15 March 2012

Boguslaw Alert: St. Louis Judge Rules in Favor of St. Stanislaus

STLToday is just reporting.  I will review and post with analysis this afternoon.  Ol' Marek will be tough to live with now. 

3 comments:

StGuyFawkes said...

My bet is that "Fr." Bogus will become the reliable "alternative view" quote for every PD treatment of Catholic affairs.

Call me Screwtape but I will take dark enjoyment watching just how far the B-Team (Boguslaw, Bialczak and Bialczak) will go now that there is nothing to restrain them.

We could be seeing Archbiship Bogus, Bishop William Bialzcak and Bishop Ken Bialczak.

Why not?

St. Guy

YoungCatholicSTL said...

Two things I find interesting fromt the Post's story: (1) It shows Mr. Bozek preparing the bulletin for Sunday and including a picture of Uncle Sam with the words "we won" underneath. Unfortunately, what is lost on Mr. Bozek and most of the people of St. Stan's is that they ultimately lost. Without anytype of hierarchy to be beholden to, Mr. Bozek is free to do/make any changes he desires, and the souls of the faithful will only become more lost from the Church.

(2) The irony of point (1) above doesn't seem to be lost on the Post. The one quote they use from the judge's decision is
"The Archbishop may own the souls of wayward St. Stanislaus parishioners, but the St. Stanislaus Parish Corporation owns its own property." And that's exactly right. What good is all the money if you lose your soul in obtaining it? A sad situation.

Timman - I'd be interested in hearing your opinion on whether they should appeal this (both from a legal and practical standpoint). While I personally think they have a good shot at reversing the judge's decision, I think I personally would drop it here. To continue to fight, you only drive the lost souls further away, and ultimately the Archdiocese begins to take on the role of the money-hungry party. Now is the time to do everything possible to bring any lost souls back they can, and let St. Stan's go.

Jane Chantal said...

For the life of me, I do not understand how it is (supposedly) ok that the St. Stanislaus board went rogue and re-wrote the original bylaws to suit itself. The illegitimacy of that action seems obvious, yet this particular judge seems to have found otherwise. Is there anyone out there who has read the decision and can explain how this happened?