues to happen.

If you can give me a good and logical answer as to why McGrath resigned, I will listen.

Priests should be held to a higher standard because they preach to us about morality. We aren't talking about people in the entertainment industry or politicians. These are people who are spreading the word of God.

McGrath should have known he was being held to a higher standard, whether fair or not. If he didn't, then he shouldn't have taken the gig.
 
LTHSALUM76:

Let's not allow our imaginations run riot just yet.

I'd hasten to point out the story only describes "inappropriate" content was discovered on his phone, but does not elaborate any further. We are at the early stages of a civil probe, but some, such as you, have already indirectly offered apocalyptic visions of horrifying images uploaded onto his mobile phone.

For all we know, a complaint could have been lodged over images of teen girls in bikinis and not grotesque pictures of 14-year-old boys showering in the school locker room.

So before you or any other poster serve up any above-it-all moralizing, I would suggest we wait and see what the inquiry produces before sending this man to the gallows.

I'd also like to remind members here there are over 40,000 Catholic priests serving in North America and approximately 200 have been accused of sex crimes, some of which (Joseph Bernardin, for example) were later to be exposed as completely groundless. However, the low number of accused priests have never halted the traveling circus of anti-Catholic agitators from revealing this important statistic, nor has it ever provided a word of absolution for the hundreds of thousands of priests globally who perform acts of kindness or charity every day.

For those who ignore these words and choose to pile on with pitiless ad hominem attacks, do so at your pleasure or risk.

I feel like you are cherry picking numbers.

"Currently serving". I'm interested in your source, but of course "currently serving" is a hugely biased statistic as many who have been discovered to have committed sexual abuse would have been removed, and many cases that have occurred have taken years or decades to surface so you don't know the number of the current priests, in many cases due to the Church hiding the scandal.

One would hope the negative exposure has reduced the frequency of this, but the fact is that there were approximately 10,667 reported victims (younger than 18 years) of clergy sexual abuse between 1950 and 2002, and the 4,392 priests who were accused amount to approximately 4% of the 109,694 priests in active ministry during that time. That's a very high % for any population, but especially for a group who are revered and who's entire job involves preaching morality and ethics while committing one of the most heinous of crimes.

I agree with you in general with the "innocent until proven guilty", but logic dictates that when one steps down from a position they've spent their entire life working towards that goal rather than stepping down you have reason to suspect guilt. Moreover, I'm not sure I agree with you minimizing the effect based on gender.... so photos of underage girls is ok but not boys? Please clarify.
 
"Inappropriate" material may not be limited to that which is there for sexual titillation. It could be things that involve any number of -isms or material offensive to certain groups, or even something with Pepe the Frog.
 
Why would he resign if there is"nothing here to see?" If he truly is innocent of anything why leave? This is why I am speculating, because I do believe in innocent until proven guilty. People don't resign all of a sudden for no reason...and especially in the middle of the school year. Something is up.

LTHSALUM:

I suspect he stepped away for a number of reasons, but not necessarily because of guilt. He was in all probability told to step down by his superiors in the Diocese; thinks more of the school than himself and would prefer to avoid any more negative publicity; or he is indeed at fault.

I don't care what anyone says, I believe there is something there. I also believe we may never know all of the truth. This may very well get swept under the rug like so many other incidents. Everyone is mum which is typical. Just don't say anything, let time pass, and it will go away.

Doubtful. According to the article, civil authorities are looking into the matter and if the justice system is involved, if he is at fault, it will be dealt with in a court of law.

I am sorry but pointing out there are 40,000 Catholic priests and saying that there are "only" 200 having been accused doesn't justify this action. To me, it's 200 too many.

My point about mentioning the number of priests who serve with dignity in comparison to those who have faced accusations was in no way an attempt to whitewash credible accusations. It was to point out to alarmists the Church is not some haven for criminals to use a collar as a refuge for their misdeeds. In the past, the Church irresponsibly shuffled both accused or guilty priests from parish or school to another parish or school in a different section of the country. Inexcusable as this was, and likely only promoting further criminal behavior, the Church has paid out hundreds of millions in damages to litigants. I think the Church, thankfully, has recognized it has cost them dearly financially and has damaged the image of the Church and priesthood. As I said above: This matter has fallen under a civil investigation and has been revealed to the media. I doubt the Diocese has much to say at this point.

I am just as Catholic as anyone on this board which is why this is especially troubling to me...and aggravating if anyone couldn't tell. All the trouble we have in getting people into church and this continues to happen.

It troubles me immensely; however, with civil authorities conducting an inquiry and aware of similar matters in which the misdeeds were ignored causing outrage, I think this delicate matter will be thoroughly inspected and if criminal charges are warranted, he will be punished.

If you can give me a good and logical answer as to why McGrath resigned, I will listen.

