Posted on 08/30/2005 7:57:24 PM PDT by Salvation
Laws that are evil are not laws but rather satanic fulminations.
Faced with an evil law such as abortion, Catholics have the choice of not performing abortions, or allowing the procedure to be performed on them. They have the right to protest to agitate against abortion politically, and to seek that the laws should be changed. Pope after Pope has sternly condemned abortion. There is no question that, morally, the Pope is correct. There is also no question that, legally, the right to an abortion is the law of the land in the United States, and that this law supersedes the law of the Church. The Church opposes, and Catholics oppose, but they cannot STOP the abortions that are performed.
Sure they can. It is not as if it is a mortal sin to use force to prevent an abortion from occuring, just as it is not a mortal sin to burn down an "Adult Book Store" selling pornography. You are acting as though these are legitimate activities that can be licitly undertaken, like selling groceries or paving driveways.
You are far to deferential to the dictators in black robes. They do not make law, and there certainly cannot be a law that authorizes abortion. It is a simple nullity that no one needs to recognize.
The truths taught by the Catholic Church are the truths taught by the Catholic Church. Real property situated in the United States is, and ought to be, subject to the laws of property of the United States. We do not step out of the United States and into a foreign country, governed exclusively by its own sovereign laws, when we walk onto the grounds of a Catholic Church.
And yet, the Catholic Church is a foreign power, recognized and granted sovereign immunity by the US Government. You do realize that the Church has an embassy in Washington, DC, and the US an ambassador to the Vatican?
Otherwise, why do we fly the flags of a foreign power - the Vatican - in and around our Churches?
The Church should be governed by its own laws. And if a government will not allow that, it is opressing the Church.
The Church is not above the civil law on matters of property, taxation or the acts of its officials.
The Church is exempt from taxation. The Church is also not to be subjected to any governmental control of use of its property for purposes of divine service. The clergy cannot be conscripted. All attempts to the contrary are nullities that breach the free practice of religion guaranteed against the US government and against all of the States.
The free exercise clause ought to recognize that a church is a small society, more like a family than a business. That is one reason James Madison "freedom of conscience" language did not make its way into the constitution, because "religion" in our culture is communitarian and not merely personal.
I find that the freedom from taxation is a natural extension of the "free exercise" clause of the 1st amendment. The state cannot take money given to God and pretend they have upheld the religious intent of the person who gave the money.
Do you concur?
The rule of law ended eons ago. This ruling is a two edged sword. It will casue the catholic church, the most well organized christian body in existence to regroup and reformulate its legal definition.
It will allow lawsuits to be promulgated against the Mormons, the Masons, the Moslems and the Scientologists as well. Just wait and see.
You hit the nail on the head.
Yes, I concur.
If you are correct, then the bishop must be found guilty in a civil or criminal case to grab those assets for damages for fines.
PROBLEM. Bishops went the bankruptcy route.
I am a lawyer and said from the beginning this was putting the Church into the hands of the state.
Whatever else, a church is far more than one person.
No, the Methodist case in Calfornia and the case here are based on the same reasoning. You use the civil law to construe the title documents.
In California, the court saw that title was held in the name of the local body, and there were no binding trust ageements of record. Here, the title is held in the name of the Bishop, and there are no binding trust agreements of record.
In both cases, church law and traditions were ignored.
The lesson in both cases is the same as well. If you want the civil courts to protect your interests, you need to have your paperwork in order to civil standards.
So. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals? This should be interesting.
Spoken like a lawyer, I mean in the perjorative sense. Then sue the lawyers for failing in their jobs. They seem to have been as trustworthy as the mental health experts that the bishops listened to.
As I posted up thread, don't turn to the court if you don't want it to apply the law. The Bishop chose the forum of the Bankruptcy court.
Then sue the lawyers for failing in their jobs.
It is not clear that they did fail. You would need to look at what the Bishop asked them to do. If he wanted to make sure that he retained the maximum control over the parishes and their assets, then that is what they gave him. If you give control of the assets to the parishes, then that can lead to its own problems. Indeed, the biggest risk right now may well be that other Bishops will overreact to this ruling.
It is also why Bishops should consult non-Catholic lawyers on issues like this, who will be less likely to be influenced by history and tradition in giving advice.
Let's give the CC the same compassion they gave the victims of these 'disgusting' abuse. So... I hope they get SCREWED financially. Perhaps in the future, if the church does not pay attention to these abuses, ON MORAL GROUNDS!... perhaps the money will force them to be more alert and responsive to the depravity by its members. I understand, seminaries are full of homosexuals, or at least they were until 3 or 4 years ago, I don't know if anything has changed, but having those individuals as potential priest... perversion will continue.
Who, me mad at the CC? Oh no....
YES! Brilliant, Robby. Spot on! That is precisely so.
If Ninth Circuit, then Supremes... It is almost a given.
Left coast ciricuit court of appeals. Need I say anything else?
Do you want to tell us why you are so angry?
Hi, if you read my post and did not get it, I can't do anything for you.
take care
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.