Click here to advertise on CatholicCulture.org

recluse diocese

By Diogenes (articles ) | Jul 05, 2005

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 seven million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!

Our Fall Campaign
Progress toward our year-end goal ($27,707 to go):
$150,000.00 $122,292.96
18% 82%
Sound Off! CatholicCulture.org supporters weigh in.

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!

Show 3 Comments? (Hidden)Hide Comments
  • 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.

Fall 2014 Campaign
Subscribe for free
Shop Amazon
Click here to advertise on CatholicCulture.org

Recent Catholic Commentary

Another side of Francis: US-Cuba role shows Pope's diplomatic muscle 2 hours ago
Silly season: a Christmas approaches, a scholar questions whether Jesus ever existed 3 hours ago
The intrinsic immorality of torture: still not convinced? 8 hours ago
The Complexity of Reforming Religious Communities December 17
Speaking Softly to Women Religious December 16

Top Catholic News

Most Important Stories of the Last 30 Days
Pope Francis: Europe seems 'elderly and haggard' CWN - November 25
Pope Francis, Ecumenical Patriarch sign joint declaration, lament persecution of Christians CWN - December 1
Consistory for new cardinals scheduled for February CWN - December 11
Vatican report on US women religious calls for further self-assessment CWN - December 16
Pope brokered deal to open US-Cuba ties CWN - December 17