Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/08/30/duplicitous-catholic-bishop-bu.html
…
UPDATE: After backlash from both the public and the parishoners the Bishop has announced he won’t move in to that house.
The statement indicated that the Diocese would put the home up for sale quickly. If there is any profit to the Diocese from the sale of the home, McGrath said those funds would be donated to Charities Housing, a division of Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County.
She said the diocese was “following the policy set forth by the United States Council of Catholic Bishops” in purchasing the home.
They were just following orders.
And how come these paragons of virtue seem so poorly acquainted with it? They couldn’t work out for themselves how the rabble would view this?
Here in Windsor, Ontario we have the oldest Catholic parish in Canada west of Montreal. A few years ago the bishop (based out of a city 2 hours away) decided more or less unilaterally to hire a fundraising company as part of efforts to restore this aging architectural gem. Would not share the terms of the agreement with anyone. Gave them a more or less unlimited expense account. Terms of agreement could not be published. Here we are years later with no funds raised (fundraising company was charging $20 000 per month + $25 000 expenses per month, more money went out than came in) and the parish is now in a different building. It’s a real mess: https://windsorstar.com/news/local-news/save-assumption-church-effort-mired-by-conflict-report-says
We have another parish in the area, also a beautiful building under restoration, where the priest stole $200 000: https://windsorstar.com/news/local-news/former-tecumseh-pastor-found-guilty-of-stealing-from-his-church
What in the holy hell is going on? Are scumbags drawn to the church or does it just drive people to madness?
I’m glad they finally figured out how incredibly wrong it was but why the heck did anyone involved think a retired priest of any rank needed a 5-bedroom house in the first place? [I’ll leave others to come up with the salacious answers to that question]
No fan of the Catholic church by any means, but a $2.3 million house in California is roughly a $350K home in most typical cities. Still spacious, but hardly the McMansion implied by the pricetag.
It also seems he was going to live there until he died, then the church would sell the house…thus no major waste of money as implied in the article. And he backed out of living there already as others have noted.
Maybe they’ve raised the bar of outrage so much from their raping and pillaging, but I hardly think this episode even warrants a disgruntled grunt, especially considering the priest’s apparent history of championing good causes.
He emphasized how important it was that Catholics "vote their consciences"
But he needed all those bedrooms for his kids.
I see what you did there…
Well said, Seamus. Well said.
Hey - if bilking the congregation works for Evangelicals, then why not try?
This is an excellent example of why local journalism matters.
The Catholic church is the oldest running scam, isn’t it?
This.
It’s true that 5 bedrooms seems a bit excessive for a…confirmed bachelor…but if it were church property to be used for putting up traveling clergy it wouldn’t be at all unreasonable.
I get pissed off when people try to pull the sackcloth and ashes thing for liberal politicians, I’m not going to do it to anyone else.
I kind of agree. Also, isn’t that an area where a very modest house costs a king’s ransom? Maybe they should exile their retired clergy to the desert. Surely they aren’t better than St Jerome?
I imagine the oldest running scam would be patriarchy itself, but point taken.
Basically. My wife’s pokey childhood homes in the area are all now multi-million dollar properties. Sannoze is a big place, and neighborhoods vary, but that’s a believable modest house price.
There are good grifters on both sides!
USD 2.3 million? What a noob.