Friday, October 29, 2010

Candidate's involvement

Does WI GOPer Ron Johnson know the names of the Green Bay area priests who raped kids?
by Joe Sudbay (DC) on 10/04/2010 08:34:00 PM

I don't understand why the traditional media types in Wisconsin don't understand the gravity of this situation involving GOP Senate candidate Ron Johnson's involvement with the Catholic Church child rape scandal. But, apparently, it's not a big issue for them. Maybe, they should talk to some real reporters in Boston, Dublin or Belgium about how deep this scandal goes. The New York Times has written more than a few articles on this particular subject, too, much to the chagrin of the Vatican.

Everyone involved in this far-reaching horrific scandal and its cover-up is tainted. We know that includes the Pope. It looks like it includes Ron Johnson, too. Uppity Wisconsin, a most kick-ass blog, has been covering this growing scandal:

Here in Wisconsin, SNAP (Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests) has for years been trying to get the Green Bay Diocese Finance Council to release the names of pedophile priests that the church has acknowledged, via civil lawsuit settlements, are guilty of sexually assaulting children.

Johnson has said that the Diocese Finance Council should release the names, but the obvious question is why doesn't Johnson just release the names himself? Answer: He can't, because he took a double-pinky promise oath to the Green Bay Diocese that whatever happens in the Finance Council, stays in the Finance Council.

OK, double-pinky-promise isn't the official terminology. According to the religious scholar Sebastian Karambai, in his book Ministers and Ministries, members of the Finance Council are required to take an oath before they assume their office:
When s/he takes charge of his/her office, s/he is required by law to take an oath that s/he will uphold confidentiality and will be efficient in his/her performance. (c 1283.1)
So, give Johnson credit: When he makes a double-pinky-promise he keeps it! Even if it means that keeping such a promise puts thousands of Wisconsin children at risk. (Tragically, the vast majority of these pedophiles that Johnson and the rest of the Finance Council should have dealt-with, are still on the street.)

Most reporters are dismissing this story as bombastic sensationalism the month before an election, but the reality is that Ron Johnson served on a Green Bay Finance Council that hides and protects the the identies of pedophiles, and Ron Johnson is the one that decided to enter public life months before an election. If this isn't a relevent issue, I don't know what is-- and if Feingold has to answer for his record-- why shouldn't Johnson?
Why shouldn't Johnson, especially on his involvement with a scandal that has caused great harm to young children and shaken the Catholic Church to it core?

No comments: