Should he stay or should he go?

Should he stay or should he go?

In response to a web site set up to ask Dallas’ bishop to resign, supporters of the bishop have set up a site urging him to stay.

I’d give the pro-Bishop Grahmann site a little more credit if it hadn’t been set up by the bishop’s spokesman, Bronson Havard, the editor of the diocesan newspaper who has given up all pretense of objective journalism to protect his boss.

  • Again, Dom…your link to the Dallas paper doesn’t work unless you want to go through all sorts of registration processes. On the other hand, if you go to the “Concerned Catholics” website (with its direct link to VOTF) you’ll have no problem accessing all sorts of information about what a bad guy Bishop Grahmann is.

    I don’t know beans about Bishop Grahmann or Dallas. But I do think that slugging this out on the web is not in the Bishop’s interests. (Even though I personally liked the web-site very much and don’t give a rap who set it up.)

    The point is, the “Concerned” people in Dallas (who, and I’m sorry to keep hammering on this, seem to be a VOTF spin-off, given their link) have everything going for them in this arena. A web-driven organization doesn’t have to prove anything, as we’ve certainly seen. They’ve already got the Dallas media on their “side” and, apparently, that’s all that matters.

    Could be that I’m just being contrary, but a brief look at the “Concerned” web-site almost automatically makes me sympathetic toward the Bishop of Dallas. I hear “lay voices” and I see “concerned Catholics”…and I smell a rat.

    Which is pretty sad, but there you are.

  • Kelly,

    Almost every newspaper web site now requires at least a free registration. I provide the link for information purposes, since it would unethical to re-print the whole thing on my site and I don’t want to take up space summarizing it completely.

    As for the Concerned Catholics group, that one of the four links on their site is VOTF is puzzling. But then again, another of the four is Catholic World News. Are they trying to be balanced by linking to “all sides”? It’s more than VOTF does on its site.

    Plus knowing the background of what’s going on in Dallas with Grahmann, I’m apt to be more sympathetic to this group than otherwise.

  • Hi Dom!

    First…I’m really impressed by the note I get when somebody replies to something I’ve written. It’s so convenient, isn’t it?

    Oh sure, I understand about the registration. My only point is that, if you go to the CC site, you’re zoomed straight to the story.

    Once, VOTF actually DID link to “Our Lady’s Warriors” site, only they did it accidentally…the OLW site has a nice section on Canon Law, so the VOTF webmaster linked the site to that section.  But if you knocked around the site VOTF sent you too, you’d find another section called “dissident groups” with our friends in Newton prominently listed!

    Somebody dimed VOTF about it (it wasn’t me!) and the link was promptly removed.