recluse diocese
By Diogenes (articles ) | July 05, 2005 10:16 AM
In Springfield, Massachusetts,
Diocesan spokesman Mark E. Dupont said the current bishop stands by his position that the diocese doesn't release personal information about personnel - clergy or lay.
That's a reasonable, prudent policy-- so long as we're talking about personal information.
Now when you meet someone for the first time, strike up a conversation, and he casually asks you where you live, do you think he's being nosy? Is that an impertinent personal question?
In this case it's transparently obvious why the diocese doesn't want to give out information. The current bishop is protecting the former bishop. Why?
That protection is embarrassing to the Church, and destructive to the cause of evangelization. It's certainly undeserved, and just as certainly unnecessary. No principle is being served here; no Catholic doctrine or discipline is under attack. A few folks have a valid reason to want Bishop Dupre's current mailing address; that's all.
If we lived in a society that openly persecuted the Church, and Bishop Dupre was the object of unjust prosecution, we'd heartily endorse whatever subterfuge or outright defiance the Springfield diocese used to protect him. Protecting him from just prosecution (or, if the statute of limitation prevents that, lawsuits) is quite another thing.
|
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus: Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach five million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you! |
Easter Campaign: Progress toward our Spring 2013 goal ($33,066 to go):
$80,000.00
$46,933.77
41%
59%
|
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
-
Posted by: -
Jul. 07, 2005 9:23 AM ET USA
I thought the bishops were going to apply the sex abuse policy to themselves. So why aren't any of these bishops being "laicized"?
-
Posted by: Pseudodionysius -
Jul. 06, 2005 9:40 PM ET USA
The only way that Invertebrate Bishops will change is if frustrated and loopy plaintiff's start trying to sue the Vatican, Bishop B16 and all of his deceased predecessors for the sins of these miscreants. Until then, expect "hide the Parish Directory" as the only pass pattern these passing fancies understand.
-
Posted by: -
Jul. 05, 2005 6:51 PM ET USA
If I were suing the former bishop, I would name him in the complaint. If I did not have a good address for service of process, I would subpoena the diocese's personnel records. That would shift the burden on the diocese to move for a protective order preventing me from releasing the address to uninterested third parties.
