Comment

I find myself in a strange position when it comes to the Church/state issue when it comes to defamation cases. Theoretically, I want the state to stay out of Church affairs, especially when it comes to ministry. But I am seeing more and more situations where Church leadership is emboldened to say whatever they want about priests and religious regardless of objective truth. The priest or religious can't say anything in response contradicting the bishop even if what the priest or religious says is true; doing so is perceived in canon law as causing division and a canonical offense, and the bishop is more "credible" because, well, he is a bishop. If the person defamed files a civil suit, the courts throw it out due to "lack of jurisdiction." So, the defamed party has no recourse. Well, I guess that's not technically correct. He/she has recourse in canon law for defamation in theory, but good luck pursuing it. By the time it makes its way through the canonical process and its appeals, the defamed person is ruined from a practical perspective. And there is no consequence for the bishop.

This is a situation where we either need to get our own act together or we need the civil authorities to step in. Isn't the Church supposedly about JUSTICE?