Sunday, January 11, 2009

"Rome is fully aware" 

Christopher Tidmore's article in Bayou Buzz (and forthcoming in the Louisiana Weekly?) on the evictions in two New Orleans "vigil churches" looks to be pretty interesting. Unfortunately the article is not online yet, but YRHT received an advance copy.

The piece addresses the central (unasked) question which animated this sarcastic YRHT post about the recent evictions of the vigilists in St. Henry's and Our Lady of Good Counsel. Why did the New Orleans archdiocese call in the police after only 9 weeks, when the Boston archdiocese continues to allow vigils in its churches after 219 weeks?

First let me quote a bit from Tidmore's piece about the legal issues involved. Daniel and I were wondering exactly how the titles of the properties were worded:

According to the Orleans Parish Assessors' website (www.opboa.org) the physical properties are owned by corporate bodies of the "CONGREGATION OF ST HENRY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH" and the "CONGREGATION OF OUR LADY OF GOOD COUNSEL ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH".

[Informed vigilist Barbara] Fortier explained to The Louisiana Weekly that under the original articles of incorporation filed when the churches were established in the 19th Century, there is supposed to a five person board that runs each organization. While the Archbishop and his auxiliary Bishop (in this case, Morin,) are listed as members of the board, so the documents also say are the Churches' pastors and two lay people from each congregation.

As Barbara Fortier outlined, "After the original two gentlemen who sat on the board past away, the Archdiocese never nominated any replacements," as they were legally required to do. This "Church Board", consequently, never met to dissolve the Parishes, a requirement of the original incorporation documents.

Moreover, Fortier and her fellow parishioners discovered, "In the articles of incorporation filed with the Secretary of State's office, it says, "this church will continue to exist for 500 years.'" She wondered how the Archdiocese could change that without a vote.

Since the archdiocese resorted to "secular law enforcement" relatively quickly (despite an imminent compromise to end the vigils that was in the works) I wouldn't mind seeing some "vigilant" lawyers take the Archdiocese to court over this. To me, it looks as if the parishioners have a case.

Tidmore's article centers around the possibility that the public embarrassment of departing Archbishop Alfred Hughes at a press conference helped prompt the timing of the evictions. On the Saturday before the evictions, Hughes incorrectly announced to the world that "the vigil at Our Lady of Good Counsel had ended". Knowing that some vigilists were still hiding there, journalist Tidmore corrected the Archbishop, saying

"Archbishop, how would you react if I told you there were people in Good Counsel right now?... How would you also react if I told you the vigil continues? That they have no intention of ending it? And, that they claim that a person stayed behind and let the other parishioners in, so there was no breaking an entering?"

Hughes was flummoxed.

As the television camera rolled, for almost a minute, Alfred Hughes stood silently absorbing what [Tidmore] had said. He then said simply, "This is new information."

Tidmore writes that this public embarrassment might have accelerated the timing of the evictions and arrests on Tuesday morning. A vatican expert supports this view.

Peter Borre', one of the leaders of the Boston vigils that have continued in six Massachusetts Catholic Churches for 51 months protesting their closure, has often visited the two New Orleans' Churches and has served as a close advisor to the parishioners of St. Henry's and Good Counsel.

In an interview on the author's radio program (on 1190 AM from 3-6 PM weekdays), Borre' explained, "There are three remaining absolute dictators in the modern world: a Captain of a ship at sea, little Kim in North Korea, and a Bishop in his diocese."

"The Authority of an Archbishop cannot be challenged," he continued, "at least not in the view of the Church, and there is a tradition of not leaving a mess behind when you leave office.

"The Vatican recently announced that the appointment of Alfred Hughes' successor to Archbishopric was imminent. The Archbishop has passed the mandatory retirement age of 75, and has spoken of his plans to retire formally in the coming months.

Given that fact, "It's very likely, Chris," Borre' admitted, "that your comment did help cause this chain of events to occur."

Archbishops do not like to be embarrassed before Rome and the World, and certainly not before the television cameras. "Make no mistake. Rome is fully aware of what is occurring at Good Counsel and St. Henry's," said Borre' and former resident of the Eternal City for eight years and an acknowledged Vatican-expert.
To be continued.

===
James Gill's T-P column about the vigils had this delicious quote:

They are saying the best way to stop Hughes sending the cops to a church is to tell him there are priests inside abusing choir boys.

Personal embarrassment, on the other hand, apparently gets his butt in gear.

===

Last week's Tidmore's article on the eminent domain and financing issues surrounding the planned LSU/VA hospital (which also finds a way to incorporate the author's radio show into the story) is worth your while, too.

Labels: ,

8 comments DiggIt! Del.icio.us

8 Comments:

In other words, Tidmore's article is primarily about the pivotal role CHRIS TIDMORE played in this week's news.

*sigh*

By Blogger jeffrey, at 10:14 PM  

For the second week in a row! He's en fuEGO...

