Replies

First of all, if the bishop had said to him that he was really needed to help develop a growing parish, Father would've been sad to leave but he would have joyfully accepted his new assignment. But, how it was handed to him was not right. How the diocese involved the media was not right. He is being removed for reasons other than a trumped-up charge of non-compliance of not doing background checks on a volunteers. Liberals have a natural distaste for guys like him. It was just a matter of time before they found something to hang him on.

The person in charge of alerting the media was the woman chancery officer. I wonder how she feels now that it has become a media circus and has embarrassed the bishop.

None of us at the church had any intention of protesting in the face of the world. In fact, we had no inclination to protest until we were made aware that Father had been truly wronged and was deserving to have the matter looked at by Rome. But, we have had to deal with what has been given us. We are not a parish who has been chomping at the bit to protest.

What we have here is a good man who is having his face dragged through the mud for no reason. That is why we are upset. A good man does not deserve to be treated in such a manner.

Did the girls take the name "Stephen" for their confirmation names too?

Sounds like somebody put them up to this.

It appears, in the article Smedley-Butler referenced, that any record of anybody being checked was missing.

In a showdown with the bishops, who have dug in their heels, you're not going to win.

I'm not aware of anything in Canon Law that forbids a bishop from moving a priest at any time, for any reason.

Your Priest is fortunate to have followers as passionate as you. I'm afraid I still don't see what the diocese has to gain by involving our friends in the media. I admit, I am on the outside and therefore may require more concrete evidence than you are providing.

Peace, TS