Court: Judge Erred on Milwaukee Archdiocese Fund

[johnnykins]

That may be but don’t forget where that cash came from. Mostly donations over the years, I would think. Can they count on future donations (and burial revenue) for cash flow?

The Bishops should have thought of that…It’s a pity the faithful gave their hard earned donations to people who were so fundamentally unworthy of that trust.

I disagree. Punishing people who had NOTHING to do with the crimes from decades ago is rather low, even for attorneys. Prior to the lawsuits, the Church had made changes, just like every other organization in the US. The only reason that those attorney’s went after the Church rather than say public schools (which are breeding grounds for pedophiles) is they saw deep pockets.

The attorneys went after the Church because priests, bishops and others raped children and covered that up. That such actions are reprehensible and result in substantial damages is something the priests, bishops and others should have thought about. What was low, was priests and bishops, etc., doing those terrible and criminal things and covering it up. Actually I think they went after the Church because they saw flagrant hypocrisy. In any event, so what if they did see the deep pockets - the Bishops etc., should have thought of that…just another reason that supports their fundamental unworthiness in this matter.

I just cannot believe people on this Forum still refuse to place blame where it belongs: our Bishops, priests, provincials, brothers and sisters… They are to blame. Not the kids. Not the lawyers.

 

[zz912]

Whenever I see someone state the Church is to blame I always keep in mind that WE are all the Church.

Maybe there is some validity to your statement. Perhaps we are all to blame here to some degree.

One could easily argue that the bishop in charge of the archdiocese right now isn’t to blame since he wasn’t the bishop at the time the cover up took place. One could argue he is by his association with the Church.

Too many silent voices. Not that those voices knew directly necessarily what was happening, but too many silent voices nonetheless.

I’m from this diocese and as a youth I attended a Catholic school where one of the priests there was named as one of the credible cases of child abuse. I served Mass with this priest. I noticed nothing about this priest that seemed out of line. In hindsight, he was a bit intimidating to us kids.

Later I learned that some classmates of mine had parents who said they didn’t trust him around their kids. I wonder why these adults kept this quiet within their private home discussions instead of bringing these things to light to others. Of course gossip is dangerous as well without substantiating evidence.

What’s really been lost in all of this is the prayer life of us all. If all who suspected something was awry would have prayed for discernment, a lot of the pain and suffering of so many involved could have been avoided.

Yet there is still hope in all of this. Prayer is a great place to start.

Funny enough, there is another thread where people are telling others to stop questioning Catholic charities about behaviors they are troubled by. Did we learn our lesson from this abuse scandal?

 

[zz912]

The lawyers need to be commended…greedy or not…for making the clergy and hierarchy take note and act appropriately. If our own clergy, bishops etc., had acted responsibly the lawyers would not be swooping, strike suits would not be filed, many many innocents would not have been damaged, the reputation of the Church would not be lower than those “greedy” lawyers, BUT…all those things have happened because our leaders, our priests, our bishops and others abused children and covered it up for decades and decades.

It was only those “greedy” lawyers forcing them to look at the mess the clergy made and the damage they did - and make them pay cash - that has gotten us anywhere.

Sorry I say, “Hurrah!! for those ‘greedy’ lawyers!!” They are just what we needed to get our leaders, priests and bishops to act responsibly. The Lord works in mysterious ways - including using “greedy” lawyers for a totally good purpose.

If you have a problem with what this has all cost - complain about the Bishops, the priests and other leaders who created this mess and cover-up. The lawyers did us all a favor and deserve to be well paid for their service.

There is some merit, but there are also quite a few attorneys who are pushing false claims simply for the money. And the lawyers, even for the truthful accusations, are raking in contingency fees of 35-50% of the settlements.

 

[Dawnia]

The Bishops should have thought of that…It’s a pity the faithful gave their hard earned donations to people who were so fundamentally unworthy of that trust.

The attorneys went after the Church because priests, bishops and others raped children and covered that up. That such actions are reprehensible and result in substantial damages is something the priests, bishops and others should have thought about. What was low, was priests and bishops, etc., doing those terrible and criminal things and covering it up. Actually I think they went after the Church because they saw flagrant hypocrisy. In any event, so what if they did see the deep pockets - the Bishops etc., should have thought of that…just another reason that supports their fundamental unworthiness in this matter.

I just cannot believe people on this Forum still refuse to place blame where it belongs: our Bishops, priests, provincials, brothers and sisters… They are to blame. Not the kids. Not the lawyers.

The blame needs to be put on those who committed the crimes and covered them up. NOT on people that had nothing to do with the crimes committed 30+ years ago.

 

[pnewton]

If you have a problem with what this has all cost - complain about the Bishops, the priests and other leaders who created this mess and cover-up. The lawyers did us all a favor and deserve to be well paid for their service.

