You might as well.
As noted before in previous posts, I am forbidden to set foot on the property of my own Catholic parish, which is about five minutes from where I live--and one of the major reasons my wife and I chose the house we live in was because of its proximity to a Catholic Church.
No, I have the fun job of driving every weekend to a church anywhere from 45 minutes to an hour away, where I am not a member of the parish (or sometimes the diocese), and after having my four daughters cooped up in a van for that time, I get them out, take them to Mass, where, hopefully, they won't fidget too much and then take them for the same exciting drive back. Daily Mass has become an impossibility. And these "foreign" parishes often offer Mass at, shall we say, "inconvenient" times. But I understand the importance of keeping me out of my own parish--after all, I'm "dangerous". Decent, respectable Catholics with bigger checkbooks need to know they can attend Mass without the unpleasant task of seeing me or my family.
Bishop Boland understands the necessity of protecting these first-rate Catholics from "that element" (people like me) and was most helpful to those who wanted me out by changing the entire nature of my restraining order to a private property issue simply by having his attorney pen a letter warning me not to set foot on the grounds of St. John the Evangelist Church (click on the image below to see).
There are a few inconsistencies in this private property rationale that trouble me. Among them:
• The letter from Bishop Boland's attorney says "...in view of the fact that Mr. Kumpel wishes to continue his litigation against..."
MY litigation? Against...?
You see, I never "litigated" against anyone. I WAS TAKEN TO COURT, SUED AND PLACED UNDER A RESTRAINING ORDER. If standing up for my rights as a U.S. citizen, journalist and Catholic by not laying down and surrendering my rights constitutes "litigating against" someone, then anyone in America would be guilty of "litigating against someone" if they dared to respond to and fight back against frivolous, meritless restraining orders.
(I would also add that I have made three separate attempts to resolve this and drop my appeal. Each attempt has been rejected.)
• Who does the Church belong to? The people of God or the bishop?
This was certainly shoved down my throat as I was cross-examined at my hearing. I was repeatedly asked whose property St. John the Evangelist Church was. When I asserted it belonged to the people of God, a deed indicating the bishop's ownership was proudly waved at me in apparent contradiction.
Of course there HAS to be a name on the property of all Catholic Churches. Bishops are usually a "corporation sole", so as to allow their successors legal continuity--which is also why bishops are seldom fired (they can actully take the property from the Church as their own and start their own schism if they defy the pope). But after 12 years in Catholic school, it was my understanding that the bishops were custodians or stewards of the Church's property, taking care of it to insure its accessibility to the people of God for future generations. Maybe Bishop Boland is trying to tell me that I don't qualify as one of the people of God?
• If the Church does indeed belong strictly to the bishop,
Why does the bishop keep asking US to pay its expenses?
How much out of pocket money does the average bishop pay toward a parish?
If the parish isn't making overhead, do bishops take night jobs to help meet expenses?
Finally, I was asked a very strange question at my hearing. I was asked if I had asked for permission to come on Church property.
The day that any Catholic has to ask for that permission is indeed a sad one.
Then again, I'm not just any Catholic. I'm "dangerous".
Click on American Catholic to get their take on this problem.
(it's item #3)
9 comments:
Robert, make no mistake I do think you're being railroaded, and you have my sympathy; but as some one who myself lives 5 minutes away from a parish, yet chooses voluntarily to drive my family of 6 to a parish 35 minutes away because I think the quality of the parish is better, I'm not sure I understand WHY you fight. What I know and have heard of St John's in Valdosta, it's not the most orthodox of parishes...so why not go somewhere else?
My decision to do so can be a major inconvenience, especially during say Easter Weekend when my 35 minute trip is made, on multiple consecutive days, but even when gas was $4 a gallon, a decently said Mass was just too important. I don't know the Priests at St John's, but if they're party to these games I can't imagine their masses being too Orthodox.
I guess it comes down to being deprived of your right to choose.
I'll repeat my explanation from a previous comment post:
One of the reasons my wife and I moved here and chose the house that we bought was because of its proximity to St. John the Evangelist Church. One of the key requirements of any house we would buy was that it had to have close proximity to a Catholic Church. We had a long-standing policy of taking our kids to daily Mass and we always lived close to a Church. (Personally, I think its important for ALL Catholics to live near their churches, since you never know when you will need a priest, especially for the Last Sacraments). But the point is that living as Catholics is not a secondary consideration for us—it is primary. If we had not been able to buy a house near a Catholic church, that would have been a deal-breaker.
The drive time you quote for the church in Adel (St. Margaret Mary) and Lakeland (Queen of Peace) are suspicious. Perhaps they are 18 to 28 minutes if you break every speed law on the way, but in my experience, both take at least 40 minutes. Couple that with loading a van with four young ladies (aged 1.5, 3, 6 & 11) and it’s a logistical nightmare. We HAVE tried attending Mass at these parishes and there are seldom any families with children present, certainly none with four (either the triumph of the contraceptive mentality or just old age). The vast majority of Catholics in those rural areas are older people with grown children. Maybe you are blessed with docile, well-behaved children. I love my kids, but they are just like I was at their age: active, rowdy and noisy. I made good progress with my older two in the behavior department when we went to daily (or at least more than just Sunday) Mass. That has all been lost on the second oldest and never even started with the younger two. The churches in Adel and Lakeland have no cry rooms. In fact, we attended “Midnight” (10 pm) Mass at Queen of Peace in Lakeland last Christmas and I spent most of that service outside with my two youngest kids who were fidgeting and making noise (and in churches that small—noise and fidgeting are MUCH more noticeable and annoying to others).
