Oh their assets would stay there, in the hands of a priest appointed by Burke himself. While that is the canonical norm, no Archbishop since Ritter has pressed St. Stanislaus Kostka on the issue. Burke’s reorganization plan for the churches in south city, the permanent transferrence of the Polish mission from St. Stanislaus to St. Agatha, and the 8 acres and $9 million in property in dispute lead me to believe, and I could be entirely wrong about it, that Raymond Burke’s motives are not entirely based in enforcing ecclesiastical orthodoxy.
You wrote:
“Oh their assets would stay there, in the hands of a priest appointed by Burke himself.”
Yeah, that’s called C-A-T-H-O-L-I-C-I-S-M. That’s how Catholics do it: the bishop is appointed, and he appoints those in his diocese who run parishes.
“While that is the canonical norm, no Archbishop since Ritter has pressed St. Stanislaus Kostka on the issue.”
Just because every other archbishop turned out to not want to follow canon law doesn’t mean Burke should be attacked as if he wanted to steal St. Stan’s money. That’s basically your argument here. No other archbishop pressed St. Stan’s to do the right thing, so, because Burke did, he must actually be a thief. Sorry, but that makes no sense.
“Burke’s reorganization plan for the churches in south city, the permanent transferrence of the Polish mission from St. Stanislaus to St. Agatha, and the 8 acres and $9 million in property in dispute lead me to believe, and I could be entirely wrong about it, that Raymond Burke’s motives are not entirely based in enforcing ecclesiastical orthodoxy.”
One thing you are right: You are entirely wrong about this.
I have had the pleasure of knowing Archbishop Burke personally. The man is one of the most humble and devout Catholics I have ever met.