MINNESOTA
Canonical Consultation
03/13/2015
Jennifer Haselberger
If the shoe fits, wear it, or so they say, and so I have concluded that the designation of W.D.O.E. (Worst Diocese on Earth) should be formally conferred upon the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis. The tipping point? This week’s announcement to priests of the dismissal of Curtis Wehmeyer from the clerical state.
During the same week in which I began a series of posts describing how there is a witch hunt underway in Saint Paul (more to come on that), with many priests being targeted supposedly as a result of the Kinsale file review and almost all living in fear that they are just one unfounded accusation away from public humiliation and an end to their ministry, the Archdiocese took a novel approach to informing the presbyterate at large of Wehmeyer’s dismissal: it sent them the news release, which included the statement ‘all priests and parishes of the Archdiocese have been notified’.
There was a brief email along with the attachment which read:
Subject: Update – Curtis Wehmeyer
Dear Reverend Fathers and Deacons,
Attached is a statement to be publicly released shortly regarding the dismissal of Curtis Wehmeyer from the clerical state.
Please let me know if you have any questions, and please keep all affected in your prayers.
Thanks!
Anne
Nothing further.
So, what is so bad about this? Well, first, it did not come from the Archbishop, who really should be the one to inform his priests of something as serious as the dismissal of one of their brothers.
More importantly, however, this means of communicating the decision fails to acknowledge how troubling priests find the idea of ex officio dismissal which, as an exception in the legal system of the Church, confers the most serious penalty possible upon a priest or deacon without any formal process. When there is a witch hunt taking place, notice of an ex officio dismissal can be perceived as a validation of the ‘shoot first’ mentality that already has many priests on edge.
For that reason, in announcing such a decision many bishops will take pains to reassure their clergy that such decisions are made rarely, under very limited circumstances, and only when the cleric’s guilt is well established. I think many priests would have found it very helpful to hear, for instance, that it is only in a few instances that canon law permits a priest to be returned to the lay state without a formal trial or administrative process. Given the current climate of fear and intimidation, I think they would have taken comfort in learning that canon law puts great emphasis on the judicial protections that we have come to associate with the right of defense, and that, therefore, the requirement for a judicial or administrative process can only be set aside when the offense of which the cleric is accused falls under the category of a grave delict, as outlined in Sacramentorum Sanctitatis Tutela, and when the cleric’s guilt is well established. Most bishops, I believe, would also have reminded their priests that in Curtis’s case, his guilt was established through his own admission and guilty plea.
Note: This is an Abuse Tracker excerpt. Click the title to view the full text of the original article. If the original article is no longer available, see our News Archive.