Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle. 2 Thes 2:15
Header image: Stations of the Cross, St Josaphat Basilica, Milwaukee, WI
I do not understand all the "leagalise" of this. Personally I think that if the Archdiocese if Milwaukee had admitted that they did not do the right thing, treated the victims with an ounce of respect and used some of the 22 million + that has gone to lawyers (not to mention other monies), I think everyone would be better off. Given the fact that Weakland and his cronies are STILL running the diocese, I take great delight in every ruling against them.
I'll try to clarify. The Cemetery Trust says it received money only for perpetual care, and this money should not be subject to claims of creditors of the Archdiocese. One ground for this was the defense that care of the dead is so important to Catholicism that taking this money for another purpose would be against religious freedom. This latest court ruling rejected that contention. The other grounds are more directly that these funds were always trust funds, even before before a formal trust was set up. Those issues have not yet been decided.I agree with you on the substance of the problem. What needed to be done ASAP post-Weakland was to try to put together a global settlement, including the then-pending California claims, and the claims involving members of religious orders in service to our Archdiocese. That would have been daunting, but if accomplished, would have put this all a decade-plus behind us. One of the assets is a cemetery site here in Franklin. I'd gladly have traded any potential plot there to not have to regularly see this scandal rehashed in the press.As for your claim that "Weakland and his cronies are STILL running the diocese", first you'd have to point out some compelling evidence that someone is running the diocese. The course of the bankruptcy and the Synod, for example, indicate not.
and the claims involving members of religious orders in service to our Archdiocese. Yah, well, it's prolly true that a global settlement would have been good. But getting the SDS and Frannies to kick in--not so easy. Besides, that would have been an indirect admission that the Diocese DOES have control of the Orders, which has been denied by both since Day One.
Mr. Berres, thank you for the explanation. You are right, no one is running the diocese and the bankruptcy and the Synod are proof. I suppose my point, better stated, is that Weakland's people are still on the dole, living off the people of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee. Check a copy of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee directory for 2002 and 2015.
Dad29, worst case scenario would seem to be news reports on which religious orders were withdrawing from our Archdiocese rather than collaborate on an overall settlement. That would indicate that keeping kids safe is the priority, not staffing. Instead we got the rationalizations that, for example, kept Father Robert Marsicek on the job, indicating the opposite.Anonymous, assuming that long-time Chancery staff are Weaklandites, you're not really concerned they're "on the dole", doing nothing. After all, enormous effort is expended to simulate goals, as in the Synod, or our Archdiocese's new 421-word mission statement.
I was not aware that there is a new 421 word mission statement. Our pastor has not preached on that yet or brought it to our attention.
Here it is.
Thank you. I'll read it tonight if I have trouble sleeping. If Christmas was approaching I could give framed copies as gifts to my best friends.
Please contact firstname.lastname@example.org if you have issues commenting.