AG's Office Asks to Monitor Priests
paul-finkelman at UTULSA.EDU
Mon Mar 11 15:10:04 PST 2002
when I read about Bishop Law's moving the offending priests from place to place to
avoid the law enforcement and his own flock from finding out about what he had
done, I too checked to see if it was April 1. Alas it was not!
When I read about the $20 million he has spent to buy off those injured by him and
his priests I also checked to see if it was April 1. Again, it was not.
Chapman Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Tulsa College of Law
3120 East 4th Place
Tulsa, OK 74104-3189
e-mail: paul-finkelman at utulsa.edu
Alan Gunn wrote:
> At 09:48 AM 3/11/2002 -0700, Alexander Dushku wrote:
> >The answer to Eugene's question has to be no, and it raises no difficult
> questions. Unconstitutional remedies are ... unconstitutional. The sort
> of continuous, systematic, entanglement--the direct regulation of who shall
> bear the priestly mantle and how he shall be trained and
> supervised--proposed by the AG might well be more devastating to the
> autonomy of churches than anything suggested by government in a century.
> Decades of ministerial exception jurisprudence clearly bars this sort of
> thing, even if a remedy. If the Establishment Clause allows such
> regulation, the very notion of entanglement is dead. How could we possibly
> quibble about state monitors in parochial school math classes and other
> such minutiae if the courts were to uphold the AG's plan for the regulation
> of priests themselves? What next, the Mass. Department of Roman Catholic
> Indeed. When I read Eugene's first message on this, my reaction was to
> glance at the calendar to see whether it was April 1 already.
> Alan Gunn
> Notre Dame Law School
More information about the Religionlaw