Belgian Appeals Court: Police Raid on Church Headquarters Was Illegal

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Press
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Catholic_Press

Guest
Brussels, Belgium, Aug 18, 2010 / 05:19 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- In the absence of an official statement from Belgium’s judiciary, the lawyer for the Archdiocese of Brussels-Mechelen announced the court’s decision that the police raids of the archbishop’s offices and Cardinal Danneel’s residence in June were unlawful.

More…
 
From what I had read, the raid resembled a Gestapo action, and there was open animus and disdain expressed by the police entity during the entire ordeal. I really thought I had glimpsed the new European reality, where the Roman Catholic Church, having been publicly deemed anathema, had become the newly sanctioned pariah of the Continent, replete with the familiar and insidious parody and mockery which declares it as being reasonably targeted for bigotry, persecution and harassment.

Thankfully, the judiciary in Belgium, it appears, has not yet been co-opted by this new ideology of open hostility towards the Church. Though, it is probably just a matter of time before they too join the movement.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
The article is untrue. The Church’s lawyer may still be saying that the raid was illegal but that’s not what the Appeals Court ruled. In fact, the Church’s complaint was dismissed.
Click to expand...
Notice the date on the article you posted (August 13th) and notice the date given by the press release (August 18th):

Brussels, Belgium, Aug 18, 2010 / 05:19 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- In the absence of an official statement from Belgium’s judiciary, the lawyer for the Archdiocese of Brussels-Mechelen announced the court’s decision that the police raids of the archbishop’s offices and Cardinal Danneel’s residence in June were unlawful
 
josie_L said:
Notice the date on the article you posted (August 13th) and notice the date given by the press release (August 18th):
Click to expand...
It’s the same ruling. The only difference is that either the Church’s lawyer is erroneously claiming that the Appeals Court ruled in his favor or his statement was mistranslated or misconstrued.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
It’s the same ruling. The only difference is that either the Church’s lawyer is erroneously claiming that the Appeals Court ruled in his favor or his statement was mistranslated or misconstrued.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe it is the same ruling (have you read both articles), i.e., it mentions that all the confiscated items taken must be returned to the Church:
As a result of the court’s ruling, the items seized, which consist mostly of boxes of files from the now-defunct Interdiocesan Commission on Sexual Abuse and their computers, must be returned and the dossiers from the local judicial investigation must be destroyed.
Click to expand...
If you could give me something more updated it would give you more credibility.

.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top