I tried my best and did as much without attempting to exonerate the accused before the conclusion of a probe. At this point, I suspect a sober judgement will be rendered by investigators endowed with the calmness of vision and impartiality of judgement required when weighing evidence in this serious matter.

Priests should be held to a higher standard because they preach to us about morality. We aren't talking about people in the entertainment industry or politicians. These are people who are spreading the word of God.

I wholeheartedly agree. Like you, I expect more from the ordained because they are entrusted with spreading virtue and it is shocking when there is a breach of trust. When a violation occurs, it is imperative a dispassionate investigation be performed to come to a equitable conclusion.

My point was merely to urge caution and not reflexively assign blame or assume it is related contact with a teen boy. We have only one piece of evidence at this point: "Inappropriate" material allegedly found on a mobile phone.

When the Niles North episode emerged at the near-conclusion of the season, all sorts of wild speculation arose on this forum. I recommended caution and reminded members of the final chapter in the Duke lacrosse case. I don't need to elaborate any further.
 
I feel like you are cherry picking numbers.

"Currently serving". I'm interested in your source, but of course "currently serving" is a hugely biased statistic as many who have been discovered to have committed sexual abuse would have been removed, and many cases that have occurred have taken years or decades to surface so you don't know the number of the current priests, in many cases due to the Church hiding the scandal.

Guido:

I am having a bit of trouble determining what your point is here. My statistic of 40,000 priests currently serving in some capacity, (parish, school, administrative position) is based on a 2014 USA Today article I unearthed when I responded to LTHSALUM. The figure I produced only represents the number of priests actively engaged in a school setting, an administrative position or serving a parish. As for the number of accused, I relied on memory from coverage and a white paper earlier this year. Allegations number in the thousands, but the number of accused priests in the U.S. is believed to be around 200. I tend to believe there are more over a 60-year period, but the Church did not pursue some cases because many accusations were leveled after the alleged offender had passed. I remind you: The total number could surpass a thousand since 1950, but as of 2017, only 200 accused exist.

Should you choose to contest either statistic, this is your prerogative, but at the very least, the USA Today piece can validate part of my claim.

the fact is that there were approximately 10,667 reported victims (younger than 18 years) of clergy sexual abuse between 1950 and 2002, and the 4,392 priests who were accused amount to approximately 4% of the 109,694 priests in active ministry during that time.

Please cite a source for your statistics. I am very willing to greet data from a neutral arbiter, but if it is from a source hostile to the Church, I am likely to dismiss it out of hand. The number I stated previously sharply contrasts with your number of 4,392. My number of 200 is as of 2017 (my memory) and you are citing over 4,000 from an extended period of time.

I do not take issue with you on this matter, excuse the misbehavior, defend the indefensible or suggest accusations stretching back to the 1950s are meaningless in any way, but I think we may differ on a timeline.

I agree with you in general with the "innocent until proven guilty", but logic dictates that when one steps down from a position they've spent their entire life working towards that goal rather than stepping down you have reason to suspect guilt.

Indeed it does. I agree a resignation appears to be an indication of guilt, but I would also recommend you carefully examine other factors: An insistence from Diocese officials he exit the school or his desire to avoid tarnishing the image of the school. Like you, my first reaction to his departure indicated immediate guilt. I thought carefully before posting with several possible alternatives which could plausibly explain his departure.

Moreover, I'm not sure I agree with you minimizing the effect based on gender.... so photos of underage girls is ok but not boys? Please clarify.

I never minimized, excused or whitewashed any accusation leveled against this priest. What I did do was to recommend prudence before passing judgement. I think it is fair to say most involved in this thread swiftly drew the conclusion the "inappropriate" material or images the priest in question had on his mobile depicted a male. This is quite a judgement based on the little or vague information we have.
 
All the problems the Catholic church has had over the past several decades and you still have guys like this hanging around. How many more are there? What else continues to be swept under the rug?

What brings this to the height of hypocrisy is this. My son tested to go to Providence although he chose Lockport instead. During the orientation McGrath went on and on about Providence teaching "right from wrong." Here was the face of that school giving us this "holier than thou" speech while doing this stuff?

I love and trust my spouse completely. She has such a great sense about people when she first meets them. When we left the school with our son that day she and I talked about him possibly going there. She said there was something about McGrath she didn't trust. She said he seemed kind of creepy. I, more or less, blew it off. You can imagine what she said when I showed her the article today in the Sun-Times. Really she didn't say anything...she didn't have to.

Before some of you guys jump down my throat let me say this. I am an "innocent until proven guilty" guy 100%. But this guy's resignation sure is suspicious as hell. Nothing will surprise me now.

It's not a sad story as one poster said...it is a sick and disgusting story.

