It's really interesting to me that when the school finds LEGITIMATE child pornography, they decline comment. When it is clear they have found illegal materials on a student's computer and have taken the proper steps to ensure the safety of the college students and community alike, they remain quiet.
And yet, when they find images on a computer that make a person guilty of at MOST poor taste and they cannot even be sure that the person actually downloaded and viewed the images himself, what do they do? They jump in headlong and unjustly label a good man, teacher, and priest a pedophile to all who will hear without actual concrete evidence.
Good luck to you Fr. Mark. I am ashamed of what Saint Vincent has become. I hope that your suit is the beginning of the change Saint Vincent greatly needs. The support you have from the outside world is stronger then you know and we are fervently praying for you.
And to those who are watching, just know we are watching you as well.
<p>Is comparing these two incidents really fair? <p>This kid is facing criminal charges that (if this article is true) will not be dismissed; no such charges were pressed against Fr. Mark. And the evidence of wrongdoing is a lot stronger here. <p>And while the first incident was a fiasco on the administration's part, I would expect them not to comment at all this time. First, they might have actually learned from their mistakes. Even if that were not so, a wayward student probably wouldn't have as much of an impact on the college's reputation than a suspect faculty member. <p>So no, I wouldn't expect the school to go out of its way either to support or to condemn this schmuck.
No, the college should comment even to say we are disappointed and we are cooperating with the police.
Now its no comment because it's not about attacking the one person selected by the faculty to speak up about JT. Surely Mr Orlando has a call into his daughter at KDKA to get the official position of the college out.
My anger aside, either St Vincent shapes the story or the media will. Orlando cared enough to try and shape the news about Fr. Mark even before the police report came back.
<p>THe administration was making comments concerning the Gruber matter even when it was becoming abundantly clear that there was not a drop of evidence connecting Father Mark to events. The Administration (through PR) even blatantly continued to make public comments that directly contradicted what even a Dunce knew to be true - one glaring example was this - that the Anthropology seminar room that contained Fr. Mark's computer (a seminar room that is detached from Fr. Mark's main office by two solid oak doors was used by many, many people, as was the computer in the seminar room. This fact the administration denied.</p> <p>No comment from PR... who ordered the "no comment" bit... DO doesn't make comments on his own. At the very least, some statement voicing "disappointment," might have been appropriate.</p> <p>On the other hand, the news article seems to suggest that the student's computer in the matter was privately owned and not a public or school computer.</p> <p>Hmmm... this could place another kettle of fish on the burner.</p> <p>And, 1981, there were others besidesTowey, the admin, PR, and the Abbot, shaping the news about Father Mark before <strong>ANYONE </strong>saw the police report.</p>
It all starts with the Chancellor Abbot. He saw an opportunity to attack Fr. Mark and took complete advantage. Instead of allowing the police do their work, he pounced. When the police come come back with there is no crime and indicate many others use the computer in question, pride gets in the way. The Chancellor Abbott can't be wrong! He has absolute power at SV and he has been corrupted by that power. It will make a great novel someday. Too bad so many are suffering for his sake.
The Chancellor Abbot could care less about this student. He doesn't want to be embarrassed.
It makes me angry. I don't want to care anymore about SV but I do.
<p>1981.... there is much to what you say on many counts. There are those, however, especially in the monastery, who feel that the Abbot had no choice but to act the way he did, and by informing the Bishop of the complaint against Fr. Mark. Everyone knows from where that initial complaint came... from the hallowed halls of the college top administration. The process, everyone knows, was initiated by an "old-timer" monk whose name appeared as a signatory on what the press called an "unflattering" satiric letter.</p> <p>These persons say that Abbot was compelled to act by the rules of the Dallas Accords. It's not clear to me whether there had to be a victim in the matter for the abbot to act as quickly as he did. There remains the question, at any rate, as to who judged the material to be pornographic (child porn) even before the police were called. Was the Abbot fully informed (saw, discussed, checked and double checked, given correct and adequate advice) before he acted? Of did he simply act on the initiial opinions and judgements of those in the administration and the person in the monastery who "serendipitously" discovered questionable material on the Anthropology seminar room computer.</p> <p>There are others, both inside the monastery and outside, on the faculty, staff, student body, et alia, on the other hand - and these people are in the significant majority - who feel that the Abbot acted in haste.</p> <p>Waiting for the police report that totally cleared Father Mark might have avoided the sad situation that exists today.</p> <p>One is free to debate either position as outlined above.</p> <p>Perhaps others are more familiar with the Dallas Accords and what clerical superiors are compelled to do under certain circumstances.</p>
My sadness and anger lies in the fact that I know in the end the Abbot Chancellor will win. He has already won. He is able to manipulate the entire scenario to his benefit.
Canon lawyers will tell you all that he had to do was put Fr. Mark on administrative leave without a victim. That did not fit JT's plan and the Abbot Chancellor was shown the "evidence".
Monks who I respect call SV a dark place now. All very sad.