Barely 24 hours have passed since the Orange diocese's press conference, and already Bishop Tod D. Brown's spinmasters are trying to make His Excellency better than he is. On the diocesan website is a story titled "BISHOP OF ORANGE APOLOGIZES TO YOUNG WOMEN," in which the following is revealed:
Most Rev. Tod D. Brown, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Orange apologized personally to two of the four young women whose lawsuits naming the Diocese had been formally settled in Superior Court just moments before.
In an impromptu news conference in front of the courthouse, Bishop Brown spoke directly to Christina Ruiz and Sarah Luckey Grey [sic], standing nearby, “To both of you, I offer my sincere and deepest apologies for what happened to you.
From reading this, it would seem that Brown went out of his way to meet Ruiz and Gray, that His Excellency really is repentant. A nice story, to be sure--except it didn't quite work out this way.
Here's the truth: On Oct. 5, Brown issued a press release stating, "I sincerely hope that it will enable the women who brought these actions to begin the process of healing and reconciliation." Nowhere in here did Brown apologize to the victims. On Monday, three of the four victims publicly revealed themselves and criticized Brown for not apologizing to them.
Flash forward to yesterday. After Judge Gail Andler carried over Brown's contempt-of-court hearing for another day, two of the four victims--Ruiz and Gray--walked out of the courtroom. Nobody in Brown's entourage so much as acknowledged the young ladies. Outside, the two had another press conference in which they criticized Brown again.
Brown finally emerged from the courtroom. Ruiz and Gray joined the reporters who crowded around the bishop. Then--and only then--did Brown apologize. The man did it only after being called on it, people.
The above press release, by the way, is a treasure trove of crap. More analysis to come after lunch...
October 10, 2007 15:10
Brown finally emerged from the courtroom. Ruiz and Gray joined the reporters who crowded around the bishop. Then--and only then--did Brown apologize.
Gustavo, your presentation of events after the hearing isn't the truth.
I didn't know Sarah Gray and Christina Ruiz were having a press conference outside the courtroom, because I was in the courthouse hallway with more than half a dozen other media listening to Peter Callahan holding forth. A few minutes before a deputy told us to clear the hallway, the Bishop told the reporters he wanted to make a statement and extended his apology to the four victims. You were outside, and so couldn't know that.
Out at the press conference, the Bishop apologized again. Unfortunately, he was looking at the bank of cameras, not Gray and Ruiz who were standing off to the side.
But his credit, the Bishop came back to the microphone a few minutes later, looked at Gray and Ruiz and apologized (his third one that morning).
October 10, 2007 15:18
I am still trying to figure out why Peter Callahan and Maria Rullo Schinderle, as legal advisors to Bishop Brown, felt it was in the interests of justice to hand the victims a ruler during depositions, requesting the size of their abuser's private parts.
Was this measurement needed to determine whether sexual abuse did or did not occur? What happened if the measurement was incorrect? Did Diocese of Orange attorneys rebut any of the measurements given by the victims of heinous sex crimes committed by employees supervised by Diocesan officials?
THIS IS DISGRACEFUL behavior by both Peter Callahan and the Diocesan General Counsel, Maria Schinderle. Why would either of these attorneys need to know what the size of the abusers' private parts? Did Peter and Maria measure the units of their sexual predatory employees before questioning the victims during deposition? What was the purpose of this type of harassing questions?
Maybe it would be best for all four of the victims of sex crimes committed by employees supervised by the Diocese of Orange to write a letter to the State Bar of California describing the intentional and harassing questions requiring a measurement of the abusers' private parts.
This has to be some type of violation of State Bar of California professional rules and guidelines.
October 10, 2007 15:23
I didn't know about the victim's second press conference either, until I noticed they were gathering outside. The question still remains, though: why did the bishop apologize only after the victims complained they hadn't yet received an apology?
October 10, 2007 16:16
Here is another question: what exactly was the bishop apologizing for? The sexual abuse? For allowing his employees to threaten, berate, and railroad the victims after they came forward? Or for how how his attorneys dragged the victims' names through the mud and treated them like trash?
And Jubal, I know that you hate Manly, but can you imagine how much worse the bloodbath would have been if the victims were represented by someone who did not have experience with the diocese?
And yes, the Bishop offered to meet with the victims privately. In fact, he even offered to meet with me privately. But after everything that has happened - in my case and the new cases - do you think that a victim would want to be in a room alone with the Bishop?
Especially after many of the victims (not the recent four cases) met with Urell and he lied to them ...
Also, I believe that the "second press conference" was just the happenstance of the survivors walking into the media circus that had blossomed outside.
October 10, 2007 17:18
Let me get this straight. The Bishop apologizes three times yesterday. But that's no good because it wasn't extended in the manner Gustavo says it should have been.
The Bishop says his door is open to those four young women at any time they want to meet and talk in private, and that's no good because...the Bishop might make a pass? IS that what you're implying? Did the Bishop say they had to come alone?
What's the good of asking for apologies if they are only going to be spurned?
As for the press conference, I had heard the day before the Bishop was planning to hold a press conference -- notwithstanding what you believe, Joelle.
