Priests who broke their vows or promises by being with women are immediately removed but priests who broke vows or promises by raping and molesting children including seminarians were kept in ministry and shuffled around.  

Was told by Byzantine friends 1priest was on the list. One maronite priest removed last year

https://www.barnhardt.biz/

How can the Church ever recover from this? Parents should think long and hard before they leave their kids with anyone. The Pennsylvania Attorney General is as justifiably angry as the clergy should have been. A reader's digest version of the sɛҳuąƖ abuse report comes after the article.

Many parents are partially to blame.  To allow young women or little girls alone with any  man shouldn't be.  Shame on the parents who ignored their own children when they were told that the priest was up to no good.  The one who are largely to blame is law enforcement and judges.  ( how many judges are pedophiles themselves?) In many cases pedophile priests weren't alone.  Using pervert rings involve lawyers, priests, doctors, etc.   

Many parents are partially to blame.  To allow young women or little girls alone with any  man shouldn't be.  Shame on the parents who ignored their own children when they were told that the priest was up to no good.  

That is correct and it still is happening today. I estimate that 25% of the clergy is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. 

Fathers, today are not really men. If I see the slightest sign in a priest, any parishioner, or person, I am on his case and I alert my son. If I see some action that confirms what I am watching for, I am going directly to speak to that person and let him know that I know what he is up to.

The problem today is that effeminate priests are mistaken for refined, cultured, educated gentlemen. No, they are fαɢɢօts, men do not act "refined".

I rather like this response. If only...

“Any cleric or monk who seduces young men or boys, or who is apprehended in kissing or in any shameful situation, shall be publicly flogged and shall lose his clerical tonsure. Thus shorn, he shall be disgraced by spitting in his face, bound in iron chains, wasted by six months of close confinement, and for three days each week put on barley bread given him toward evening. 

“Following this period, he shall spend a further six months living in a small segregated courtyard in custody of a spiritual elder, kept busy with manual labor and prayer, subjected to vigils and prayers, forced to walk at all times in the company of two spiritual brothers, never again allowed to associate with young men.”  -- Saint Basil the Great 

Fr James McLucas was listed under the hαɾɾιsburg Diocese although I know he is from NY. He was the editor of Latin Mass magazine in the '90's. It tells about his abusive misdeeds re: a 14 y/o female and a subsequent long term "relationship" but there are no charges of any kind listed .Are they printing  accusations as well as convictions? Can anyone just say anything without anything conclusive?
 I always held him in high regard. He wrote a moving piece that is still online called"The Emasculation of the Priesthood".
All in all, horribly disappointing.

Father McLucas' reply through his attorney appended to the Grand Jury Report:

Father James McLucas respectfully requests that interested persons read and consider this
response before forming any final conclusions about the shocking and horrible accusations that
have been leveled against him in the report issued by the 40th Statewide Investigating. Grand
Jury. These allegations must have been based upon half-truths, false assumptions, and/or
innuendo and are categorically false. Any individual that provided information that could have
led to such conclusions by the Grand Jury was misinformed, sought to mislead the Grand Jury, or
was mistaken. It is unknown what evidence was presented to the Grand Jury; what is known,
however, is that Father McLucas was never asked to testify or given an opportunity to present
evidence on his own behalf.

While Father McLucas was not charged with any crime, the shocking and horrible
accusations in the report - without published evidence, without trial, and without due process of
law - will nevertheless blacken his reputation and destroy him in his profession. In this regard,
the report so offends traditional notions of fairness that Father McLucas is compelled to publicly
make this response denying each and every allegation in the strongest possible terms.

Father McLucas' reply through his attorney appended to the Grand Jury Report

A Grand Jury is empanelled to hear prosecutorial evidence.  Based upon this evidence they recommend the filing of charges.  There is no defendant present, no representation, no opportunity to examine evidence or confront witnesses.  Grand Jury proceedings are secret.  "They can call any witness.  The testimony is under oath, takes place without counsel present and can go on for as long as prosecutors and the grand jurors want to question the person.  And they can ask him any questions they want to ask." (Judge Andrew Napolitano).  Fr. McLucas does not know who testified against him, what they said, or what evidence they presented if any.  With many of the cases considered by this Grand Jury they have released the evidence along with the accusations, such as with Virgil (Gabriel) Tetherow, but all we have against Fr. McLucas is the testimony of an anonymous witness which should not count much in the fair judgment of any Catholic.

I am not a big fan of Fr. McLucas although I personally like him.  He is a conservative Catholic with traditional sentiments but it takes a lot more than sentiments to defend the faith against its committed enemies.  Fr. McLucas tried to forge a common ground between conservative Catholics and traditional Catholics while he was editor of The Latin Mass Magazine.  He got a taste of how vicious conservative Catholics can be when he published Gavin's article criticizing Paul VI Humanae Vitae as being a completely insufficient defense of Catholic teaching against contraception.  Still, everything I have seen in Fr. McLucas over twenty years suggests a serious and upright priest doing what he thinks best to defend the Catholic faith.  This charge against Fr. McLucas should be treated as calumny until the accused comes forward by name with evidence that can stand up under cross examination.

Drew

Thank you for posting that, Drew. What a terrible affront to Fr McLucas. I knew that there was something very wrong about these reports against him.
How AG Shapiro and crew can spew out such undocuмented venom is beyond belief -just hoping it will stick?  How evil is that?
Unfortunately this will taint Fr McLucas' reputation forever. I hope he sues.