One of the things revealed in the documents that have been released concerning the Fr. Kolar case in St. Paul is that after Kolar was sent away for treatment and it became obvious that he was both initiating sexual contact with adult women he was counseling, and also abusing a minors - and after
the psychiatrists who evaluated him indicated the he had a serious personality disorder, the archbishop and his cronies decided that their options were either ...
1. Make Fr. Kolar DIRECTOR OF GUIDANCE at the seminary (where he could guide and form young men who were becoming priests)
2. Put him to work AT A PARISH (where he would be free to counsel more young women. Note that the archdiocese made a point of not informing any laity of Fr. Kolar's abusive behavior, so women approaching Fr. Kolar for counseling at a parish would not know the risk they were taking.)
And in neither case would any of the bishops around the country be informed of Kolar's previous work in NET Ministries nationwide, where he had access to plenty of teenage girls over the years. This despite the bishop of St. Cloud, who had caught wind of this, suggesting that they do so.
This is after TWO lawsuits were filed and SEVERAL victims had come forward.
Kolar has since left the priesthood, is married, and draws his full priest pension. Of his sexual molestation of girls under his care, he says ...
1. Make Fr. Kolar DIRECTOR OF GUIDANCE at the seminary (where he could guide and form young men who were becoming priests)
2. Put him to work AT A PARISH (where he would be free to counsel more young women. Note that the archdiocese made a point of not informing any laity of Fr. Kolar's abusive behavior, so women approaching Fr. Kolar for counseling at a parish would not know the risk they were taking.)
And in neither case would any of the bishops around the country be informed of Kolar's previous work in NET Ministries nationwide, where he had access to plenty of teenage girls over the years. This despite the bishop of St. Cloud, who had caught wind of this, suggesting that they do so.
This is after TWO lawsuits were filed and SEVERAL victims had come forward.
Kolar has since left the priesthood, is married, and draws his full priest pension. Of his sexual molestation of girls under his care, he says ...
As I look back on all of that now, I see that I was simply using them ... because of my sexual needs.
Comments
Your comment is irrelevant and hurtful to those of us that were raped by clergy.
What do you think your comment accomplished?
It made you look like a child, like you do not care about the victim.
Because of your statistic, do you think that it is ok for clergy to rape children?
What would Jesus think of your comment?
I believe the facts show that such a claim is untrue.
In a nutshell, when abuse by Kolar of a *minor* was first reported (in 1991), Kolar was immediately removed from ministry and laicized a short time later.
The archdiocese learned in 1986 of abuse years earlier by Kolar of an *adult* woman and was sued for it in 1988. The archdiocese believed there may have been other adult women as well. Kolar resigned from his job leading a youth center.
Kolar was immediately sent to treatment at St. Luke's Institute in 1988, which is *exactly* what "progressive" folks like Tom Doyle recommended at the time.
[The prophetic 1985 report about abuse in the Church was co-written by three guys: Doyle, a lawyer, and the leader of St. Luke's.]
St. Luke's evaluated the guy, and it did *not* recommend that his faculties be completely removed.
Additional lawsuits were filed regarding Kolar in 1990 also alleging *adult* abuse years earlier.
But then in 1991, Kolar was accused of abuse of a *minor* years earlier, at which point Kolar was quickly removed from active ministry.
In January 1992, the archdiocese petitioned for his laicization, which was granted in 1993.
I believe the Kolar case is far more layered than you have presented it.
Thanks.