Diocese Facing Abuse Suits Files for Chapter 11

[Ichingcarpenter]

Source: Gannett News Service

WILMINGTON, Del. – The Catholic Diocese of Wilmington Inc., which has pastoral charge of 233,000 Roman Catholics, sought protection Sunday night in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in an attempt to manage the potential liability resulting from a flood of clergy sexual abuse lawsuits.

The Chapter 11 filing in U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware lists assets of as much as $100 million and liabilities of as much as $500 million for the nonprofit. The diocese encompasses 58 parishes, 21 missions and 27 schools in Delaware and on Maryland’s Eastern Shore. The diocese, founded in 1869 in Wilmington, has 126 diocesan priests.

“This is a painful decision, one that I had hoped and prayed I would never have to make,” Bishop W. Francis Malooly said in a statement. “However, after careful consideration and after consultation with my close advisors and counselors, I believe we have no other choice, and that filing for Chapter 11 offers the best opportunity, given finite resources, to provide the fairest possible treatment of all victims of sexual abuse by priests of our Diocese. Our hope is that Chapter 11 proceedings will enable us to fairly compensate all victims through a single process established by the Bankruptcy Court.”


Bankruptcy filing freezes any lawsuits under an automatic stay, bankruptcy lawyers said. The standstill came just hours before the start of Delaware ’s first trial involving alleged sex abuse by a Catholic priest. The personal injury suit filed by Neuberger involves a now defrocked priest, Francis G. DeLuca, who served in the Wilmington diocese for 35 years. The trial was scheduled to begin Monday in the Kent County Superior Court. Michael Vai, 57, alleges DeLuca sexually abused him when he was an altar boy at St. Elizabeth’s Church in Wilmington. Neuberger has 20 other cases against the diocese related to DeLuca alone.

Read more: http://www.jaxobserver.com/2009/10/19/diocese-facing-abuse-suits-files-chapter-11/

---

[Soylent Brice]

1. justice.

[rhett o rick]

2. In other words the Catholic Church is going to use legal means to avoid paying compensation

to victims. Looks like insult added to injury.

[Ichingcarpenter]

3. Yes but It also hides scandalous documents for the court case

But Thomas Neuberger, a lawyer representing 88 of the victims, said the purpose of the bankruptcy filing was to conceal "thousands of pages of scandalous documents" and vowed to contest the move.

"This filing is the latest, sad chapter in the diocese's decades-long 'cover-up' of these despicable crimes, to maintain the secrecy surrounding its responsibility and complicity in the sexual abuse of hundreds of Catholic children," he said in a statement, the Associated Press news agency reported.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8313791.stm

[happyslug]

24. Under Chapter 11, ALL Creditors MUST be paid

And the issue is how and when. Now, the Court can (and often does) reduce who gets what but that requires a majority approval of the debtors (which includes the Victims of the abuse). If the debts exceeds the assets then the Organization will be dissolved and the assets sold to pay off the debtors as much as possible. If the assets did NOT exceed the debts the Church would have been better off dissolving itself and setting up a new organization that then ban bid on the Church's assets (This is what Chrysler and GM did). No one else will want the assets so it is the best way to maximize the value of the Assets. Instead what the Church is doing is asking the Court to give it time to sell off its assets to pay off all of its debtors (including the Victims). That is the heart of Chapter 11. For example in the case of Chrysler and GM the assets were sold off to two new companies (Mostly owned by the Federal Government, but Government ownership is a minor issue) while the liabilities stayed with the old GM and Chrysler. The Assets NOT needed to keep GM and Chrysler ongoing stayed with the Old Chrysler and GM and is slowly being used to pay off the remaining creditors (along with the money used to Purchased the assets of Chrysler and GM to set up the New Chrysler and GM).