Which bishops, are you saying all bishops are corrupt? The people who are paying these outlandish settlement are not the people who have done anything wrong. They are removed by generations because our system of civil litigation is written by lawyers for lawyers. Therefore, Churches can be sued for wrongs committed decades ago. Taking money from the dioceses today make no more sense than taking it from taxpayers, or from other random groups.

 

[pnewton]

Funny enough, there is another thread where people are telling others to stop questioning Catholic charities about behaviors they are troubled by. Did we learn our lesson from this abuse scandal?

The two issues are different, but I think everyone knows that and Catholic Charities is not the discussion here. That is another thread.

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

Some older information from when the initial ruling was made in 2013 that pertains to the current situation:

twincities.com/localnews/ci_23762407/milwaukee-judge-shields-archdiocese-funds-from-creditors

The cemetery trust was formed in 2007 by then-Archbishop Timothy Dolan, four years before the archdiocese filed for bankruptcy protection to deal with hundreds of sex-abuse claims. Dolan specifically wrote to the Vatican seeking permission to move $57 million into the trust.

Archdiocese spokeswoman Julie Wolf said the trust was established for the perpetual care of cemetery sites and funded by sales of cemetery plots and mausoleums.

The cemetery trust was formed to cover costs associated with operating burial facilities on nearly 1,000 acres of land in which more than 500,000 people are buried, according to the ruling by U.S. District Judge Rudolph T. Randa. The judge noted that burial, death and resurrection are key tenets of the Christian faith, and he said Catholics believe in the ultimate resurrection of their own bodies.

“The sacred nature of Catholic cemeteries – and compliance with the Church’s historical and religious traditions and mandates requiring their perpetual care – are understood as a fundamental exercise of this core belief,” Randa wrote. “Theologically, the deceased must be treated with respect and charity in the Catholic faith with the hope of resurrection.”

Randa cited the church’s Code of Canon Law that he said requires that the cemetery trust’s funds be used specifically for their stated purposes. If those funds were used for a different purpose, he wrote, the archbishop as trustee could face discipline and a religious penalty from the church.

jsonline.com/news/religion/milwaukee-archdioceses-creditors-want-ruling-halted-judge-off-case-b9975543z1-219553341.html

In motions filed Monday — one to set aside the ruling and the other asking Randa to recuse himself — the creditors said they “discovered that at least nine of Judge Randa’s relatives (including his mother, his father and his wife’s parents) are buried in cemeteries owned and operated by” the archdiocese.

“This fact alone creates the appearance of partiality,” the motion states. They add that Randa, by purchasing burial rights for his parents, entered into a contract with the archdiocese, further supporting the call for him to step down from the case.

“Judge Randa should have disqualified himself from presiding over any aspect of this adversary proceeding. Yet, he did not do so,” the motion reads. “Nor did he disclose the facts to the parties at any time during the case.”

The trust was created in 2008, but the archdiocese maintains the funds were always segregated for cemetery use and that the trust merely formalized that arrangement. The creditors claim documents show that prior to the transfer, the cemetery payments were commingled with other operating funds.

The cemetery decision was a key victory for the archdiocese, because it eliminated one of the last major assets available for a settlement with sex abuse victims who filed claims in the bankruptcy. If it stands, the ruling could have far-reaching implications for other religious institutions considering bankruptcy.

Both sides have called the developments unusual — and possibly the first time a judge has been asked to recuse himself in the several Catholic Church bankruptcies around the country.

 

[ProVobis]

Which bishops, are you saying all bishops are corrupt? The people who are paying these outlandish settlement are not the people who have done anything wrong. They are removed by generations because our system of civil litigation is written by lawyers for lawyers. Therefore, Churches can be sued for wrongs committed decades ago. Taking money from the dioceses today make no more sense than taking it from taxpayers, or from other random groups.

pn, they are not necessarily removed by generations. The bishops are frequently transferred as are the priests. Thus the bishops being sued are rarely at fault in that particular diocese. Perhaps it’s the statute of limitations that should be changed, in your opinion?

 

[johnnykins]

The blame needs to be put on those who committed the crimes and covered them up. NOT on people that had nothing to do with the crimes committed 30+ years ago.

You may not like the way the law works…but this is how it works. An entity is responsible the actions of its agents. It’s not limited to the Catholic Church or even churches in general. So, in the eyes of the law, the Church is responsible. I suggest if current innocents are hurt by that, they too should sue the Church. No matter how you want to slice and dice it, the blame rests not with the victims of the abuse and it is the church’s obligation to pay for the damage caused by its agents. Welcome to adult life.

 

[johnnykins]

Which bishops, are you saying all bishops are corrupt? The people who are paying these outlandish settlement are not the people who have done anything wrong. They are removed by generations because our system of civil litigation is written by lawyers for lawyers. Therefore, Churches can be sued for wrongs committed decades ago. Taking money from the dioceses today make no more sense than taking it from taxpayers, or from other random groups.