October 10, 2007 17:56
Decide when to apologize. Sometimes immediately after your mistake is best, sometimes not. The sting of a harsh word can be cooled right away with a quick apology, but other offenses might need the other person to cool down before they are willing to even listen to your next sentence. However, the sooner you apologize for your mistake, the more likely it will be viewed as an error in judgment and not a character flaw.
"I'm sorry...I shouldn't have said that."Write your apology down. Construct a letter to the person you're apologizing to, rehearsing what you will say in person. If you don't feel comfortable with writing, then use a voice recorder. Not only will this help you remember what to say when you're face to face with them, but you can also bring the copy with you and hand it to them if you find the apology quite difficult to express. But don't forget that a direct and honest apology is best. Do it face to face, if possible. A phoned, emailed or recorded apology shows a lack of sincerity and effort and should only be a last resort.
Begin the apology by naming the offense and the feelings it may have caused. Be specific about the incident so that they know exactly what you're apologizing for. Make it a point to avoid using the word "but". ("I am sorry, but..." means "I am not sorry.") Validate their feelings or discomfort by acknowledging your transgression's (potential) effects:
"Boss, I'm sorry I'm late again, I know my shift started 10 minutes ago. I hope this doesn't complicate your day."
"Dear, I'm sorry I forgot your birthday - there's no excuse. I hope you don't feel neglected, please let me set this right."
"This is an explanation, not an excuse. There is no excuse."Make amends. Think about what caused you to make the offense. Is it because you're a little too laid back about being on time, or remembering important dates? Is it because you tend to react instantly to certain comments, without pausing to consider an alternative point of view? Is it because you are unhappy with your life, and you unknowingly take it out on others? Find the underlying problem, describe it to the person (as an explanation, not an excuse), and tell them what you intend to do to rectify that problem so that you never repeat this mistake again:
"I snapped at you because I've been so stressed out with work lately, and it's selfish of me to take it out on you. Starting tomorrow, I'm going to cut down my hours to X per week. I really think it'll help me unwind, and help us spend more quality time together."
"I've been distant and cold because I get paranoid that you're going to walk out on me because I don't have a job. But that's a terrible thing to do. Look, here's a list of things I'm going to do to find a job ASAP..."
Express your appreciation for the role they play in your life, emphasizing that you do not want to jeopardize or damage the relationship. This is the time to briefly recount what has created and sustained the bond over time and tell loved ones that they are indeed loved. Describe what your life would be missing without their trust and their company.
Ask if they will give you a chance to make up for what you did wrong. Insist on proving to them that you have learned from your mistake, and that you will take action to change and grow as a result, if they will let you. Make a clear request for forgiveness and wait for their answer. This gives the injured party the well deserved "power" in determining the outcome of the situation.
Be patient. If an apology is not accepted, thank them for hearing you out and leave the door open for if they wish to reconcile later. (E.g. "I understand you're still upset about it, but thanks for giving me the chance to apologize. If you ever change your mind, please give me a call.") If you are lucky enough for your apology to be accepted, avoid the temptation to throw in a few excuses at the end. Instead, have a transition planned out beforehand for what you can do to solidify the clean slate (e.g. "Let's go get some coffee and catch up. It'll be my treat. I miss knowing what you're up to.").
Stick to your word. This is the most important step. A true apology entails a resolution, and you have to carry out your promise in order for the apology to be sincere and complete. Otherwise, your apologies will lose their meaning, and trust may disappear beyond the point of no return. Follow through.
[edit] Tips
One on one.If you can, pull the person aside so that you can apologize while you're alone. Not only will this reduce the likelihood of other people influencing the person's decision, but it will also make you a little less nervous. However, if you insulted the person publicly and made him/her lose face, your apology is much more effective if done publicly.
Use relaxed and humble body language. Keeping your arms crossed or pointing fingers will put the other person on the defensive.
One apology will often cause another, either from you for something else you realized you are sorry for, or from the other person because they realize the conflict was mutual. Be prepared to forgive.
A proper apology is always about the injured party. Keep your apology focused on the actual wrong done, and the recipient.
Dont keep asking if he or she is mad at you. Constant reminding of this will only make the person be more angered and ill tempered towards you.
[edit] WarningsSometimes attempted apologies turn into a rehash of the same argument you wanted to amend. Be very careful not to re-argue any topics or open any old wounds.
Don't be too surprised (or suspicious) if you are forgiven. Take people at their word, just like they took your apology.
Don't apologize unless you really mean it. You can spot a false apologies from a mile away, and so can others.
October 11, 2007 06:30
Full disclosure: I am a victim of physical and sexual abuse at the hands of nuns. I am 55 years old, a father and grandfather, a totally disabled veteran, a left wing Democrat, a retired Coast Guard warrant officer and I hold three Masters Degrees and two Bachelors. I live in Alexandria, Virginia. I do not attend church.
Question: What I want to REALLY know is this: what do the PEOPLE in that diocese think of all of this?
It is obvious that the various bishops are going to put spin on the abuse scandal. What REALLY matters to me is what do the people, the billpayers, the Catholics in the pew, think of all of this?
