Thursday, March 20, 2008

An Apology to Bishop Callahan

In discovering that my last entry was incorrect, I sent the following e-mail to Bishop Callahan. I am choosing to leave my prior post up as a reminder to myself and others that I can make huge mistakes. This will be of no surprise to some of you.

Dear Bishop Callahan,

Perhaps you have heard about my egregious blog entry concerning you and extraordinary communion ministers for confirmation services ( I must sincerely apologize to you for this post on my blog. After talking to someone this past weekend, I thought that what I posted on my blog was correct, but I have discovered this was definitely not the case.

Dean Daniels, with Christian charity, pointed this out to me. I then revisited the person I had conversed with and discovered there had been a miscommunication, which is most definitely my fault. For even if this person misspoke, I should be much more careful before putting such an entry on my blog. So once again, I am very sorry.

I do not expect a reply from you, but hope that you can find it in your heart to not think ill of me.

In true embarrassment,

A Faithful Catholic

P.S. I refer to myself as a faithful catholic, but after this incident I feel much less faithful.


Joann said...

I appreciate your being able to say you were wrong.

Terrence Berres said...

"I refer to myself as a faithful catholic, but after this incident I feel much less faithful."

That's a disadvantage of using a pseudonym that leaves you open to warranty claims.

jackjoe said...

Being new to your blog I have a beief statement and a couple of question. The young man who has been using my blog will be confirmed tomorrow. I really think dad29 was out of line in ridiculing, by inference, this young man. Also dad29's effort to scare people by saying he is a 'nasty, old man' is kind of weird. The young new catholic is a former outstanding football player who I am sure dad29 would not want to face in a physical contest.

Now my questions: Berres is obviously very conservative---Federalist Society---for example. But in reading some of his comments he does seem to think the church sex abuse scandal was most unfortunate. As you would know, many leaders of the church are very excited to know that the clergy have no more sex abuse than other groups. May I be so bold to say that I think the Church should have fewer sexual abuse cases than say, Alabama prison guards.Am I being unreasonable?

I noticed in our dioscean paper a chart was reproduced from some Church goup showing some figures on this problem. One figure showed19 per cent of the sex abuse cases were against women. No figure was given for sex abuse reports against males. What is the point? Is it to show that clergy can abuse females as well as males, thus making male abuse less likely? Any opinions? Jack

jackjoe said...

Correction. Change "less likely" to "less" serious" in last sentence. Jack

Faithful Catholic said...

Jack, I must agree with you that for the most part, the response of the American hierarchy to the sexual abuse scandal has been lacking. The Milwaukee Archdiocese would not release the names of those priests who have had their ministry restricted until they were basically forced.

Many of the steps the bishops have taken have been good, but one gets the feeling that all the material has taken its content from the advice of lawyers and public relations people.