CT Blue

The Boston Globe reports that the Bridgeport Roman Catholic Diocese is trying to keep the public from seeing internal documents bearing on the decisions made by the present Cardinal of New York relating to the assignment and re-assignment of child molesting priests:

A Roman Catholic diocese in Connecticut has invoked the First Amendment’s separation of church and state in a request to the US Supreme Court to let it keep clergy sexual abuse documents under seal, a move that appeared to contradict the church’s recent pledges of openness.

Justice Ginsburg, a female and a Jew to boot, turned down the Church’s request, though to this lawyer the church’s argument is so clearly correct that one must suspect some sort of animus on her part. How could anyone disagree with this reasoning:

“Because courts lack a legitimate role under the First Amendment to examine a church’s employment decisions regarding its ministers, the courts similarly lack constitutional authority to require a church to produce and publicly disclose confidential internal documents or testimony that would be germane only to second-guessing those decisions,’’ the diocese wrote in its 33-page court filing.

Not to worry, the Church decided to do some Justice shopping, and has asked good Catholic male (and rumored Opus Dei member) Antonin (the “Fixer”) Scalia to overrule the presumptuous Jewess:

Following the Ginsburg decision, the diocese specifically asked Justice Antonin Scalia to keep the documents under seal until the full high court decides on whether to take up the review.

Personally, I can’t see why they asked Scalia, since he’ll obviously bend over backwards to avoid any appearance that his personal preferences might play a role in his decision making.

The documents in question were produced in connection with a series of lawsuits (23 of them, but who’s counting?) in the course of production and disclosure and motion practice. Some nosey newspapers are asking for copies of the documents, and the lower court judge agreed they should see them. The Connecticut Justices (all but one of whom will surely rot in Hell) barely discuss the First Amendment issue, choosing instead to focus on the purely irrelvant fact that the Church had not asserted a privilege during the litigation itself, and had therefore waived it. (I’ve attached a copy of the Connecticut decision below).

We can only hope this injustice will not stand. It’s self evident that the Church’s decisions about it’s pedophiliac priests are nobody else’s business. Why, in my mind’s eye I can almost see the type of intrusion into matters of religion that might result from this. What havoc to true religion would be caused if documents something like this were to surface?

Memo to: The Right Reverend Bishop Bernard O’Shaugnessy
From: Father Francis Vespucci Don Bosco

As you know, we have to make some personnel decisions in the coming weeks. You have asked for my recommendations and I enclose them herewith.

Father O’Malley, over at Our Lady of the Perpetual Agony, needs reassignment. People are asking questions. As you know, Father O’Malley prefers boys age 4 to 6, so we recommend he be transferred to supervise the Kindergarten at Our Lord of the Barely Beating Heart Church. In the name and to the glory of the Lord Jesus, Amen.

Father Sarducci, at Communist Martyrs High is asking for a transfer. He has been unable to cope with the high rate of pregnancy among the girls at the school, and in fact some of the parents are suggesting that he bears some responsibility in the matter. As you know, we have managed to hold off paternity testing on First Amendment grounds. We are recommending that he take over duties as gym instructor and wrestling coach at the School of the Weeping Virgin Female Academy, a post in which he has expressed a great deal of interest. May God’s work bear fruit through him in his new endeavors.

The Cardinal of Los Angeles has asked us to find a place for Father Scalia, who recently completed his probation in California. Luckily, he had his little troubles (for which he has made a full and sincere Act of Contrition) before the sex offender registration law was passed there. Father Scalia prefers to work with teenage boys, so I am recommending that he work here with me at the Seven Sacred Wounds and the Crown of Thorn Rehablitation Center. As you know, I am also fond of teenagers, and can likely be of assistance in helping the good father learn a little discretion, if you take my meaning. In Jesus name may our work be blessed.

I sincerely hope that these suggestions meet with your favor. May I add that I look forward to receiving some of your favors when next we meet.

It’s fairly obvious that this sort of thing is entitled to constitutional protection. You can see he’s talking about God all the way through. What does it matter that the Church’s argument would essentially give it carte blanche to assign priests to where the pickings are good or the questions are few? We liberals believe that there should be a wall of seperation between Church and State, and so does the Catholic Church, particularly when the wall is between the law and the Church’s money and/or its reputation. It follows that there should be no consequences if the Church enables a little harmless child molestation, since in doing so it is by definition doing God’s work.

Afterword: In all seriousness, the Church’s argument would appear to preclude even criminal investigations into these matters, or at least preclude any requirement that the Church provide any information with respect to such an investigation. If this information is constitutionally privileged in some instances, it is privileged in all.

You can read the Connecticut court’s decision here