Join the Conversation
Send your thoughts to Letters to the Editor. Learn more
Mark Silk, at Spiritual Politics, asks why Bill Donohue is so intent on defending the indefensible behavior of Kansas City Bishop Robert Finn. I can't answer that question and, in the event and as is to be expected from Silk, he meticulously lays out the case why Donohue's confidence appears misplaced.
But, I wonder if even Donohue will be able to stomach this report from the Kansas City Star's court reporter, Mark Morris, that indicates the diocese has filed notice that it may present an affirmative defense in the case, namely, that the pornographic photos on Father Ratigan's computer were constitutionall protected. Huh? Bishop Finn, you may recall, issued his first pastoral letter on the subject of pornography. He is opposed to it. But, the lawyers for the diocese have now stated, in a formal court filing, that they may avail themselves of the argument that pronography is constitutionally protected? Yeesh.
I have said before - the Holy See needs to appoint an apostolic administrator fast, sede vacanta preferred, sede plena if necessary. Someone needs to be looking out for the best interests of the diocese other than Bishop Finn whose legal interests may not be identical with those of the diocese and who is the man, after all, who brought this mess on the diocese by failing to pick up the phone and call the cops.