My point is simple, Chapter 11 does NOT permit a cut off of the claims of the Victims. They are as much a Creditor of the Church as any other creditor. If the Church wants to keep its assets it has two painful choices. First do the GM maneuver and dissolved the diocese and lets someone else buy the assets. In the case of GM that was the Federal Government and the UMW. In the case of the Catholic Church that can be a new Diocese under a new Corporate Charter. That new Diocese must pay something close to full value for the assets it buys from the old Diocese. Then the old Diocese MUST distribute those assets NOT purchased AND the money received for the items sold to ALL creditors in proportion to their claim. Given that, unlike GM, no one is willing to come up with the cash right now to buy these assets (And the sale MUST be approved by the Court, which will require evidence that the price is close to its re-sale value, i.e. what the court could get at auction for the same items) this is NOT a choice open to the Church. It can be done but given the value of its buildings (Based more on their location then anything else) hard, for most churches have low re-sale value but cost a lot to build NOT much of an option.

The second option, one I think the Church is looking at, is to retain the property and set up some sort of payment program to pay off ALL creditors over a period of years. Now, the lawsuit are stayed automatically at the filing of the Petition, but that can be undone within weeks by filing a motion to lift the automatic stay and proceed with the lawsuits. I doubt the bankruptcy filing had anything to do with the start of the lawsuit for that reason (The lawsuit may be the cause of the filing, I am just saying it is NOT the cause of the TIMING of the filing). As long as the total assets of the Diocese exceeds the value of any potential judgment, the Victims will be paid. The only issue is how much and when. How much may be set by the Bankruptcy Court OR by state court if a lifting of the automatic stay is granted (and in my opinion will be granted unless an agreement to an amount is agreed to as part of the Bankruptcy).

Remember, unless the Creditors agree to waive their claims against an Debtor, the Creditors rights are preserved in Bankruptcy. This is especially true of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy which started in the 1800s as state remedy independent of Bankruptcy (later merged into the Bankruptcy code) where you had a good ongoing business that fell into a situation where it had more money do today then it had cash to pay off those debts. Creditors found the best way to get their money was NOT to dissolved the business but to take it over and run it. While today management of most companies in Chapter 11 stay in place, a filing transfers the "de facto" "ownership" from the former owners of the business to the Creditors. Thus the "new owners", which includes the victims, are the "real owner" of the assets of the Diocese. Now the Bishop stays in charge, but his loyalty is no longer to the benefit of the Diocese but to the Creditors. Once the Creditors are satisfied then the Bishop can Transfer control back to the Church, but not till then. The key is satisfaction of the Creditors and that will take time and effort.

That switch in loyalty is what the Church wanted to avoid, but filed the Bankruptcy do to the fact no one was going to lend them money to pay ongoing bills for such loans would be equal to any judgment entered for the victims. Once the bankruptcy was filed, Banks could loan the Church money for they would be first among the New Creditors to the post bankruptcy organization. Prior to bankruptcy such creditors would have been one among others, including the victims. If the assets of the Diocese are sold, these new Creditors must be paid first (Right after anyone holding a lien on the property being sold i.e. a mortgage on a building for example) AND before any assets are used to pay off any of the old Creditors (Again this is if the Diocese follows GM, which I doubt the Diocese is doing given the huge amount of fixed assets, i.e. churches).

Now, part of the reason for the filing is to reduce the amount of any claim but the claim will have to be addressed (i.e. paid). Chapter 11 is just a way to work out a payment agreement among the Diocese creditors (including the Victims) NOT a way to cut them out (Unless the Diocese sells off its assets like GM, but that would require Court Approval AND that requires something close to market value).

[rhett o rick]

35. Very good information. I appreciate you taking the time to educate me. nt

[Lerkfish]

4. its unfortunate they didn't expend this much energy keeping parishioners safe from pedophiles

;(

[saigon68]

42. Priests Sodomizing Alter Boys

Large Hairy Brutes laying the lumber to Little Boys Rectums.

Oh ya they need Chapter 11 to avoid paying anything.

Another criminal enterprise on the loose.