It’s hard to understand how you missed it since you quoted it:

complain about the Bishops, the priests and other leaders who created this mess and cover-up

The settlements are certainly not outlandish for the damage inflicted on children. What’s outlandish is that you presume to decide that it is…when the acts of the Bishops, priests, etc., who did these things and covered up these things is indefensible in any way. I again point out it was only these damage awards that got the attention of the Church leadership. It’s the Church paying these awards as it should. That the leaders were or are unworthy of the trust you put in them is not the problem of the minors damaged by them. You should have been more discerning. I suggest, if you have a claim, sue them for malfeasance.

I cannot believe you think it appropriate not to make whole those damaged by all this! Or you hold yourself up as the one to decide what should be paid…or even worse you believe the perpetrator should get to decide. Absolutely chilling. BTW the law has statutes of limitation…and they often did indeed hide behind those laws.

You are simply wrong on all counts.

 

[johnnykins]

There is some merit, but there are also quite a few attorneys who are pushing false claims simply for the money. And the lawyers, even for the truthful accusations, are raking in contingency fees of 35-50% of the settlements.

If strike suits have been bid into this mess it is due to the appalling handling of the coverup and multitude of actual criminal abuse cases as well a hypocrisy of those who did it…so that too is the fault of the Church leadership. It’s not the shark’s fault it is attracted when someone deliberately cuts open their own gut and goes for a swim in known shark infested waters.

And why shouldn’t the attorneys be paid well? Those are the same rates we all know they get for contingency cases. In any event, think of the lesson they taught our priests and bishops - one that needed to be driven home because it was fought, or ignored or covered up for decades and decades. We need to thank them for that. The lawyers have made them more responsible.

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

…The lawyers have made them more responsible.

How have the lawyers made those who commited these crimes more responsible? Not sure I follow your logic on this point.

 

[Dawnia]

You may not like the way the law works…but this is how it works. An entity is responsible the actions of its agents. It’s not limited to the Catholic Church or even churches in general. So, in the eyes of the law, the Church is responsible. I suggest if current innocents are hurt by that, they too should sue the Church. No matter how you want to slice and dice it, the blame rests not with the victims of the abuse and it is the church’s obligation to pay for the damage caused by its agents. Welcome to adult life.

I work in the legal field, I know how the law works. It’s also why I think your opinion is baloney.

 

[pnewton]

It’s hard to understand how you missed it since you quoted it:

What’s outlandish is that you presume to decide that it is… You should have been more discerning. I suggest, if you have a claim, sue them for malfeasance.

You are simply wrong on all counts.

Understand if no one has respect for your opinions, that you do the same for others and will only receive what you give. As far as me suing, I do not play the lawsuit lottery hoping for a payout. I also do not think money heals. That is a fallacy learned in our materialistic society. I would have no objection for those who abused and allowed the abuse paying for their crimes, as they should. That is why almost every other type of lawsuit has a reasonable statute of limitation, unlike the extremely long period of time that one is able to sue that has been allowed in these sex abuse cases. There is no way for a fair hearing to be given decades after an event. Even when guilt can be determined, money will heal nothing that hasn’t already been healed.

You say I am wrong, as if opinions can be wrong. I think you lack understanding of what an opinion is, and what wrong is, as no one person’s opinions are the absolute standard of what is right and wrong, save God alone. I assume you are not claiming to be deity.

I applaud all those victims who have taken the path of healing instead.

 

[pnewton]

pn, they are not necessarily removed by generations. The bishops are frequently transferred as are the priests. Thus the bishops being sued are rarely at fault in that particular diocese. Perhaps it’s the statute of limitations that should be changed, in your opinion?

Yes, both to assure that those who are responsible for injury are the primary ones penalized, and to assure a fair trial. Time makes determination of guilt difficult, especially over decades. In most cases, guilt is impossible to determine and awards are more based on emotional arguments than verifiable facts. Statute of limitations are in place to protect justice, not to thwart it. When suits are filed after decades, then we risk making more victims, not of sexual abuse, but of good intentions, and sometimes even greed.

 

[ProVobis]

Yes, both to assure that those who are responsible for injury are the primary ones penalized, and to assure a fair trial. Time makes determination of guilt difficult, especially over decades. In most cases, guilt is impossible to determine and awards are more based on emotional arguments than verifiable facts. Statute of limitations are in place to protect justice, not to thwart it. When suits are filed after decades, then we risk making more victims, not of sexual abuse, but of good intentions, and sometimes even greed.

But certainly some of the blame has to go to those who would not listen to such complaints in the first place. And that would include parishioners who perhaps overregarded the priests or religious in question. It seems that it was when the priests and bishops are transferred, then questions are raised as to whether it was done because of abuse or spite or for some other reason. Institutions are usually quiet about these reasons. But this is all after the fact and after a certain amount of evidence and pattern is cited.

I will agree that the system is being at least partly abused for personal gain at the expense of those who had legitimately purchased cemetery grounds for their beloved ones. They are victims too.