How is the BOR chosen/appointed? Seems very much a good ol’ boys network giving power without true accountability to a very small handful of people. Is this the perception others have as well?
But all under the power of the archdiocese.How is the BOR chosen/appointed? Seems very much a good ol’ boys network giving power without true accountability to a very small handful of people. Is this the perception others have as well?
Seems that’s where we really need to change things up though I have no idea how to make that happen.But all under the power of the archdiocese.
Being McCarrick's secretary is something different than what it sounds like. A bishop's secretary is more like a flunkie or gopher. He brings the bishops vestments, miter, staff to public Masses and may drive him around. But the bishop's srcretary has nothing to do with policy decisions, scheduling appointments, or anything like that. It's usually a very young priest too.I had a long talk with a priest who is close to retirement. He said so many people knew about Uncle Teddy as they called him. He would invite Seminarians to his beach house and pick one to share his BR. The priest said many priests feel very guilty that they didn’t speak up and bring this to the light. If you are his secretary and ran the seminary at the time, I’m not sure how you didn’t know. Tough situation all around but his closeness to the McCarrick situation alone should have taken him off the list of candidates IMO. Really bad decision by the BORs who had to get this decision right after botching/ and maybe creating the Nyre situation. This sucks.
I have no time for Tobin and despised McCarrick since the 1980s. But the Archdiocese is not the evil empire. I think they pick regents who genuinely care about the university. One flaw in choosing is that they tend to favor big benefactors. In reality, being a rich benefactor isn't necessarily a good qualification.But all under the power of the archdiocese.
How is it as hit piece? Because of the timing? Or do the documents not exist? (Hint: they do.)It does seem a little suspect to do a hit piece on Msgr. Reilly and the university on what was probably the last day the university was open before Christmas break.
Yes, timing. No one is really around to respond. Not questioning the validity as usually where there’s smoke there’s fire. Hope I’m wrong on that though.How is it as hit piece? Because of the timing? Or do the documents not exist? (Hint: they do.)
The old Friday afternoon news dump. Seton Hall perfected that.Yes, timing. No one is really around to respond. Not questioning the validity as usually where there’s smoke there’s fire. Hope I’m wrong on that though.
The points about what McCarrick did are right on. Whether our new Pres spent a lot of time with him and did not handle things at the Seminary correctly I do not know for sure and never said I did. It still sounds like a big problem unfortunately. If he was with McCarrick and later ran the Seminary and brushed something under the rug, it is not a good look. The BORs should have vetted that and steered clear. I'm blaming the BORs not our new President. There are lots of good priests who have been accused that are innocent. Lots that are guilty too. Unfortunately the church continues to screw this up and opens itself up to this scrutiny. BORs should have avoided the scrutiny if there was any question when they chose a new President. Can't mess up two Presidents in a row but it seems that may be the case. Hoping it gets settled soon and we move on to the business of running Seton Hall. I wish we weren't talking about this as our University doesn't need continued bad press.Being McCarrick's secretary is something different than what it sounds like. A bishop's secretary is more like a flunkie or gopher. He brings the bishops vestments, miter, staff to public Masses and may drive him around. But the bishop's srcretary has nothing to do with policy decisions, scheduling appointments, or anything like that. It's usually a very young priest too.
Did he run the seminary during McCarrick's tenure? I dont think so.
You're points are based on bad information.
I'm not a fan of Opus Dei in general, not the saint or the spirituality but the actual members of the group.
The conservatives in the church are not known for dirty tricks.
Pope Francis has a credible accusation of sexual abuse against him. That has been swept under the rug. Most are too scared to speak about this or criticize him in any way because he is so dictatorial and vindictive. His pontificate has been a reign of terror.
So I doubt the hit job on Msgr Reilly is part of any vast right wing conspiracy.
A hit piece?Yeah, that's Jerry Carino...a long-time despiser of his alma mater. Yes, I'm sure that's what it is.It does seem a little suspect to do a hit piece on Msgr. Reilly and the university on what was probably the last day the university was open before Christmas break.
They can’t, but even if they could, then what?Is there anyway the school can break from the Diocese of Newark ? I doubt it but that would be the move .
A lot of this discussion seems wacky, but the original story was from Politico, not Jerry.A hit piece?Yeah, that's Jerry Carino...a long-time despiser of his alma mater. Yes, I'm sure that's what it is.
I suppose if the diocese wanted to sell, but who would a potential buyer be?Is there anyway the school can break from the Diocese of Newark ? I doubt it but that would be the move .
I stand corrected then.A lot of this discussion seems wacky, but the original story was from Politico, not Jerry.
I was talking about the politico article, not Jerry’s. His article was just a follow up.A hit piece?Yeah, that's Jerry Carino...a long-time despiser of his alma mater. Yes, I'm sure that's what it is.
His article was an amplification. The whole thing is nothing.I was talking about the politico article, not Jerry’s. His article was just a follow up.
The Peter Principle is alive and well in 2024, unfortunately.This is the entire point, "Investigators never accused Reilly of abuse, but according to Politico, Seton Hall University’s governing body followed a recommended action plan to remove him from university boards and as the dean of the university seminary. So it came as a shock to many within the college community when Reilly was tapped as the new president last April."
How does anyone actually defend this? Obviously, people find a way as we see in this thread and the fact that his resume was even put in the pile to consider.
You removed him from the seminary only to then put him in charge of the whole damn thing a few years later? It's mind numbingly stupid and audacious in the hubris of those involved.