[DeSwiss]

5. "Bidness, is bidness...."

- And on top of that, they pay no taxes....

K&R

[BR_Parkway]

6. I wonder why they're allowed access to certain things that they don't

pay taxes on. Like access to a legal system that they don't support. Almost as much as corporate personhood, we need to be looking at these exemptions as well

[DeSwiss]

11. Like the god....

...they purport to represent here on earth, they believe themselves to be exempt from scrutiny. Nor are they subject to the rule of law as we are, for the duration. And of course they draw this authority from an entity that they created out of the thin-air. From poetry, if you will. And enough people buy-in to this "tale" to create this special classification of citizen.

- One that can exist among us, and yet live outside of our laws....

[RKP5637]

26. No taxes, isn't that a crock of BS. I'm fed up with tax exemptions for churches. Many of...

these outfits are far larger than many corporations. And these jokers get away with no taxes. It's a racket, plain and simple! Say the God word, throw a flock together and you're a church and no taxes. And then you can run politics (legal or not) from the pulpit or wage a hate war against someone or a group, whatever pleases you and your flock, tax free. :grr:

[DeSwiss]

39. Said tax-exemption of which has been granted by society.....

...with the understanding that the church will stay the fuck out of our secular affairs. Such as NOT getting involved in our politics. But as always has been the case, they're having a difficult time keeping their goddamned mouths shut.

- So I say fuck it. Tax the hell out of all the motherfuckers. And I sincerely mean this, with all my heart.

[RKP5637]

41. Agree 100000% with you!!! n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

7. And yet this hypocritical Church has the gall to oppose equal

civil rights on the grounds that they are too moral for equality. They are up in Maine, right now, just as they were in CA and all over the nation, pointing fingers at others while they themselves are guilty of horrific crimes. The hubris or the hypocrisy, which is most stunning?

[MaineDem]

10. They are spending a great deal of money to oppose equal marriage here in Maine

You're absolutely right.

They had a second collection in churches a few weeks ago and raised over $80,000 to go to the "Yes on 1" campaign (to overturn the law allowing same sex marriage.) How much good could this money do for the poor in Maine. I think the Catholic Church has forgotten its roots. Feed the poor, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless. You know, that sort of thing.

[CatholicEdHead]

21. Those are the current conservative/traditionalist priorities now

Abortion and gay marriage, nothing else matters. If you want to get ahead in today's church, hammer down those points with faux outrage. Feeding the poor, clothing the naked, sheltering the homeless is so passe in those circles. They care about what happens inside the church building, not outside it.

[MineralMan]

8. Proof that there is no God.

If there were, these folks would be quaking in their red shoes, and Jebus would be heading for Delaware to do some serious butt-kicking. Since they're not and Jebus hasn't shown up, I assume not even they believe in supernatural entities. It's a hoax.

[RKP5637]

27. Exactly, one massive hoax and a bunch of mindless lemmings flocking along spreading...

hatred or whatever suits them... One massively evil institution!

[MineralMan]

9. Seriously, the court should refuse to grant Chapter 11, and

should force complete liquidation of all assets, with the proceeds held in escrow until all sexual abuse cases are done. Send the Sheriffs of the various jurisdictions where church assets are located and padlock the doors, pending auctions of all assets.

The church...any church...should not be able to escape from its legal responsibilities, any more than any other organization. Screw 'em.

[DeSwiss]

12. ....

[MineralMan]

13. Caption for your image...

"Someone has stinky pants..."

[DeSwiss]

14. ....

:rofl:

[RKP5637]

29. Or "Get your hand out of my diaper!"

[hedgehog]

15. The people who put their money down to build those buildings

are even more enraged than you are. I think some people were vaguely aware of one or two priests who were a little odd. Finding out how many priest were involved, and how many priests and bishops were involved in the cover-up seems to be the gift that keeps on giving. Even now, we are seeing parishes closed and assets sold in anticipation of the need to raise revenue. We have an organization run by old men using a hodge podge of rules left over from the Middle Ages. (Not to knock laws left over from the Middle Ages, the Magna Carta is from the Middle Ages.)

