Money doesn’t buy happiness

Money doesn’t buy happiness

A year after the massive sex-abuse settlements in Boston some victims are realizing that money doesn’t bring happiness or closure or a return to innocence. Some take comfort in the fact that people are rebelling against the Church over parish closings. Others simply give up and kill themselves. Some are moving on with their lives.

Meanwhile, the lawyers are splitting their one-third share of the $85 million. Who knew there was such profit in other people’s pain? And some of the victims themselves feel like the push for a big settlement robbed them of an opportunity to have their case heard in court. Except that would have meant more work for their lawyers with an uncertain payoff in the end.

And the archdiocese continues to bear the costs over and above the settlement payout. Just this year, it will have spent $2 million on therapy for victims. That doesn’t come out of the sale of property that went to the monetary portion of the settlement; it comes out of the operating expenses. So when people complain about their parish being closed, they can look right there at one of the reasons why. Everything is interconnected.

Written by
Domenico Bettinelli
10 comments
  • “The extent of the financial issues disclosed today by Archbishop O’Malley is staggering and calls into question the financial stewardship of the archdiocese over its assets, including parishioner donations and personnel retirement plans…” . . . “This underscores the need for much more disclosure about archdiocesan finances. . . . Comprehensive financial information must be made public and then validated by a nationally recognized auditing firm.”

    See, there it is.  It’s all about money and power. 

  • Sounds just like one of the boys ta me!  Remember, this is the guy the other bishops want to front for them…

  • Melanie:

    do you mean comment_author_url>
    63.100.44.98
    2004-11-15 18:32:20
    2004-11-15 22:32:20
    “The extent of the financial issues disclosed today by Archbishop O’Malley is staggering and calls into question the financial stewardship of the archdiocese over its assets, including parishioner donations and personnel retirement plans…” . . . “This underscores the need for much more disclosure about archdiocesan finances. . . . Comprehensive financial information must be made public and then validated by a nationally recognized auditing firm.”

    See, there it is.  It’s all about money and power. 

  • One would think and hope that the Holy Ghost would some day have a hand with this body of hapless bench of bishops.  It certainly wasn’t in this case.

  • This man is there because he was elected as the 2nd man in line before the fiasco of 2001.  It is traditional that the 2nd man in line becomes the 1st man in line in his turn.  Our bishops still, to some degree, have their heads up their dark internal cavities.

    So….this man needs to be given the glare by laypeople for the duration of his term….

    The whole NCCB needs to see our displeasure in print, in words and in the collection plate.  We need to make sure that there is no mistake about our displeasure at this development.

    The NCCB is NOT the magisterium.  It is only an advisory structure for the American bishops.  REMEMBER, it has NO JURIDICAL POWER apart from the power allowed it by Rome.  WHICH is PRECIOUS LITTLE these days.

  • One would think and hope that the Holy Ghost would some day have a hand with this body of hapless bench of bishops.  It certainly wasndescription>
    The Boston Globe‘s Michael Paulson offers his review of Archbishop O’Malley’s letter to parishioners. It’s about what you’d expect from him given his liberal biases. He can’t help injecting his own voice into the article, like in this sentence: “In the letter, O’Malley reiterated his argument that a decline in the number of priests contributes to the need to close parishes—an argument that some Catholics reject, citing the reliance on lay parish administrators in other parts of the country.” Get that “some Catholics”? When you see a reporter use that construction, it means he can’t be bothered to find “some Catholics” to actually cite so he phrases it himself. And doesn’t he oversimplify the case? The decline in the number of priests vis a vis parish closings is much more complicated than a simple hiring of lay parish administrators would admit. A pastor or priest is not simply an administrator, nor is he a sacrament machine. He has (or should have) an intimate spiritual relationship with his people, a relationship of spiritual fatherhood that is a result of the sacramental graces bestowed on him. Just like the spiritual relationship between a husband and wife cannot be likened (or substituted with) any other possible relationship or any other person.

    ]]>

    4558
    2004-11-15 14:16:27
    2004-11-15 18:16:27
    open
    open
    a_biased_response_to_the_archbishop
    publish
    0
    0
    post


    21444

    singogoddess@yahoo.com

    70.19.159.231
    2004-11-15 16:45:10
    2004-11-15 20:45:10
    do you mean “can’t be that long”?

  • “Who knew there was such profit in other peoplend never even had a chance to understand they weren’t alone and it wasn’t their fault because they couldn’t take living with the pain of knowing they were raped by a priest and nobody would believe them if they reported it.

    I go to church regularly and am happy that   the settlement is requiring the church to take a long hard look at what went wrong.

    Don’t look at the settlement as one reason your parish is closing.  Look to the arch diocese and ask how could they allow this to happen?  Why did they allow it to continue?  Don’t make the people who received the settlements victims again by blaming church closings on them.  They only told the truth.

    God Bless All

  • I wouldn’t give the lawyers too much credit. There were other people working at exposing this long before them and their goals were not altruistic.

    And regardless of whether you want to pretend that parish closings and the money paid on the Scandal are unconnected, they are. Yes, the bishops who enabled the perverts are responsible too and primarily so, but the reality is that huge monetary settlements create a condition by which parishs had to close. Blaming the bishops isn’t going to pay the bills and keep them open.

  • Of course, parish closings and money paid on the Scandal are connected.  If they weren’t, I’d seriously be wondering where your Church is getting their money!!  Maybe the diocese plays the horses??  Or??

    I think chatter has a point actually.  Maybe this is what it takes for clerics to get serious about understanding the evil they do, and for laypeople to get serious about playing nicey-nice with religion.

    Religion is not a parlor game.  Maybe people *get* that now.  Or maybe they have to go thru more pain???  I expect we’ll see.

Archives

Categories

Categories