Unfortunately, catholic schools have the same human issues as public schools. Downers north teacher was just summarily dismissed for females finally coming out about being abused as teenagers. I know preists are suppose to be different, they are still human. No excuses for creeps, religious or not, but it is a fact that no matter the religion, humans are in charge of running churches and schools, and humanity will continue to produce creeps.
 
LTHSALUM:

I suspect he stepped away for a number of reasons, but not necessarily because of guilt. He was in all probability told to step down by his superiors in the Diocese; thinks more of the school than himself and would prefer to avoid any more negative publicity; or he is indeed at fault.



Doubtful. According to the article, civil authorities are looking into the matter and if the justice system is involved, if he is at fault, it will be dealt with in a court of law.



My point about mentioning the number of priests who serve with dignity in comparison to those who have faced accusations was in no way an attempt to whitewash credible accusations. It was to point out to alarmists the Church is not some haven for criminals to use a collar as a refuge for their misdeeds. In the past, the Church irresponsibly shuffled both accused or guilty priests from parish or school to another parish or school in a different section of the country. Inexcusable as this was, and likely only promoting further criminal behavior, the Church has paid out hundreds of millions in damages to litigants. I think the Church, thankfully, has recognized it has cost them dearly financially and has damaged the image of the Church and priesthood. As I said above: This matter has fallen under a civil investigation and has been revealed to the media. I doubt the Diocese has much to say at this point.



It troubles me immensely; however, with civil authorities conducting an inquiry and aware of similar matters in which the misdeeds were ignored causing outrage, I think this delicate matter will be thoroughly inspected and if criminal charges are warranted, he will be punished.



I tried my best and did as much without attempting to exonerate the accused before the conclusion of a probe. At this point, I suspect a sober judgement will be rendered by investigators endowed with the calmness of vision and impartiality of judgement required when weighing evidence in this serious matter.



I wholeheartedly agree. Like you, I expect more from the ordained because they are entrusted with spreading virtue and it is shocking when there is a breach of trust. When a violation occurs, it is imperative a dispassionate investigation be performed to come to a equitable conclusion.

My point was merely to urge caution and not reflexively assign blame or assume it is related contact with a teen boy. We have only one piece of evidence at this point: "Inappropriate" material allegedly found on a mobile phone.

When the Niles North episode emerged at the near-conclusion of the season, all sorts of wild speculation arose on this forum. I recommended caution and reminded members of the final chapter in the Duke lacrosse case. I don't need to elaborate any further.
Again, another well thought out post. There are few things that concern me.

First, I don't see McGrath denying anything inappropriate on his device. If that is me and nothing is there, I am saying so. But, he is staying silent, which is the usual protocol.

Letting an investigation, inquiry, trial, etc. decide and tell us what the truth is, will not necessarily give us the truth. Many times it doesn't.

Another thing that has concerned me over the years is the lack of public outrage by the Diocese and Church, in general, over so many incidents revealed. They pretty much stay silent.

You may recall my post from before when I said, "don't say anything, let time pass and it will go away." Every Saturday morning I see a man at Starbucks who was the RE/CCD teacher of my children. We exchange pleasantries. This past Saturday this issue came up. The guy shook his head in disgust. As it turns out, he worked for the Diocese for 20 years. He expressed his concern for the Diocese trying to cover up some issues in the past. But he told me they do what their attorneys tell them to do..."don't say anything, let time pass and it will go away." Exactly what he said word-for-word.

For some posters to say it happens in other places, he's human, etc. isn't acceptable for me. It is soft justification. I don't much care for justifying bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior. "He or she did it too" doesn't work here with this subject.

I am also very curious as to the usage of the word "inappropriate." If the truth comes out we'll know what the definition of "inappropriate" is to the Catholic church. If this turns out to be something disgusting, we'll know just how serious they are when it comes to getting this fixed or changing their ways.

I told my friend at Starbucks, the Diocese should just get all of this crap out in the open, express outrage and then make examples of the ones who are guilty of such behavior. It may not stop all sick people from acting this way, but it will definitely give the public the opinion that this won't be tolerated. Quietly dismissing someone or asking them to resign tells many people they really don't want to face this reality unless they have to.

Thank God for the newspapers and media who will cover this and probe for the truth. If not for them, we wouldn't know anything and we didn't for hundreds of years.

OK the rant is over and I really don't care to discuss this anymore and become more aggravated. That is, unless something new comes up.
 
Last edited:
First, I don't see McGrath denying anything inappropriate on his device. If that is me and nothing is there, I am saying so. But, he is staying silent, which is the usual protocol.
Letting an investigation, inquiry, trial, etc. decide and tell us what the truth is, will not necessarily give us the truth. Many times it doesn't.

