Sorry. Of course, that should be 'nihil sub sole novum.'
Nothing under the sun is new, nemo.
Could you please explain to me how Burke could possibly sue the parish? From my understanding of things, the Archdiocese is not the deedholder to the property, nor do they have a lien on it, nor any of the parish assets.
Unless I am missing something here, I do not think he has a legal leg to stand on in a civil court of law. Secular courts are not interested in canonical disputes over authority........only reagarding debts, and ownership of assets. So, since the parish has the deed to its assets "in perpetuity", and the diocese is not named as a receiver, lienholder, or member of the corporate board..........
......it would seem to me that, in the matter of civil law, burke is SOL !