I know the response will be that we should all leave. Let me ask you this. If the successor to the Dalai Lama should turn out to be an absolute skeeze, would that invalidate all of Tibetan Buddhism?


On edit: while I attend Mass and sing in the choir, I haven't given a penny to my parish in two years. When I do give to the Church, I send my money to Call to Action.

http://www.cta-usa.org/

[liberal_at_heart]

22. I left Christianity for Buddhism

I left Christianity for Buddhism because in my opinion today's Christian church has abandoned the true teaching of Jesus; love, peace, forgiveness, compassion, charity. If Buddhists abandoned Buddha's teachings of these same virtues (love, peace, forgiveness, compassion) I would leave Buddhism as well. As the Dalai Lama has said my religion is compassion and I don't need a building or even a religion to practice it.

[RKP5637]

30. Excellent!!! n/t

[hedgehog]

34. The suggestion that Christianity is tied to buildings ignores

the Masses held in the open air while the Church was suppressed in Ireland under British rule. It might be said the Church prospered more during centuries of oppression than during the 20th century when it had overwhelming government support. Moreover, the implication that Tibetan Buddhism is above such mundane concerns as building structures for worship is not valid.

My post was meant to point out that there is a difference between a religion as a belief or philosophy or guide to living and religion as a human social structure. If some Buddhist leaders did not practice the virtues of Buddhism, would that negate the value of Buddhism as a way of transmitting and practicing those virtues?

[MineralMan]

28. If I were a Catholic, instead of being an atheist,

I would have questioned the entire authority of the RCC long ago, given the abuses against humanity it has perpetrated, and I'm not just talking about pedophile priests. Don't Catholics have to ask themselves whether such a corrupt establishment can truly represent Christ? If they're wrong in their actions, does it not stand to reason that they are wrong in their theology?

There are choirs and liturgies in other denominations, you know. Think of the Epsicopal and Lutheran churches. Or, perhaps one of the Orthodox denominations. If you feel that worshiping Jesus is something you need, then there are options that don't include denial of rights for all humans.

[woodsprite]

16. I saw that in the paper today and wonder if they would

take the same position if Saltarelli was still Bishop of the Archdiocese. He died just over a week ago. I don't know, but it was just a thought I had.

[Altoid_Cyclist]

17. This is a link to a local scandal involving the local Diocese.

This area has a long history of Pedophile Priests and attemtpting to cover it up. The problem that I have with this link is that it seems to go out of its' way to paint Pedophile Priests and gay men as one and the same. There was a real problem for a long time regarding the protection and transferring of the Priests responsible, but people need to understand that these abuses did occur but that it wasn't because some of the Priests were gay.

http://www.dioceseaj.com/


That's been disproved already as the second link makes clear. I still can't believe how many people equate the two as one entity.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/gays-anatomy/200809/homosexuality-and-pedophilia-the-false-link

[DeSwiss]

19. I've said for some time....

...that The Church should be prosecuted under RICO.

[Altoid_Cyclist]

23. They do operate in much the same manner as a criminal enterprise at times.

They've been closing churches around here in order to try to recoup some of the money that they were forced to pay out.

A lot of the people are elderly and have no way to travel to the nearest church still open. The Diocese does still have enough money that the Bishop responsible for most of the disgrace has a brand new house on the same block as my PCP and some other Doctors.

Go figure.....

Sort of makes me glad that I don't really believe in religion.

[RKP5637]

32. Religion is for the mindless that need to be led by the nose and taken advantage of...

and lives controlled in the name of a mystical deity with threats of damnation and hell. What a bunch of absolute crap.

