Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Pia Crosby's avatar

If the conduct of Fr. Plow did not violate any policies in 2012, how does one explain that the University counselor not only called the conduct harassment, but cited the rule in the code of conduct that was violated? Anyone who takes time to carefully read the posts documenting the victimization of this student, supported by others who contacted Jenn with their testimony, will see that this is again a case with concern only for the institutions involved. It documents victim blaming and protecting Fr. Plow. Nothing has been done to validate the victim. How should courses on proper spiritual direction address bruising a victim‘s (directee‘s) arm, acting as if he had a romantic interest in the victim, to the point that it was noticed by other students, exhibiting pathological controlling behavior, calling her cell phone against agreement late at night, being in the women’s dorm after hours, just to mention a few behaviors? She did not want any of these behaviors, but was also concerned not to damage his reputation as a priest. It was his responsibility as a priest to observe the appropriate boundaries. But the local bishop had decided the case does not deserve to be investigated further. What will it take for the University and the diocese to put victims of abuse first?

Expand full comment
Catherine Danner's avatar

The things these men can get away with because their victims aren’t minors is horrific.

Expand full comment
1 more comment...

No posts