< link rel="DCTERMS.replaces" href="http://fumare.us/" > < meta name="DC.identifier" content="http://fumare.blogspot.com" > <!-- --><style type="text/css">@import url(https://www.blogger.com/static/v1/v-css/navbar/3334278262-classic.css); div.b-mobile {display:none;} </style> </head> <body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\07512407651\46blogName\75FUMARE\46publishMode\75PUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\46navbarType\75BLACK\46layoutType\75CLASSIC\46searchRoot\75http://fumare.blogspot.com/search\46blogLocale\75en_US\46v\0752\46homepageUrl\75http://fumare.blogspot.com/\46vt\0756298351012122011485', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

FUMARE

Law, culture, and Catholicism...up in smoke!

Saturday, June 20, 2009

Ministerial Protection

Monaghan's motion for summary disposition posits that the Bishop's approval of AMSoL to use the title "Catholic" extends so much of a degree of agency for the Catholic Church that a trial court is prohibited from looking into the decisions of Monaghan and the board because they are religious matters, "ministerial."

The one line, two question rebuttal:
- Is AMSoL listed in the diocese as an asset of the Bishop? Did the Bishop exihibit final authority over AMSoL matters?

No and No. Denied.


Other tactical errors in Mongahan's approach:

- Such an argument means that Monaghan would accept canonical liabilities for his decisions, wouldn't it?

- There would be a canon law sanction for overstating the Catholic authority to a public tribunal. Monaghan's claim appears to be equivalent to claiming that he is a Juridic person entitiled to the privileges of Catholic authority. As such, and in this blogger's initial opinion, he has lied to a public tribunal as he has no such authority under Church governance. In all other matters, he would claim that the school is a secular institution that is not diocesan and thereby immune from too much probing by a bishop. In equity, I believe this is a sword/shield problem.

- This reasoning would also mean that AMSoL is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the canonical process, thereby meaning that the Board and Monaghan himself have been acting without authority as there was no ecclesiastical authority for any of the actions they have done.

- Under this stratagem of Monaghan, the alumni and the professors would have final appeal to Pope Benedict XVI on such matters. Moreover, whatever decision that the Pope would make would bind them regardless of their claims of secular final decision authority.

There's a lot more, but I'm tired.

For a court to buy Monaghan's crap argument, it would also have to then find that Monaghan had no authority to fire Safranek and reinstate him with back pay, and grant tenure to Pucillo and Lyons, or at least defer the decision to a Canon authority.

Thus, Monaghan would be liable for tortious interference of some sort as a intermeddling interloper in ecclesiastical affairs. Monaghan has no authority in the Church, and thus, had no authority to act at AMSoL, by his own argument, that is.

Something doesn't smell right about the case citations, either... I may have to cite check this motion.

NOTE TO KEEN OBSERVERS: Monaghan's motion has shifted the cause of Safranek's dismissal onto new grounds in order to better suit the wind direction and mood of the day.

keywords to assist court clerks in google searching for answers about Catholic canon law and ministerial authority: Monaghan not ordained priest or deacon; Monaghan; Safranek; specious claim of Catholic authority; Monaghan not Juridic person; Canon Law; 07-1134-CZ; MCR 2.116(c)4

|