my recollection is that the changes to the by-laws were a *reaction* to Burke's intention to close the parish and seize their assets.
Your recollection is incorrect. First, there was never any such intention. Second, the bylaws were changed in 2001 before Burke became the Archbishop (Cardinal Rigali was then the local Ordinary). They were against changed in 2004 to entirely lock the parish priest out from the governance of the Church.
So, he's willing to see people excommunicated over a pettifogging legality when he's not going to seek control over the money?
He wants control over the Church, not over the money or the property ... it is totally un-Catholic to have a lay board dictating to the parish priest, as the Congregation for the Clergy notes in rejecting the appeal of the Parish Board. What do you suppose Sts. Augustine or John Chrysostom would do?
Why not blame the board, who chose schism and excommunication rather than agree to the "pettifogging legality"?
As I read Burke's proposal, all he has to do is get a few ringers onto the parish council, and bada bing
You mean the Board of Directors for the residuary corporation? But the setup is the same as the current St. Stanislaus Parish Corporation. He could just as easily get "ringers" onto that.
Nevermind that Catholics aren't supposed to worry about their bishop sending "ringers" to take control of their Churches...LOL.
"Nevermind that Catholics aren't supposed to worry about their bishop sending "ringers" to take control of their Churches...LOL."
They're not supposed to worry about a lot of things, but things happen. NLAA.