ShareThis Page
Letters to the Editor

Sounding off: Diocese's response is appalling

| Saturday, Aug. 25, 2018, 3:36 p.m.
Bishop Edward C. Malesic, speaks with reporters after the release of the diocesan report, titled “Progress Update on the Protection of Children: Higher Standards of Today’s Catholic Church' inside Blessed Sacrament Cathedral in Greensburg on Thursday, Aug. 9, 2018.
Dan Speicher | Tribune-Review
Bishop Edward C. Malesic, speaks with reporters after the release of the diocesan report, titled “Progress Update on the Protection of Children: Higher Standards of Today’s Catholic Church' inside Blessed Sacrament Cathedral in Greensburg on Thursday, Aug. 9, 2018.

I am sickened by the redacted grand jury report and the Diocese of Greensburg. I have listened multiple times to Bishop Edward Malesic's homily response. I am astonished and appalled at the decision of the bishop and his PR handlers to do anything other than beg for the forgiveness of the victims. His words are emblematic of the same institutional response that protected predators for 70-plus years while they preyed on thousands of children in Catholic dioceses across Pennsylvania.

Malesic states that past bishops of the diocese "sometimes misjudged the gravity of child sexual abuse." Disregarding the assertion that there could possibly exist levels of gravity with regard to child sexual abuse, the reality is the church actively ignored, suppressed and fought against claims of abuse for decades. They have shown love not to the faithful, but to the institution alone and above all.

Moreover, I find the overt marketing campaign of "Committed to Higher Standards" laughably grotesque, as though the church is the same as a bank or an airline that has somehow lost the trust of its customers. This response is not good enough. Likely nothing ever will be, but a church that is concerned with image repair ignores the reality that what they've lost cannot be repurchased with logos and marketing materials.

Faith and belief and love are not supposed to be transactional experiences, yet the diocese is proceeding as if they are. I have not lived in Greensburg for 20 years, but if I was a parishioner there today, and I somehow was able to walk through the doors of my church this weekend, I would stand and leave when Malesic's homily is played. And I'm not sure I would ever come back.

Sara Aldinger, Chicago


White people and the anthem 'traitors'

When white people dump tea in the ocean, they are "patriots." When white people want land and resources and commit genocide to wipe out its inhabitants, they are "pioneers." When white people commit treason and attempt to secede from the union, resulting in the death of over 1 million Americans, monuments are erected to display their "heritage," and the flag of rebellion proudly flies to this day. When white people don't like the government they exclaim "don't tread on me" and display the American flag upside down. When white people block women from entering abortion clinics they are fulfilling their "Christian duties."

When an African-American silently and passively kneels during the national anthem it is an outrage and the offender is a traitor ... .

Tom Spallone, Hempfield


Trump is more like Churchill

I know schools are not teaching history to show the ills and triumphs of the world's past like they did 40 years ago, so I wasn't shocked to read Karen Shackelford's lack of knowledge on this important subject.

Comparing President Trump to Hitler is a sad, unreasonable comparison, even among the "unhinged" sector. Comparing him to Churchill would be a much better analogy. Churchill had to clean up the mess left by Neville Chamberlain's lack of action. Trump must take action to alleviate the problems left by President Obama's lack of action on North Korea and ISIS.

Shackelford's "fake news" words — "racism," "Hitleresque" — don't raise the level of the conversation. The list of Trump's accomplishments in his first 18 months as president is too long to write, but a tweet or name-call to someone erases the entire list and makes him deserve every derogatory remark? So who's on the side of fairness, unity, kindness and tolerance?

Denny Biava, Mount Pleasant


Security clearance 101

A security clearance is issued because a position requires the designated person to have access to a specified level of classified information in order to perform the duties assigned to that specific person.

It is issued in the name of the individual performing such duties but does not "belong" to the individual.

The clearance is valid only for the specified duties and does not entitle the individual to other information, even within the same security level, if there is no legitimate need for the person to have such additional information.

The clearance exists only when and while the person's duties require it.

The clearance terminates when the person no longer has responsibility for performing such duties, i.e., the person's position terminates for whatever reason or the person changes to a different position not requiring the clearance.

Again, a clearance is not a personal possession and does not "belong" to the person

If former CIA director John Brennan, and anyone else, no longer have specific, responsible duties requiring the clearance, then their clearances are therefore terminated and they have no clearance to revoke.

President Trump need not "revoke" anyone's clearance under these circumstances unless these individuals are still having appropriate, specified duties requiring a specified clearance level.

I have had two security clearances myself. It was not necessary to notify me of the revocation when my security responsibilities terminated.

George Wandell, Hempfield


Democrat socialists are terrifying

For years I have been calling the left what they really are: socialists, liberals, conservatives and communists.

Finally a large group of Democrats has come forward with a half-truth, calling themselves Democrat socialists. That title should scare the daylights out of every Christian patriot that loves God, family and country. They are the embryo that needs to be aborted now or it will grow into the cancer of communism.

Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin are laughing in their graves because they lied to the Russians in 1917. They promised one class of people equal pay for all, free health care, free education land for all to own. Instead they removed God from their lives, closing churches and banishing priests to Siberia. They murdered thousands of clergy and slaughtered over 25 million Orthodox Christians. The Holocaust four times over again. The Russian communism experiment failed.

Socialism has failed everywhere. Medicare will cost over $3 trillion a year if given to everyone; free college education, over $100 billion a year.

The party of Pelosi, Sanders, Schumer, Warren and an unelected Cortez will remove the tax cuts, ruin the economy, open the borders and ruin the best health-care system in the world. Do not let them "Ruin America Again." Stand up against lies and promises that cannot be kept. The Democrat socialists only want you to put them into power so they have more control over you than they ever had.

"Keep America Great" and vote for the conservative candidates to keep improving our country for our benefit.

The Rev. Tony Joseph, Johnstown


Won't tariffs hurt China, too?

It seems you can't pick up a paper today without reading about the negative effects of tariffs on our economy. See " Ralph Reiland: Prosperity isn't produced by tariffs " and " Congress needs to get involved in tariff matter ".

However, despite all the articles, I feel I am getting only half the story. Aren't similar things happening in China? Aren't the retaliatory tariffs on U.S. farm goods raising the price of food in China? Aren't rising food prices bad for Chinese consumers? Wouldn't U.S tariffs on finished goods made in China cause the price of those goods to rise in the U.S., leading to fewer sales in the U.S.? And won't fewer sales lead to a decline in demand, wage inertia and employee layoffs in China?

With China selling us about $375 billion a year more than we are buying from them, wouldn't any trade war cause more economic hardship for China than for us? And if China is experiencing greater economic hardship than the U.S., wouldn't it be to China's advantage to seek an end to the trade war? Does China really want to risk losing a half-a-trillion dollar market?

Until someone writes about the negative impact of a trade war on the Chinese economy and explains why that $375-billion-a-year trade deficit doesn't give us the upper hand, I will remain ill-informed.

Edward Pencoske, Trafford

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me