[happyslug]

25. The Courts will never permit that, for the next step would be RICO the Police

People tend to forget the reason these cases occurred is the same reason Police do not turn in other officers, those are your friends and co-workers. Given a choice between believing a friend and co-worker and a total Stranger 90% of the people will believe a Friend or Co-worker. This is even more so of groups with tight social bonds, such as the police and the Religious (By Religious I am using the Catholic definition of that term, Priests, Monks, Nuns etc). If you expand RICO to the Catholic Church, then it is an easy step to use the same logic to any tight social group, and the tightest social group is the law enforcement group. Any rationale against the Catholic Church can be used against Police who do NOT turn in their fellow officers for minor violations (and how the Police dismiss claims against their fellow officers UNLESS the evidence is overwhelming).

No, RICO will never extend to the Catholic Church for then there is no real restriction on RICO and if that is the Case most Police Departments could be sued under RICO (and the courts will NOT permit that, thus cut it off while before it comes near the police and that means as RICO comes close to Catholic Church).

[DeSwiss]

40. I'm afraid what you suggest.....

...would take a gargantuan leap of logic in order to find that The Church is somehow analogous to "any tight social group." They are a tax-exempted, filthy rich institution that has practiced its crime against people for 2,000 years. They "sell" a "product" to unsuspecting dupes which is indefinable, unchallengeable and indistinguishable from air.

They have used their association(s) to commit major crimes and to cover them up. They have used their organization to move their criminal members about to avoid prosecution. They have used their legal status as a "nation-state" to cover-up their crimes and to avoid prosecution as federal court ruled just a couple of years ago that the Pope could not be party to any conspiracy prosecution as he is the head-of-state of a "legitimate country" -- The Vatican.

- I don't know of ANY "social groups" that have all that shit going for them.....

[happyslug]

44. Do you Understand RICO????

RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS (RICO) Act is what I was addressing. It is aimed at any group that engage in "racketeering activity".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act

The Actual Act:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sup_01_18_10_I_20_96.html

Section 1961 Defines "racketeering activity" as:
(1) "racketeering activity" means:
(A) any act or threat involving murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), which is chargeable under State law and punishable by imprisonment for more than one year;
(B) any act which is indictable under any of the following provisions of title 18, United States Code: Section 201 (relating to bribery), section 224 (relating to sports bribery), sections 471, 472, and 473 (relating to counterfeiting), section 659 (relating to theft from interstate shipment) if the act indictable under section 659 is felonious, section 664 (relating to embezzlement from pension and welfare funds), sections 891–894 (relating to extortionate credit transactions), section 1028 (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents), section 1029 (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with access devices), section 1084 (relating to the transmission of gambling information), section 1341 (relating to mail fraud), section 1343 (relating to wire fraud), section 1344 (relating to financial institution fraud), section 1425 (relating to the procurement of citizenship or nationalization unlawfully), section 1426 (relating to the reproduction of naturalization or citizenship papers), section 1427 (relating to the sale of naturalization or citizenship papers), sections 1461–1465 (relating to obscene matter), section 1503 (relating to obstruction of justice), section 1510 (relating to obstruction of criminal investigations), section 1511 (relating to the obstruction of State or local law enforcement), section 1512 (relating to tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant), section 1513 (relating to retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant), section 1542 (relating to false statement in application and use of passport), section 1543 (relating to forgery or false use of passport), section 1544 (relating to misuse of passport), section 1546 (relating to fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents), sections 1581–1592 (relating to peonage, slavery, and trafficking in persons).,<1> section 1951 (relating to interference with commerce, robbery, or extortion), section 1952 (relating to racketeering), section 1953 (relating to interstate transportation of wagering paraphernalia), section 1954 (relating to unlawful welfare fund payments), section 1955 (relating to the prohibition of illegal gambling businesses), section 1956 (relating to the laundering of monetary instruments), section 1957 (relating to engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful activity), section 1958 (relating to use of interstate commerce facilities in the commission of murder-for-hire), section 1960 (relating to illegal money transmitters), sections 2251, 2251A, 2252, and 2260 (relating to sexual exploitation of children), sections 2312 and 2313 (relating to interstate transportation of stolen motor vehicles), sections 2314 and 2315 (relating to interstate transportation of stolen property), section 2318 (relating to trafficking in counterfeit labels for phonorecords, computer programs or computer program documentation or packaging and copies of motion pictures or other audiovisual works), section 2319 (relating to criminal infringement of a copyright), section 2319A (relating to unauthorized fixation of and trafficking in sound recordings and music videos of live musical performances), section 2320 (relating to trafficking in goods or services bearing counterfeit marks), section 2321 (relating to trafficking in certain motor vehicles or motor vehicle parts), sections 2341–2346 (relating to trafficking in contraband cigarettes), sections 2421–24 (relating to white slave traffic), sections 175–178 (relating to biological weapons), sections 229–229F (relating to chemical weapons), section 831 (relating to nuclear materials),
(C) any act which is indictable under title 29, United States Code, section 186 (dealing with restrictions on payments and loans to labor organizations) or section 501 (c) (relating to embezzlement from union funds),
(D) any offense involving fraud connected with a case under title 11 (except a case under section 157 of this title), fraud in the sale of securities, or the felonious manufacture, importation, receiving, concealment, buying, selling, or otherwise dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), punishable under any law of the United States,
(E) any act which is indictable under the Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act,
(F) any act which is indictable under the Immigration and Nationality Act, section 274 (relating to bringing in and harboring certain aliens), section 277 (relating to aiding or assisting certain aliens to enter the United States), or section 278 (relating to importation of alien for immoral purpose) if the act indictable under such section of such Act was committed for the purpose of financial gain, or
(G) any act that is indictable under any provision listed in section 2332b (g)(5)(B);

