Clinton apology weighed

Bishop Howard J. Hubbard has expressed disappointment with President Clinton's televised address Monday night, while priests and counselors, who routinely work with people during times of crisis, confession and contrition, voiced mixed reactions to the speech.

In his remarks, the President admitted lying about an adulterous sexual affair with Monica Lewinsky, an affair which he had denied for seven months. In his speech, however, he did not use the words "lie" or "adultery."

To the Bishop, some priests and some counselors, those omissions were notable. To others, however, the President struck the right notes of apology (also see the editorial on page 8).

Here is a sampling of reaction to Mr. Clinton's speech, gathered by James Breig, editor, and staff writers Maureen McGuinness and Paul Quirini:

Bishop Hubbard: "Sorrow requires a full acknowledgement of one's wrongful behavior, contriteness of heart and repentance. While only the President and God know what is in his heart, unfortunately I found that too much of Mr. Clinton's address came across as an angry attack on his accusers, rather than a full and candid acceptance of the serious consequences of his own behavior.

"I wanted him to say he had violated the trust of his office and acknowledge that he had lied to the American people, and was sorry for that behavior and apologized. I didn't hear any of those words: 'lied,' 'apologize' or 'asking for forgiveness.'"

Sister Christine Partisano, CSJ, a spiritual director in the Albany Diocese: "I think he said the right words. He did the best he could do for who he is and the society he was raised in. I was so glad he said he had to make it right with Hillary, Chelsea and God." Pointing out that until recently it seemed as if the only people involved were lawyers, she was pleased that the Rev. Jesse Jackson became involved by meeting with the President before his speech since the issue is a spiritual one.

Rev. David Berberian, a judge with the diocesan Tribunal: "He didn't say, 'I'm sorry' nor did we get an admission of deep-felt contrition. Words like [sorry, apologize and lie] are critical to genuine contrition. He equivocates so much and tries to parse words; people know he's not telling the truth. I spend 75 percent of my time trying to protect the sanctity of marriage; what does that sanctity mean to him? He's [committed adultery] before. It's sad. We expect more from our leaders."

Sister Anne Bryan Smollin, CSJ, executive director, Counseling for the Laity of Albany Diocese: "His speech wasn't strong enough for many Americans, but I read it as his saying, 'I was wrong.' He brought a lot of disgrace on himself and asked his family to endure the humiliation. He didn't have to make a public statement. It's part of his ownership of the problem to do so and shows his intent to be sorrowful. For him to achieve forgiveness, he has to behave with real integrity from now on. How many times can we be asked to forgive his behavior?"

Rev. Arthur Toole, pastor of St. Matthew's Church in Voorheesville: "I don't think he should keep placing the blame on other people. It was a qualified apology. It seems like it has not ended yet. He's still holding back. I don't think he's shown the moral leadership that he should have shown. I think they're political reasons why he didn't [tell the truth]. He thought he'd beat the rap. His position should have been more forthright. I don't want to see him impeached, but he's got to be more mature."

Rev. George Brucker, pastor of St. Paul's Church in Schenectady, hoped that Mr. Clinton would be more apologetic during his speech, but he didn't doubt that the president was sincere in his admission of guilt and acceptance of blame. "I was looking for the expression of his sincerity in a more direct way, but I don't doubt his sincerity. I wish that he would have said, 'I'm sorry.' That would have resounded a true note of concern on his part. If, in the beginning, he had only come out and told the truth, this whole episode would have been put to one side. When things are hidden or denied, it just mushrooms. He looked for excuses and, really, there is no excuse that can be put into words."

Father Brucker wasn't offended by the President's change in tone at the conclusion of the speech when he criticized the investigation of him. "I think that's within all of us. We want to get beyond this. He said he was sorry -- in a way that was, perhaps, not to the degree that most of us would have liked -- but, nevertheless, that was the target that he was aiming at."

Rev. R. Adam Forno, administrator of St. Joseph's Church in Rensselaer, said the president's address lacked what he would have expected from someone sincere about their contrition. "It lacked the tone, and was harsh and aggressive. Words are very important. It's all about words. He used the words of a lawyer, not a poet. It wasn't about reconciliation."

Father Forno understood that president took the middle ground in his address because he was advised that it would have weakened him as a leader to ask for forgiveness. "It's risky to show vulnerability, and that's a pity," he said but added he wasn't sure that being vulnerable would have been a negative thing for the president. He pointed out that there have been times when the Church has asked for forgiveness and that hasn't weakened the Church. "There has to be some kind of ownership and a consequence. This is our American president. If there are no consequences, what does that say to our children?"

(08-20-98) [[In-content Ad]]