Stop me if you’ve heard this one before: A priest is prosecuted for allegedly trying to get child porn. Another priest castigates the authorities for prosecuting his friend, saying he’s suffered enough. Yeah, I’ve heard it before too.
This case takes places in the Diocese of Arlington, Virginia. Father Robert Brooks, who has resigned his parish and left active ministry because of the allegations, is being prosecuted by Commonwealth Attorney Jim Plowman. Brooks’ friend, Father Sean Rousseau, has written to the judge complaining about Plowman’s prosecution of Brooks, saying it is “not Christian” and that Plowman is “a man who calls himself a Catholic, yet he purposefully persecutes a priest in the public forum for a private weakness.”
Making excuses for the inexcusable
I think Bishop Loverde’s comments should be viewed as a pro-forma appeal for mercy. The bishop is, after all, his spiritual father. He should make the case for the court to show mercy to a wayward son, especially if Brooks no longer poses a threat to the community.
Brooks did get a fair and lenient sentence – two years probation. Loverde had removed him from ministry immediately. Investigations are underway regarding his past ministry. But we have no basis to say that his 40+ years of service to the Church were anything less than “excellent.” In fact, he is unlikely statistically to be anything like John Geoghan.
Father Rousseau’s judgment seems to be clouded by sympathy for a man he knows who is personally devastated by the consequences of his crime. Rousseau is not in a position of authority in this case. We should pass over his emotional statements in silence.
There is every reason to think the authorities – civil and ecclesiastical – have acted responsibly in this case and no reason to throw more stones at a deeply-flawed man who is down.
I don’t know how to say this but the Arlington diocese has a lot of problems. Every now and then they erupt like teenaged acne but the trouble is always brewing under the surface. We have some very fine and even holy young priests but they have no power. Maybe things will get better when Loverde is gone. I just don’t know. As for Father Rousseau, I hope he never comes to my parish.
The priest’s comments were out of line. Has he suffered enough? Once someone is at a point where they are downloading child pornography on their computer they have gone through several stages of sin. So this may have been the first time he downloaded such pornography, but it was not an entry level element of this sin.
Saying the priest suffered enough may be true, but it was also enabling. Go visit your local skid row and you will see many people caught up in the final stages of addiction. Each time when something terrible happened they said that they had suffered enough and this will not happen again and each time they failed.
Bottom line, the priest purposely contributed to an underground movement in the sexual abuse of children, he did not just accidentally download a piece of child pornography. He may not have suffered enough. His priest friend could be there for his friend as he goes through stages of healing, but he has to allow his friend to go through those stages however painful they may be. He may not have suffered enough.
Probation may or may not be enough. However, probation is more difficult than people think and many people going through the court system prefer jail to probation They find it easier to do jail time where they do not have to confront their crimes to probation where they do.
What, exactly, is a “fair, yet lenient” sentence? It’s almost like Loverde is saying that yes, we want to be “fair”, but not too “fair”.
It is unlikely that Bishop Loverde will be leaving anytime soon. Trust me on this.
And anyone who thinks the Diocese of Arlington has been an unparalelled Garden of Orthodoxy in past years, never attended the Religious Ed conferences that I did during a previous episcopate, nor have they noticed that our newer church buildings are looking more like chruches and less like barns.
The problem is not necessarily the bishop, and certainly not the vast majority of priests in the field. It is a few clerics and others in positions of influence in the diocese, with a penchant for heavy-handedness, connivance, if not downright arrogance.
And another thing: mercy must be tempered by justice. Who among the shepherds are showing mercy to the victims, or those who are deceived by the merciless, without relentless prodding in the public square?
A reader who lost her password sent the following to me in email to post:
This story isn’t terribly important as far as Father Brooks is concerned but it IS important about Father Rousseau because Father Brooks was removed from ministry immediately but Father Rousseau is still around. He’s been a priest for about ten years. His stint in Leesburg was his second assignment as a priest and he’s old enough now to be considered for pastorships in this diocese (and he is being considered). His letter wasn’t just an emotional outburst; Father Rousseau wrote to a judge and the judge eventually put the letter into the public record. When a reporter found it he called Fr. Rousseau for comment and got it. Incredibly bad judgment apart from what he said. I attended that parish for eight years with Father Brooks as pastor, the last two including Fr. Rousseau as assistant. This was a place you could get tossed out of for kneeling. All I hope is that this article means he never will be a pastor. P. S. They have a fabulous priest in Leesburg now. Say a prayer for him as he tries to rebuild a hollowed out parish.
Sooo, how does priest B know the “pain” of priest A so well? And why is he so sympathetic to something that is a federal crime?
3 words: Jail Them Both.