Unless it comes under one of the above definitions RICO does NOT apply. You apparently are accusing the Church of Fraud, but to have Fraud you must sell something that is NOT what you claim it to be NOT something that does NOT exist. The Church claims to save souls in exchange for donations. While you may disagree with the Church's ability to save soles, the law requires something more then that i.e. if the Church was saving souls when you can prove that the Church KNEW it could not and was not. Notice the requirement, that the person "selling" the product (in this case the saving of Souls) KNEW he was NOT but did it for the money. What believe is unimportant, what is important is what can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the Church and its hierarchy KNOWS it was NOT saving souls and the only reason they were doing it was to get the money. As long as at least one
Priest says he is trying to save people's soul then that whole attack fails.

As to moving priest about to avoid litigation. That is NOT a criminal act unless the reason was to avoid CRIMINAL charges. The Movement of most priests have been to separate the priest from his alleged victims OR to move him away from service of process (i.e. avoid a civil suit). The problem with the latter is the defendant is rarely the priest alone, but the Priest and the Dioceses and the Dioceses never moved so service on the Dioceses was possible thus NOT the movement of the Priests is NOT a Criminal act if the purpose was to avoid civil litigation for such Civil Litigation could start without the Priests as long as the Dioceses was served.

The only case I have heard of regards a case out Louisiana where the alleged priests were transferred to the Vatican. In that case Louisiana was trying to prosecute them for sex with someone under 18 but over 15. The Age of consent within the Catholic Church is 15 (and it is 14 or 16 in most states, under the Common Law it was only age 12). Italy has a similar age of Consent (and the Vatican has, until recently, always followed Italian law in areas where the Vatican has to separate law). Thus, under Italian and Vatican law the alleged sex acts were NOT statutory rape given the age of the alleged victims and since all the evidence indicate it consensual sex NOT rape, in fact the State Concedes it was consensual. Given that situation, since it would NOT be a crime in Italy, the Vatican and Italy has refused extradited the Priests. That is the only case I have heard of and the facts are NOT favorable for in most states the sex act involved is NOT illegal. It is a jurisdictional mess but not a crime subject to RICO.

