I'm unfamiliar with the baptism scandal -- could you fill me in?
Well, they might own or lease the buildings, but the AB could always withdraw their faculties (I believe Law threatened them with just that in the baptism affair). That would put them in a real bind, and if they flouted the AB’s authority, Rome would get *quickly* involved. Only one side could win this type of dispute...
Anyway, as far as the baptism issue is concerned, back in the 90’s, there was one priest there who did *at least* a couple of hundred baptisms using the ol’ “Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier” bit for the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. That, of course, is a big no-no, and renders the whole baptism invalid. The pre-baptism catechesis he provided was pretty shaky, too. When word got to the chancery about this, evidently the cardinal didn’t like the way the Paulists wanted to handle the situation, and he took personal charge of its remedy. He ordered the priest to personally track down every family involved, and inform them that they neded to rebaptize their child(ren), specifically pointing out why they weren’t baptized yet. He ordered the Paulists to ensure that such things didn’t recur, and took the opportunity at that time to insist on the ending of the liturgical gymnastics going on there.
My understanding is that this fiasco didn’t end all that well. Some people could not be reached, as they had since moved. Many, being, after all, liberal Catholics, were offended at the notion that the baptisms didn’t “take,” and blew-off the need for baptizing their kids again. The priest was ordered to keep trying, but, unfortunately, many just weren’t reachable. But there were some, at least, who were found and took the necessary steps all over again. God only knows how many of those kids and adults are out there thinking they’ve been baptized when, in fact, they aren’t at all. The only thing they have going for them is the fact that, while god is the Author of the Sacraments, He is not bound by them.