By Blogger oyster, at 10:17 PM  

I am happy that Hughes is having this pie he made thrown in his face--how amazingly appropriate that the fine-grained neighborhood institutional character of our city even subsumes the authority of the Church!

However, as I commented on the Louisiana Weekly page--I don't think Tidmore uncovered such a homerun on the LSU/VA issue. The matter related to transferring private property to a non-profit for a public purpose has already been cleared in court in New Orleans when NORA turned over Road Home properties to Habitat. A public hospital with such wide-ranging benefits with clearly pass muster if Habitat's home for a private citizen does. And that's if the state even goes the route of creating a non-profit for managing the hospitals. If they end up getting the financing for the hospital (a big if), then there's no reason to expect the state wouldn't just raise the debt limit for the project.

Back to the issue of the Articles of Incorporation for the parishes in question: does anyone else feel like it's the Dogma storyline?! Ha!

By Blogger Jeffrey, at 10:26 PM  

Is there actually a lawsuit or more than one under way right now? I have a read about a lawsuit having been dismissed in October because the congregation, it was decided, no longer existed (isn't that a tautology...the congregation and Church own the church buildings but the Church can declare that the congregation no longer exists and thus can have no say-so...how would that work in a secular business partnership?). Is that ruling being appealed? Is the ownership of these two churches different than that of other Catholic churches? How does the Archbishop have the power to decide on his own something that would seem to be a matter of secular law? Are there any well-schooled attorneys in these congregations capable of at least making it a nasty fight for the Archdiocese (one strongly suspects that the parishioners have almost no chance of getting the Church to reverse itself to re-instate the officiality of the congregations...or would that be a wrong perception...but having ALL of the facts come out would almost certainly prove to be intriguing)? Anyone have any answers to these?

By Anonymous Richard P., at 10:36 PM  

Chris Tidmore interviews experts who think Chris Tidmore is the straw that broke the camel's back.

He's almost like that Dallas Cowboy's Wide Receiver...Terrell Owens? What was his quote?

Oh yeah...

"I love me some me."

By Blogger GO, at 12:28 AM  

nike air max 90
nike air max 95
nike shoes
nike air
nike air shoes
nike air max tn
nike air rift
nike shox r4
sports shoes
nike air rifts
nike air rift trainer
nike air max 360
nike shox nz
puma cat
air max trainers
mens nike air max
nike air
puma mens shoes
puma shoes
puma speed
nike shoes air max
nike shoes shox
air shoes
Lucyliu IS Lucyliu
nike shoe cart
puma future
levis jeans
nike rift shoes
cheap nike air rifts
bape shoes
cheap puma
nike rift
jeans shop
diesel jeans

By Blogger TOM, at 7:42 PM  

cheap nike shox
cheap sport shoes
nike tn dollar
ed hardy ugg boots
ed hardy love kills slowly
ed hardy clothing us
ed hardy clothing
cheap ed hardy
cheap ed hardy clothing
ed hardy clothes
ed hardy wholesale
ed hardy clothing
ed hardy t shirts
ed hardy shirts
ed hardy uk
ed hardy t shirts
ed hardy shirts
ed hardy hoodies
Cheap JORDAN SHOES,,
cheap nike max ,。
puma future cat
ed hardy ugg boots.
ed hardy love kills slowly boots.
ed hardy love kills slowly.
ed hardy polo shirts.
cheap ed hardy clothing,.
ed hardy shirts .
ed hardy t shirts.,

By Blogger nike, at 8:42 PM  

nike shox oz
JORDAN WOMEN SHOES .
nike running shoes .
nike tn dollar.
ferrari shoes .
AIR JORDAN SHOES .
Nike Air Max Tn .
JORDAN SHOES .
cheap puma shoes .
NIKE AIR MAX .
NIKE WOMEN SHOES .
Cheap Puma ferrari shoes .
cheap nike shoes。。.
NIKE ShOX Rival..
Nike Mens Shoes.
nike air max 360..
nike air max 2010
nike air max 2009 .
nike air max 90.
ed hardy ugg boots.
ed hardy love kills slowly boots.
ed hardy love kills slowly.
ed hardy polo shirts.
ed hardy love kills slowly shoes.
ed hardy wear.
ed hardy love kills slowly shirts
ed hardy trousers.
ed hardy jackets.
ed hardy t shirts sale.
ed hardy womens t shirts.
ed hardy boots.
ed hardy womens clothes.
ed hardy womens shirts.
ed hardy clothes.
ed hardy outerwear.
ed hardy womens.
ed hardy womens jeans.
ed hardy bags.
ed hardy winter boots..
ed hardy t shirts.
ed hardy womens shoes.
ed hardy t shirts for men.
ed hardy mens jeans.
ed hardy mens shoes.

By Blogger nike, at 8:42 PM