We want our children to have Catholic friends. In a Protestant-dominated culture, it’s almost impossible for them to meet other Catholic kids without the conduit of parish life.
You may argue that SJE has no cry room and you are correct, However, its spacious vestibule has become the default cry room and parents with their children can hear what’s going on in the church even when in the vestibule thanks to the PA System. The nearest Catholic Churches with cry rooms are in Thomasville Georgia and Live Oak Florida—both at least an hour away—that is if you drive observing legal speed limits.
I would like for my oldest daughter to be confirmed. These smaller parishes have no Confirmation Classes. Can you imagine the nightmare of driving one hour each way and waiting out the classes in between with three other smaller children to supervise simultaneously? What about preparation for Confession and Holy Communion for my younger ones? Yes, I approach and train for all of these sacraments by way of home schooling, but, as with most dioceses, my children still have to “jump through the hoop” of going through an officially sanctioned parish program before they will be admitted to these sacraments.
Drive time is a problem for other reasons as well. Is it reasonable to ask kids to sit in a car for one hour, get out, quietly go into a church and sit for another hour, then face another hour of driving to get home? This is further exacerbated that most of these other churches don’t exactly have a convenient, full schedule of Masses.
The lack of a full schedule of Masses and driving proximity becomes even more of a barrier because, for medical reasons, most of the time my wife cannot be more than 15 minutes away from Valdosta.
Did I mention the expense? Fortunately, fuel prices are not as bad now as they were, but I am not so foolish as to expect that to last. We have spent a fortune on gasoline alone.
Finally, it is our Constitutional Right to freely practice our religious faith unimpeded. This is a clear impediment to our freedom of worship and this hardship could all be solved with a stroke of the pen by Bishop Boland. I want to believe the best about the good bishop, but there seems to be no other explanation for his obstinate refusal to permit me to attend Mass other than a personal grudge. I really hope and pray that I am wrong, but it’s sure hard to discern any other possible explanation.
Call me naïve, but I do not honestly believe that anyone would harm me and certainly not my family. Oh yes, there are a few hardened, hateful people who out of some misguided notion of “love” and “loyalty” hate me intensely, but THEY are responsible for their hatred—I didn’t put that in their hearts. I firmly believe that most of SJE’s parishioners are good people who would not harm anyone. If they want to glare at me, that’s their problem. If they are stupid enough to actually attack me, they can deal with the law. I would feel far more concern for the safety of my family if I was to take them to Mass in East Los Angeles.
I don’t believe anyone is going to harm me at the parish any more than the few who have turned on me believe that I would hurt them. That is their false excuse to hold whatever grudge they carry and keep all the nonsense about me spinning in their rumor mill. I have never harmed anyone--and that is by the admission under oath of everyone who testified against me. I have never threatened anyone. If I was the “dangerous nut case” that they have tried to portray me as, I could have hurt the people who are allegedly so afraid of me a long time ago. Nothing of the sort ever happened. If I was the “dangerous whack job” that these few people wish to believe that I am, I would have violated my restraining order by now. I haven’t.
Another problem with driving that distance, as you point out, is the kids . I mean, we lived 1 hour from both a TLM and a Maronite liturgy in Fredericksburg. In theory, that's not much of a big deal, esp. by northern VA driving standards. But getting up extra early on Sunday with young kids to get there in time for a 10 AM Mass, and having the kids fall asleep on the way, so they were well rested and very wired by the time we got to Mass. . . .
The primary issue for me is that young children who are being raised Catholic should not be giving a reason to grow up hating the faith.
From Matthew 16:8 - but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.
From Luke 17:2 - It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea, than that he would cause one of these little ones to stumble.
From Mark 9:42 - Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe to stumble, it would be better for him if, with a heavy millstone hung around his neck, he had been cast into the sea.
Is the bishop claiming the church as a non-profit on his taxes?
Is he following federal guidelines for non-profits (no discrimation)?
I find it interesting since I heard another man who attends saying the church belongs to his family, that they built it for Valdosta.
I guess Bishop Boland wanted the television screens to make his appeal so HE would not be stuck with all the mortgage? Are the utilities in his name also? It must be a great burden on his personal 'budget' to have the income going down by those who are withholding their money due to this situation. (I personally know of several who had stopped giving here and are giving elsewhere.)
I too was raised with the belief that the church belonged to the people - I'm in shock! I thought I was going to God's house. My children will be homeschooling or going to public school next year instead of St. Johns.
Is it the Bishop who is paying to continue on this lawsuit against you? Or is the money coming out of the offering plate of the church?
Hard to say. The attorney who initially represented the two plaintiffs against me is the parish council's president. The bishop's attorney has only written the letter refusing me entry to Mass at SJE and warning me not to contact Bishop Boland any more. Are they doing this pro-bono or for pay? I have no idea. If they are getting paid, who is paying the bill? Well, who is it that pays the salaries of priests and bishops? I'll give you three guesses and the first two don't count.
Are you allowed to give the name of the attorney or is that also 'censored'?
Every attorney involved has his or her name on the photo of the letter above. All you have to do is enlarge it.
Post a Comment