Sorry, while the Church has covered up the Crimes of Pedophilia, it was NOT to further those crimes but to reduce liabilities and that is legal. In fact the law had long taken a positive attitude when someone does something after an injury has occurred in the form that such repairs can NOT be introduced to show repairs were needed before the accident. Thus moving a priest once is something the Church has never been found liable for (The problem for most dioceses is that the Bishops would move priests again and again after such allegations instead of keeping the priest away from Children after the second set of allegations, had the diocese moved the Priest once and if the allegations resurfaced and then move him away from any potential victims no court would have held the Diocese liable for they did all that they could to avoid such harm, the problem was several Bishops did NOT adopt that policy, instead moved the priests around hoping the allegations would stop).

My point is NONE of the above raises to a violation of any of the statutes cited in the RICO act. If you could charge the Church under any one of the Statutes cited, you could charge any other organization that tolerated illegal acts by its members (and that includes the Police). RICO was NEVER intended to go after organizations that in themselves were legal, but which had members that committed illegal acts. Thus RICO can NOT be used against the Church nor the Police for both provide a LEGAL service, members of both may do illegal acts but those acts do NOT show that the Organization in itself is committed to those illegal activities, which was the point I was trying to make.

[DeSwiss]

46. Well, thank you for..... all that.

Really, the links would have sufficed.

From your post:

You apparently are accusing the Church of Fraud, but to have Fraud you must sell something that is NOT what you claim it to be NOT something that does NOT exist. The Church claims to save souls in exchange for donations. While you may disagree with the Church's ability to save soles, the law requires something more then that i.e. if the Church was saving souls when you can prove that the Church KNEW it could not and was not.

Yes I am accusing the church of fraud. Their "product" is a service that they claim is essential for life. Not this one but the next one that they also claim will come after everyone dies. I invite them (or anyone) to prove any of this in a rational, demonstrable and reproducible way.

I not only disagree with the church's ability to save souls, I disagree with the church ability to prove that I have a soul to begin with. Or that anyone else has a soul for that matter. But we all know as does the church, that they cannot demonstrate their ability to carry out what they say they can. If they can, then I invite them (or anyone) to show me the proof. Until then, they and anyone who supports them they are full of it.

As to moving priest about to avoid litigation. That is NOT a criminal act unless the reason was to avoid CRIMINAL charges.

As for the movement of the pedo priests, to avoid litigation -- well that is exactly why they moved them. Unless you want to believe that they move them around because they wanted to allow them the opportunity to spread their special brand of joy around to all the little children. Seriously, that has got to be clearest example of the perfidy and willingness to allow the innocent to suffer not only at the hands of these monsters via sexual abuse, but again and again through the failure of them to find justice for the abuses they have already endured.

Sorry, while the Church has covered up the Crimes of Pedophilia, it was NOT to further those crimes but to reduce liabilities and that is legal.

Right. And you KNOW this to be the case. Tell me, how does one NOT further "those crimes" when "those crimes" go unpunished? Even The Church believes in righteous punishment. Or is that only for us, the Great Unwashed? How is The Church NOT furthering "those crimes" when by moving the criminals around they are providing them with fresh opportunities to commit "those crimes" again? Oh. That's right. They prayed for them. Silly me. That fixes everything, doesn't it?

My point is NONE of the above raises to a violation of any of the statutes cited in the RICO act.

And Ken Starr was supposed to have been investigating Whitewater but he some how ended up at blowjobs. Imagine that.

- Look, I have no time for this silly jousting. I could care less what specific tool is used to knock these assholes upside their heads. RICO just seemed like a great tool because it is easier to get a conspiracy conviction under it. And that's just what this is, a BIG CONSPIRACY. And I just want them locked the fuck up! But I will say that your arguments sound as though they have been approved and vetted and come directly from the Vatican. Bennie, is that you????

