wholly in compliance
By Diogenes (articles ) | Mar 15, 2005
Remember Rochester's Father Michael Volino, whom the FBI helped ease out of full-time ministry because of his penchant for kiddie-pix? Well, it turns out the Diocese had sent him to the St. Luke Institute, and it turns out the St. Luke's folks recommended in 2002 that Volino should be "restricted from ministry involving children." Get a load of the Diocese's statement issued in response:
The Diocese of Rochester, in 2002, asked Rev. Michael Volino to undergo assessment at St. Luke's Institute, to which Rev. Volino agreed. The referral and assessment were related to behavioral issues and not to sexual abuse.
A fine specimen of the U.S. episcopacy's new trust-building transparency. "Related to behavioral issues." Binge eating? Telling bad puns? Inappropriately aggressive chess openings? Mixing mauve and electric blue beachwear? Somehow I don't think so either.
The recommendations of St. Luke's staff were not issued in the context of a person who was sexually abusive. However, the diocese failed to adequately monitor the follow through of some of the recommendations. The report did not give any finding, nor did the Diocese interpret any indication, that Fr. Volino would be a danger to anyone.
"Not issued in the context of a person who was sexually abusive." Parse that, transparency fans. In what context are we to imagine that a St. Luke's grad would be restricted from contact with kids? Incompatibility based on his horoscope? Just why was Volino asked to undergo an assessment at St. Luke's in the first place?
No mystery here. The Diocese of Rochester, in common with the majority of U.S. dioceses, is incapable of speaking the H-word as if it referred to an intrinsic disorder. That means the Volinos and the bishops who love them will continue to get the green light, provided they stay clear of the "danger zones" -- defined, thanks to Wilton Gregory and his chums, in forensic rather than spiritual terms. Your pastor subscribes to GQ for the "men's fragrance" ads? No problem! His appetites aren't assuaged in the context of felonious sexual assault, so he's perfectly suitable for ministry. Any further questions?
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach seven million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: www.inquisition.ca -
Mar. 21, 2005 7:35 PM ET USA
"A fine specimen of the U.S. episcopacy's new trust-building transparency. "Related to behavioral issues." Binge eating? Telling bad puns? Inappropriately aggressive chess openings? Mixing mauve and electric blue beachwear? Somehow I don't think so either. " :-D Who is this "Diogenes" guy? Somebody give him a raise! I wish I could be that good on my web site!
Posted by: principle not pragmatism -
Mar. 21, 2005 7:04 PM ET USA
Bishop Clark is homosexual friendly and should resign his post. He will continue to cover for homosexuals.
Posted by: -
Mar. 16, 2005 5:05 PM ET USA
The problem IS that a lot of the higher-ups & decision-makers suffer from the same malady--they dare not, or wish not to cast stones. No wonder this won't go away.
Posted by: hUMPTY dUMPTY -
Mar. 16, 2005 6:36 AM ET USA
Follow up: Volino was allowed close unregistered association with a parish Boy Scout troop after the Rochester Diocese reinstated him, WWJD?
Posted by: hUMPTY dUMPTY -
Mar. 16, 2005 6:26 AM ET USA
May I suggest the NCR Daily Abuse email for details on this world wide scandal: You may view the column by clicking on the following link: http://www.ncrnews.org/abuse AOL users can use this link: Clergy Sex Abuse Tracker, hosted by NCR WWJD?
Posted by: patriot6908 -
Mar. 15, 2005 12:02 PM ET USA
Is there not a Republican, Catholic Superior Court judge in San Francisco who has resolved this whole issue? Now that he has pronounced with great gravity the legality and necessity of homosexuals being able to marry, would this not resolve the priestly celibacy crisis and bring married men into the Church? Could some of the bishops then get off the hook? Who knows what lurks in the future? Maybe the Shadow knows! St. Thomas More, pray for us!