LTHS:

I agree his staying mum is a standard legal position and wise for him, but to your other point regarding the effectiveness of the inquiry, I do not share your pessimism. I tend to believe in these thorny issues, protecting children, investigators become hypersensitive and do indeed conduct vigilant examinations. While no investigation can ever answer every question and the accused can successfully evade the probing minds of a formal inquiry, it's not as if the accused in this case can afford blockbuster legal counsel to bamboozle a jury.

Most of the faith lost in the justice system revolves around high-profile cases in which the accused were men or women of means. O.J. and Robert Blake, for example, eluded justice largely because of the skill of their conniving attorneys. In the case of Casey Anthony, who is one of the most hated persons in the world, the injustice occurred as a result of the state's misapplication of legal statute. In sum, Florida overcharged. Still, though, had I sat on her jury, I would have found this shameless, worthless excuse of human excrement guilty even if it meant risking a mistrial or throwing the entire trial into a tailspin.

In the case of McGrath, this factor is virtually nonexistent.

Another thing that has concerned me over the years is the lack of public outrage by the Diocese and Church, in general, over so many incidents revealed. They pretty much stay silent.

No doubt the Church's frequent position in the past was to ride out the scandal, hope it could avoid damaging publicity, and then quietly pay handsome damages. It may have worked for a while, but over the past two decades, much has been exposed over how the Vatican and the U.S. Bishops have conducted themselves when confronted with these issues and they have taken a serious P.R. hit. Since the mid-90s, the Church has done more to expose negligent priests and those whom protected them to established law. It is still unclear at this moment precisely what McGrath stands accused of other than the vague "inappropriate" material on his mobile. As of now, and now only, we know it was images on a mobile and no charge of abuse has emerged. It is fairly common for the charge of abuse to be revealed from the onset; nonesuch has been disclosed, yet.

I am also very curious as to the usage of the word "inappropriate." If the truth comes out we'll know what the definition of "inappropriate" is to the Catholic church. If this turns out to be something disgusting, we'll know just how serious they are when it comes to getting this fixed or changing their ways.

"Inappropriate" is a broad term used to describe a wide range of wrongdoing. As far as I am concerned, if the term was applied to describe behavior instead of what allegedly exists on his mobile, I would be even more troubled.

I told my friend at Starbucks, the Diocese should just get all of this crap out in the open, express outrage and then make examples of the ones who are guilty of such behavior. It may not stop all sick people from acting this way, but it will definitely give the public the opinion that this won't be tolerated. Quietly dismissing someone or asking them to resign tells many people they really don't want to face this reality unless they have to.

As I have stated before, had the Church handled this issue more judiciously in the past, Rome would not have found itself fighting off litigation or struggling to repair its tattered image. However, I do believe it has done more to cooperate with the legal system and turn over offenders.

Thank God for the newspapers and media who will cover this and probe for the truth. If not for them, we wouldn't know anything and we didn't for hundreds of years.

While I agree the media can contribute greatly to keeping the public well informed on this unsavory matter, I have a deep skepticism of the intent of some members of mass media. Should any further truths be exposed, it will be civil investigators revealing the truth and the media reporting what is discovered. Within the ranks of media exist many, many persons intent on using this issue as a rhetorical cudgel to bash the Church over the head.

If the media were truly responsible, they would remain devoted to reporting and avoid editorializing. The purpose of media should be to inform, not to influence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wolffan64
Sure sound like my wife wrote the last two sentences.....

SSCFD:

Mine too. Perhaps we are married to sisters.

Had it been my wife doing the scrawling while in one of her "moods," it would have been written in ALL CAPS for emphasis, all the while telling me everything is "fine" and denying she is a state of fury.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voodoo Tatum 21
All the problems the Catholic church has had over the past several decades and you still have guys like this hanging around. How many more are there? What else continues to be swept under the rug?

What brings this to the height of hypocrisy is this. My son tested to go to Providence although he chose Lockport instead. During the orientation McGrath went on and on about Providence teaching "right from wrong." Here was the face of that school giving us this "holier than thou" speech while doing this stuff?

I love and trust my spouse completely. She has such a great sense about people when she first meets them. When we left the school with our son that day she and I talked about him possibly going there. She said there was something about McGrath she didn't trust. She said he seemed kind of creepy. I, more or less, blew it off. You can imagine what she said when I showed her the article today in the Sun-Times. Really she didn't say anything...she didn't have to.

Before some of you guys jump down my throat let me say this. I am an "innocent until proven guilty" guy 100%. But this guy's resignation sure is suspicious as hell. Nothing will surprise me now.

It's not a sad story as one poster said...it is a sick and disgusting story.


it is very sickening especially in this day and age.
but, with all the open to everything being pushed on everybody. maybe he was was just beginning to realize who he really was inside and coming to grips with it.(sac) but, i do not think we as the public will really ever know exactly what was involved. unless of course criminal charges are brought up.
 
ADVERTISEMENT