[unhappycamper]

18. And they act surprised when you try to sue their ass for fucking your kids.

This shit exploded in Boston a while ago.

[closeupready]

20. And, in keeping w/form, they sent Archbishop Bernard Law to Rome, outside the jurisdiction of those

who could subpoena him.

[saigon68]

43. He is a Criminal and a Pervert

[Critters2]

31. Why is anyone still Roman Catholic? nt

[closeupready]

33. Brainwashing?

n/t

[RKP5637]

37. I think so! And from an early age, generally. n/t

[Altoid_Cyclist]

38. The ones that upset me the most are the people in Latin America.

Every time that the Pope goes there or they go where the Pope is, I get ripped. Come on people, the only reason that you're Catholic is because your ancestors were conquered hundreds of years ago by the Europeans.
They only converted (for the most part) because they would have been exterminated otherwise.

I know that we were taught in school how "noble" the Europeans were for civilizing the heathens by bringing the "word of God" to them, but doing it by wiping out entire civilizations seems to go against the "Christian Way".

Study your past and then decide if you still want to worship the ideals that almost wiped out your ancestors.

[happyslug]

45. The problem is the Catholic Church is viewed in a positive lights in most of Latin America

Now the Catholic Church in Latin America is split, the hierarchy (The bishops) tend to support the power elites but the village priests tend to support the peasants (Thus Liberation Theology was and is popular in Latin America). US support tends to go to Protestant religions in the regions, most such Protestants only coming into Latin American since WWII. Thus you get situations where the Local Protestants are tied in with the local Death Squads while the Local themselves are tied in with the local Catholic Church. Yes, it is a mess.

I once read on the Vatican Web Cite a Cardinals response to the comment that we should convert the Iraqis to Christianity. He just planned attacked the whole concept, in his word the first step in converting anyone is to understand where they are today. You must study them and understand them and then use that understanding to convert them. You can NOT force people into conversion, you must UNDERSTAND THEM. I bring this up for one of the Characteristics of the Catholic Church has been a policy of trying to understand different cultures and people. They do this better then anyone else (With the possible exceptions of the Communists, but then Lenin said he wanted the Communist party to be more like the Jesuits then any other organization). The Church, as part of its conversion program, tried to make itself the center of their Community and their social Network. The side affect of this is the Church, in Latin American, has come to represent the poor against the Upper Class (Who has been busy converting to Protestantism, or at least mouthing protestantism) as an alternative to the Catholic Church, a church do to the fact its priest do not marry is hard to suppress.

Yes, at times you hear of the Church being for the rich elite, then you hear of them being against the Communists, and then the opposite. The Catholic Church in Latin America is in transition as is most of Latin America. Things will change but it is to simple to say that the Natives of Latin America are Catholics do to the Conquest. There is some truth to that, but at the same time the local priests have tried to understand what they people need and get that message to people who could help them. It is a thread in the social network and if pulled may cause more harm then good and even the local accept this (Even Castro went to a Catholic Mass for Pope Paul II when Pope Paul II died).

[Altoid_Cyclist]

47. The Catholic Church is a positive for a lot of them in the modern era.

The CC does do things to aid the local civilizations now, but I was looking at it from a wide angle perspective that includes some long ago transgressions.

I was just pointing out that the methodology of converting the native populations at the beginning was less than Christian.

There's a lot of debate concerning actual numbers of indigenous populations at the time of the first European contacts in the Americas. That makes it impossible to fully understand the impact that the European settlers had on the natives since numbers and accounts vary so widely. I was just emphasizing the fact that what we were told in school was a very whitewashed account of how we helped the native peoples and not a balanced presentation.

These are links to some of the many accounts of what transpired.
The scary thing was that I found one by David Duke. I didn't even know that he was still around.

http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/native_voices/nav2.html
http://www.anzasa.arts.usyd.edu.au/ahas/conquest_overview.html

[rhett o rick]

36. Because of family pressure is my guess. nt