October 11, 2007 06:37
Dear Jubal:
Please read carefully the posting made by "How it's done from a-z". Yes, Bishop Brown supposedly apologized to the victims three times on Tuesday, while the Diocesan General Counsel, Maria Rullo Schinderle, whispered in Peter Callahan's ear, allowing Bishop Brown to face contempt proceedings for illegal acts committed by her!!!!!!
Bishop Brown needs to immediately stop ENABLING sex crimes, conflicts of interest, obstructions of justice, corruption and perjury by filing a report with law enforcement against Maria Rullo Schinderle, Peter Callahan and their attorney partners in crime who are guilty of judicial abuse, obstructions of justice and pose a serious threat to the protections of children, if illegal activity continues, OR
Bishop Brown can continue to allow Maria Rullo Schinderle to whisper in his ear and Callahan's ear, while meeting in Judge's chambers during civil trials involving the Diocese of Orange, obstructing justice, perjury and illegal activity, OR
Bishop Brown can always follow the advice of Maria Rullo Schinderle, Esq., by calling Child Protective Services to file a confidential report of child abuse and/or neglect against Maria Rullo Schinderle (General Counsel for Diocese of Orange) and Peter Callahan for child endangerment, obstructions of justice, legal conflicts of interest, perjury and failures to protect those who cannot protect themselves, hiding behind civil rules of discovery.
DO WHAT YOU NEED TO DO! Please get these attorneys away from abusing the judicial process and intimidating victims of sex abuse and their families from reporting illegal acts to law enforcement.
October 11, 2007 11:30
As a graduate of Mater Dei High School (Class of 1989) I cannot agree with the feelings of many OC Catholics on this issue. The behavior of the Diocese during this affair is not in line with the teachings of the Catholic Church. The Bishop was most definitely not Christ-like.
What has not been discussed, however, is how there are two Mater Dei's. Many who have attended MDHS understand that there are many wonderful and caring teachers, support staff and administrators. Dulce McCracken, Greg Dhuyvetter, Phil Bellomo and Sister Marie are only a few names that come to mind as being wonderful people and educators. But the fact is that those people and the values they represent have been pushed to the side in the name of money and individual glory.
Gary McKnight was very close to being let go during the early years of his coaching careeer at Mater Dei. Instead, the powers that supported him thwarted those efforts in the name of a "win at all costs" mentality. He then proceeded, over the next two decades, to spread a cancer that has all but now consumed that campus. Many good people have been scorned and even forced from their positions based on the influence of "THe Godfather" of basketball. This power hungry dictator holds dominion over a now crumbling empire. He represents everything that is wrong about education, Ctholicism and Mater Dei High School. Regardless of the fame and financial advantage that Mr. McKnight's presence bestows on the school; they have no choice but to remove him if they want to save the only thing that really matters, their soul.
October 11, 2007 11:38
Matt,
I'm sitting here with FRIEND THAT SAYS THEY KNOW YOU FROM St Pasacales in Thousand Oaks. Did you go to Catholic school in Thousand Oaks????
October 14, 2007 10:22
First of all let me say that I believe Monsignor John Urell will be the man I know him to be and will come forward eventually. I can't say that I knew him because we spent a lot of time together. Dear father John, you acted on my wife and my behalf and married us in the Diocese, I believe in you. Do what God commands and come forth with the truth. Face the lions as Daniel did. You will be revered in God's eyes and the people will forgive you.
As a little boy of 5 I sat downstairs with my parents and looked up to the choir loft and dreamed of singing up there. God granted me that privilege and I was truly blessed!
I was involved with the Folk Mass for 20 years. I eventually became the folk mass vocalist and served 10 years as such. One day the organist brought up the new singer and without warning or reason I was dismissed. I personally don't know why, I DO know that the acting pastor/Monsignor wouldn't let me perform my duties for the 2 weddings I was paid for. The young couples were so upset that the church would not let me sing for their weddings, they moved their weddings to another location. The church said,” Because I was not involved in the choir, I couldn't perform weddings." Why did they do that to me? I asked and asked but there was no reason or rhyme. I'm a middle age man that still cries when I think of that devastating day.
After 20 years of personal service and 10 years of intimate relations I couldn’t get help when my family wife and three daughters didn’t have money for food. Monsignor Strange wrote me a personal check for $100.00, which possibly was the difference between our family’s survival, or not. Monsignor Strange raised me in Catholicism and I miss him very much.
It’s very hard for me to be forgiving but I still believe Monsignor John Urell will do what’s right in the end. Once he listens to his God instead of the lawyers who ask (according to the Register) victims if they enjoyed the sex.
Thank you for letting me vent. I always wanted to let the families of Holy Family know what happened to me. I miss you all….
October 14, 2007 18:23
To Anonymous:
Thank You for the story in your church. You're right Urell needs to stop listing to the attorneys for Bishop Brown. They will let him take the fall and keep moving with out missing a breath. I'm thinking that John has been swayed to far to the bad side that he might not have any chance of getting back his integrity. I hope he comes around and tells all that he knows. I will be the first to say good job protecting as opposed to hurting children.
May 22, 2008 14:20
Very interesting!