Thanks for your posts Chris. Personally, I'm a big fan of Bishop Barron and Word on Fire, and thus this is all somewhat sad. At the same time, as someone who has worked at four NGOs, including ones that have been through major scandals, I imagine that part of the problem is that Barron is a great communicator, but has less experience in large-scale organisational management. It is often easy to run a small NGO of a handful of friends, but a much bigger challenge to run a medium or large organization. In short, I wish Word on Fire could deal with the situation with more humility. Perhaps they could say something along the lines of "while we feel we dealt with this as well as we could have, and in accordance with the law, we always feel we can do better. We feel upset that any employee would ever feel that Word on Fire is a bad place to work, or that they would feel unsupported. We will reach out to all those involved, and strive to make this a workplace in which all employees feel loved and respected."...or something along those lines. I pray for the best of all those involved.
Ok so obviously Gloor’s behavior was inappropriate and even sinful. But was it criminal? A sexual advance could be unwelcome but not criminal. For example, complimenting someone’s body or cat-calling. Obviously bad behavior, and certainly can make someone uncomfortable, but (to my knowledge) not a criminal offense. I’m not saying WOF/BB aren’t complicit in permitting a toxic work environment and turning a blind eye to bad behavior, but is it fair to allege this is some kind of cover-up if no illegal activity was committed? You’ve indicated this story stands in stark contrast to Barton’s letter of the sexual abuse scandal in the church. But is Gloor a pervert and a misogynist or is he actually a sexual abuser? Not saying he did nothing wrong or WOF/BB acting rightly in this situation, but it just seems to me that you are tying this story in with the broader sexual abuse crisis when the connection isn’t there.
I don’t understand why people are shocked over a Bishop mishandling a victim’s claim of abuse. When has that ever happened? WOF is a cash cow for the Bishop and it’s based on his clean reputation. When that goes so will his sales. Clergy needs to stop being able to sell their services, books, DVDs, or other materials for personal profit. It takes them away from their duties of being a priest & makes them a brand.
For WOF and some of its employees to dismiss these issues as “spiritual warfare,” “woke left ideology,” or a “smear campaign” just shows how ignorant they are about LAWS that govern the workplace. This isn’t about feelings, but about what is legal. Big difference.
You have highlighted some troublesome legal issues at WOF—bro culture, discrimination, harassment, sexual harassment, toxic workplace, witness intimidation, CEO misconduct during an investigation, etc. And, WOF now disclosing identifying details about a victim in their recent public statement?! What a big legal mess for them. They need some serious HR help. And, following the law is the bare minimum expected from a Catholic Bishop/nonprofit. They should be held to to an even higher standard.
"In essence, they have tried to wash their hands of responsibility by passing it on to someone else." But isn't that what they should have done? It was obvious to anyone who followed WoF that Bishop Barron and Gloor are/were close. Wouldn't Bishop Barron then been accused of having an unfair bias towards Gloor if he was involved in the investigation?
Thanks for your posts Chris. Personally, I'm a big fan of Bishop Barron and Word on Fire, and thus this is all somewhat sad. At the same time, as someone who has worked at four NGOs, including ones that have been through major scandals, I imagine that part of the problem is that Barron is a great communicator, but has less experience in large-scale organisational management. It is often easy to run a small NGO of a handful of friends, but a much bigger challenge to run a medium or large organization. In short, I wish Word on Fire could deal with the situation with more humility. Perhaps they could say something along the lines of "while we feel we dealt with this as well as we could have, and in accordance with the law, we always feel we can do better. We feel upset that any employee would ever feel that Word on Fire is a bad place to work, or that they would feel unsupported. We will reach out to all those involved, and strive to make this a workplace in which all employees feel loved and respected."...or something along those lines. I pray for the best of all those involved.
Ok so obviously Gloor’s behavior was inappropriate and even sinful. But was it criminal? A sexual advance could be unwelcome but not criminal. For example, complimenting someone’s body or cat-calling. Obviously bad behavior, and certainly can make someone uncomfortable, but (to my knowledge) not a criminal offense. I’m not saying WOF/BB aren’t complicit in permitting a toxic work environment and turning a blind eye to bad behavior, but is it fair to allege this is some kind of cover-up if no illegal activity was committed? You’ve indicated this story stands in stark contrast to Barton’s letter of the sexual abuse scandal in the church. But is Gloor a pervert and a misogynist or is he actually a sexual abuser? Not saying he did nothing wrong or WOF/BB acting rightly in this situation, but it just seems to me that you are tying this story in with the broader sexual abuse crisis when the connection isn’t there.
Dudes so desperate to take down Word on Fire, and he gets 13 likes on his latest article lolll
I don’t understand why people are shocked over a Bishop mishandling a victim’s claim of abuse. When has that ever happened? WOF is a cash cow for the Bishop and it’s based on his clean reputation. When that goes so will his sales. Clergy needs to stop being able to sell their services, books, DVDs, or other materials for personal profit. It takes them away from their duties of being a priest & makes them a brand.
For WOF and some of its employees to dismiss these issues as “spiritual warfare,” “woke left ideology,” or a “smear campaign” just shows how ignorant they are about LAWS that govern the workplace. This isn’t about feelings, but about what is legal. Big difference.
You have highlighted some troublesome legal issues at WOF—bro culture, discrimination, harassment, sexual harassment, toxic workplace, witness intimidation, CEO misconduct during an investigation, etc. And, WOF now disclosing identifying details about a victim in their recent public statement?! What a big legal mess for them. They need some serious HR help. And, following the law is the bare minimum expected from a Catholic Bishop/nonprofit. They should be held to to an even higher standard.
"In essence, they have tried to wash their hands of responsibility by passing it on to someone else." But isn't that what they should have done? It was obvious to anyone who followed WoF that Bishop Barron and Gloor are/were close. Wouldn't Bishop Barron then been accused of having an unfair bias towards Gloor if he was involved in the investigation?