• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Catholic diocese's bankruptcy filing sparks criticism about asset shifting

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
39,580
Reaction score
9,766
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From CBS News

Catholic diocese's bankruptcy filing sparks criticism about asset shifting

New Mexico's largest Catholic diocese has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in recent months on lawyers to fight claims of clergy sex abuse and to prepare for a potentially lengthy battle in U.S. Bankruptcy Court.

The Archdiocese of Santa Fe's petition for reorganization provides a rare look into the finances of a religious organization that for decades has been wrestling with the financial and social consequences of a scandal that rocked churches across the country.

Archbishop John Wester describes the filing as an equitable thing to do as church reserves dwindle. He says compensating the victims is a top priority.

National watchdog groups and attorneys for victims of clergy sex abuse said Tuesday the archdiocese's actions suggest otherwise.

They point to the money spent by the archdiocese on lawyers over the last three months and the tens of millions of dollars in real estate that has been transferred to parishes in recent years, effectively reducing the amount of assets held by the archdiocese.

COMMENT:-

I don't see why everyone is so upset about this, after all "minimizing potential losses" is something that any responsible corporate management does. Just because "The RCC Inc." reduces the assets available to actually satisfy any potential damages (while not admitting that there is any legal grounds for such damages being awarded) that does not, in the least reflect on the deep felt concern for the inconvenience that some rogue elements operating (and fraudulently operating at that) under the purported aegis of "The RCC Inc." (not that the existence of any such rogue elements is admitted] that any victims (not that the existence of any such victims is admitted) may have suffered (not that any such suffering is admitted).

Right?
 
Top Bottom