Oct 24, 2018 3 min read

Recently, the first of two local listening sessions with Bishop Edward C. Malesic, head of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Greensburg was held.

On Oct. 31, he will be at Holy Family Parish in West Newton from 1:30 to 3:30 p.m.

The sessions are an opportunity for area Catholics, some left hurt, angry or questioning, to engage in a frank discussion their diocesan leader.

So much has happened since the August release of a grand jury report on sexual abuse in six of the state’s eight dioceses.

Locally, several priests from the Greensburg or Pittsburgh dioceses have been removed from active service. Allegations against them that were not included in the grand jury report were lodged against them and officials in both dioceses removed the men so those claims could be investigated.

Parishes in Uniontown have been particularly hard-hit. In late June, before the report was released, the Rev. James Clark was put on leave. The diocese recently announced he would not return to active ministry, finding the decades-old allegation lodged against him had been substantiated.

Monsignor Michael Matusak, longtime head of St. Therese, was removed less than a week after the grand jury report. A woman alleged he engaged in inappropriate behavior with her when she was a teenager and he was serving at a Mount Pleasant-area parish.

The diocese has not yet concluded its investigation to determine if he will return to ministry.

Their absences left the faithful of Uniontown with one priest to serve the four churches in the area.

The report and new allegations have undoubtedly left some Catholics with deep concerns about a faith many of them have followed since they were born.

As the leader of the diocese, Malesic deserves praise for organizing the seven sessions, and his willingness to engage in a frank discussion with parishioners. He should be lauded for stepping forward to address their concerns.

It’s more than our state legislature has done.

A bill that would’ve opened a limited two-year window for victims of sexual abuse in the church to sue stalled when senators left the Capitol without voting on it last week. The window, recommended in the grand jury report, was meant to allow those outside the statute of limitations — a challenge to many alleged victims — to sue for damages.

There are problems with such a bill, which, in our view, targets the church while ignoring the damage to all other sexual assault victims who may only be coming to grips with trauma later in life. They too may be beyond the time allowed to sue.

However, in light of the impending mid-term elections, we feel it was incumbent upon our elected leaders to put this legislation to a vote.

Those who are making the important determination about who will represent them in state government deserved to know their position on the matter. That information may have impacted for whom they vote on Nov. 6.

It’s difficult not to look at the inaction with a jaded eye, feeling politics instead of people took center stage.

That’s disgraceful.