Archbishop Leveda to be deposed

  • Thread starter Thread starter JOHNYJ
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JOHNYJ

Guest
The victims rights organisation SNAP is reporting. ( snapenetwork.org )
That the Oregonian Newspaper reports. That Archbishop Leveda the new Prefect of the CDF in Rome.Will be deposed by lawyers represent children molested while he was Archbishop of Portland.
 
Do the SNAP lawyers have jurisdiction to depose Archbishop Levada? (sarcasm smiley)

Well, now I guess would be the time to email the Archbishop asking him to start making the Church smaller before the lawyers ‘get’ to him and he starts compromising.
 
I’m from Oregon and have a little more background. This is in connection with the bankruptcy and the dispute over whether or not parishes own their property or whether they are owned by the diocese and thus part of the assets that can be grabbed by the plaintiffs.

Despite the innuendos in the original post, this has more to do with money than the theory that Archbishop Levada was complicit in these alleged cases.

Lisa N
 
Lisa N:
…This is in connection with the bankruptcy and the dispute over whether or not parishes own their property or whether they are owned by the diocese and thus part of the assets that can be grabbed by the plaintiffs.

Despite the innuendos in the original post, this has more to do with money than the theory that Archbishop Levada was complicit in these alleged cases.

Lisa N
Click to expand...
:amen: …if its from that snap group, I don’t doubt its all about the money from what i’ve heard of them, they need to learn the meaning of these words, “forgive us our trespasses AS we forgive those who trespass against us.” seriously.
 
why dont they ask a cannon lawyer rather than levada? Portland has several cannon lawyers and the code would be clear on this point i think.
 
I’ll restate what I said a couple of months ago when we were discussing this problem. In the northeast, the diocese is claiming ownership of the churches they want to close. In the midwest, the same thing is happening with a Polish church. On the west coast, the diocese is claiming parish ownership in order to protect the assets. Ownership by the parish when there’s a lawsuit against the diocese, ownership by the diocese at all other times. Puhleeeze. I’ve got a feeling the Church is gonna lose this one.
 
40.png
Brain:
why dont they ask a cannon lawyer rather than levada? Portland has several cannon lawyers and the code would be clear on this point i think.
Click to expand...
Well it may be clear to the canon attornies but it is not clear to the bankruptcy judge who is making the decision whether the plaintiffs can take away our parishes.

Lisa N (having some really non Christian thoughts about this issue)
 
40.png
geezerbob:
I’ll restate what I said a couple of months ago when we were discussing this problem. In the northeast, the diocese is claiming ownership of the churches they want to close. In the midwest, the same thing is happening with a Polish church. On the west coast, the diocese is claiming parish ownership in order to protect the assets. Ownership by the parish when there’s a lawsuit against the diocese, ownership by the diocese at all other times. Puhleeeze. I’ve got a feeling the Church is gonna lose this one.
Click to expand...
I dunno, in this case they are looking very carefully at each site. In some cases for example they can trace the construction of the building or purchase of the land to specific donations by that parish’s parishioners. I think those probably have the best case of being preserved. For example the bankruptcy court allowed a parish to complete a building project because a) the parish raised the money b) they were going to lose the permit due to expiration and c) even if they did lose the parish, the building would be worth more. So they are going case by case. OTOH our parish is probably sunk if they win because it was donated by the archdiocese.

As to closing the parishes they ‘own’ I wonder if the parishioners had stepped up and said they would support the parish the archdiocese would have changed the policy. I understand it was mostly a matter of finances and they were closing parishes that had fallen on hard times or were very expensive to operate.

Lisa N
 
**geezerbob: **In the northeast, the diocese is claiming ownership of the churches they want to close. In the midwest, the same thing is happening with a Polish church. On the west coast, the diocese is claiming parish ownership in order to protect the assets.
Click to expand...
Lisa N: Well it may be clear to the canon attornies but it is not clear to the bankruptcy judge who is making the decision whether the plaintiffs can take away our parishes.
Click to expand...
Speaking as someone who works in the area of bankruptcy law, I can tell you that the one consistent thing about the bankruptcy code is how inconsistently it is applied division-to-division, district-to-district, state-to-state, circuit-to-circuit. “Local rules” apply.
 
The bishops that lead there diocese into bankruptcy to avoid justice.Better hope no one gives the bankruptcy judges any book about,Trusteeism in the Catholic church in America.
In the 1890’s the bishops of the Catholic church had to fight. To make it clear that the diocese owned the parish churches.The diocese in the name of the bishop that is.
Trying to claim the opposite now, mght seem a little duplicitous now.
 
40.png
JOHNYJ:
The bishops that lead there diocese into bankruptcy to avoid justice.Better hope no one gives the bankruptcy judges any book about,Trusteeism in the Catholic church in America.
In the 1890’s the bishops of the Catholic church had to fight. To make it clear that the diocese owned the parish churches.The diocese in the name of the bishop that is.
Trying to claim the opposite now, mght seem a little duplicitous now.
Click to expand...
I have a few thoughts on this:
  1. I think there may have only been two Archdiocese in America in 1890 - the first was in Baltimore, the second in Oregon City. It could be the case that the Diocese owned the parishes at that time, but things change.
  2. Who controls the U.S. Catholic Church? The Bishops right? So, each Diocese could very well handle ownership differently.
  3. In Oregon, Church ownership is not clear cut, because the Archdiocese is the lender to the parish. Each parish has to pay off the loan for their buildings and property. However, I believe there have been cases where the Archdiocese has made the decision to close a parish, so what happens to the money? I’m not doubting that it goes to good use in the Church, but I’m pretty certain the Archdiocese controls the property/funds at that point.
 
40.png
allhers:
…if its from that snap group, I don’t doubt its all about the money from what i’ve heard of them, they need to learn the meaning of these words, “forgive us our trespasses AS we forgive those who trespass against us.” seriously.
Click to expand...
AMEN!
Let us pray for the Church as well as those who are persecuting it.
 
To figure damages the judge has to figure ,blame. Was the archdioces complicit in the crimes or just negligent and incompetent in its supervision of the priests. So far most diocese have been found complicit .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top