ShareThis Page
Letters to the Editor

Diocese can't win

| Thursday, Feb. 17, 2011

I was disappointed to see the Trib publish the letter " Concern misplaced " (Feb. 10 and from Judy Jones of Marthasville, Mo. She works for SNAP (Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests) Midwest -- an organization intent on destroying the Roman Catholic Church.

SNAP should have as its ultimate goal going out of business because of the virtual elimination of all abuse. Instead, it involves itself in matters that only gain publicity against the church.

Jones says church officials should not fixate on where a former priest charged in two molestations "was assigned or who signed his paychecks." It is Jones' organization that has forced church officials into that corner.

No matter what they do or say, it is wrong, according to SNAP. When the church stands behind a falsely accused priest, SNAP says it is discouraging victims of other priests from coming forward. This man is apparently not a former priest of this diocese, but SNAP still says the diocese is discouraging victims from coming forward. No matter what the diocese does, it is wrong.

If the accused had been, say, a teacher, would the Department of Education be responsible for finding victims• If he had been an astronaut, would NASA be responsible for finding victims?

Unfortunately, SNAP will not be satisfied until the church is no more. SNAP says it stands with the victims, yet it backs accusers over falsely accused priest victims.

Jones mentions "crimes" as if the accused former priest is already guilty. Truth doesn't matter -- only the destruction of trust in the church and its officials.

Anna Oslica

Point Breeze

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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