Monday, September 19, 2016


Posted by Tim

On Phill's show this morning at about 11:25, Mary Lou Garcia-Pereda shared the conversation she had with a priest after Mass this weekend. 

The priest had read part of Hon's letter and then launched into a several minute long diatribe of his own about the closure of schools and churches should Bill 326 be signed into law.

Mary Lou later confronted the priest telling him that he was wrong about the closure of schools and churches, that that was just fear-mongering. The priest replied: 

But that's what the lawyer said."

The priest was referring to a presentation given by two lawyers to the clergy this past Friday. The lawyers do not represent the archdiocese and do not represent Apuron. So why were they invited or permitted to address the clergy on this matter?

Moreover, did those two attorneys actually proffer questionable information with the intent to influence the outcome of this legislation? In fact, given the almost verbatim words of doom and gloom in Hon's letter, did they have a part in composing it?

Hon's letter makes the following claims:
  • the Archdiocese will be exposed to unlimited financial liability
  • Bankruptcy will mean the forced sale of Church properties
  • In other states...the results have been school closures and the cessation of vital services
  • the Bill will...erase the good work of those in the Archdiocese who serve the neediest
But according to this priest, it wasn't Hon who came up with these claims. According to this priest "that's what the lawyer said." 

Hmmmm. Where were these lawyers to advise the clergy BEFORE the bill passed? Why only now did they tell the clergy these things? And who are these lawyers? Or should we say "officious intermeddlers?" And no, the "trained lawyer" was not one of them. 

Recommendations by JungleWatch