The story of the former St. Albert’s parish in Weymouth, Mass., has now gone national with a story in the New York Times. The only new information in the article is that Fr. Christopher Coyne, the archdiocesan spokesman, said that he would be sitting down with the protesters this week and that it is definite that the archdiocese will not back down because it would send the wrong message that the way to get what you want is to sue the archdiocese and occupy a church.
Meanwhile, the protesters are apparently getting their legal tactics from divorce lawyers.
But the sit-in may also be part of a legal strategy in a pending civil lawsuit filed by parishioners, similar to tactics used by divorce attorneys.
... Divorce lawyers say they sometimes advise a spouse to remain in the family home because it can make the other spouse uncomfortable and therefore more eager to reach a settlement. Staying in the home can also improve a spouse’s negotiating position, just as parishioners staying in the church building could help them argue that they own the church, said Pasquale DeSantis, a Boston divorce attorney.
So it’s like they’re “divorcing” from the Church. In Catholic circles, we call that schism. The reality is that they don’t have a legal leg to stand on. Hopefully, this will be resolved in the hearing scheduled for tomorrow when the judge throws out the lawsuit. I have a fear though that some Dukakis appointee will take perverse glee in sticking it to the Church for a while and letting this farce proceed.
