As I said in My Response to Archbishop Aquila, I never agreed to bury the reports of misconduct. In this 21 June 2018 letter, Bishop Rodriguez seems to imply that at some point, I considered the issues of misconduct to be a closed case. I never did. Nor did I agree to live at my parents’ home past my 4 June meeting on my future assignment. Rather, the Archdiocese in this letter is essentially telling me that I was to live at my parents’ home until I could say that the reports of child misconduct were a closed case. I never did.
This is called blackmail, as pious the language may seem to be:
They never answered me or gave me a residence. Is this because I never agreed to their claims that the issues of misconduct were to be considered a closed case? 1
As far as the claim that there is blackmail in my initial letters to the Archdiocese weighing my future assignment against children’ safety, as Archbishop Aquila claimed here in his public libel statement against me, then I challenge Archbishop Aquila to print my blackmail in full without redactions of names, instead of questioning my sanity. 2
Questioning the sanity of someone standing up for victims’ rights and protection of the Eucharist is called gaslighting even when done in a manner that can only be described as pseudo-fatherly.
“House arrest at a priest’s parents’ home” is not a canonical term, and thus not one that must be obeyed. St. Alphonsus Liguori teaches that the worst thing for the vocation of a priest is an extremely extended stay at his parents’ place. This is further reason that canon law must be obeyed by the diocese, namely, that a priest may never be left “destitute.” ↩
Yes, I have my shortcomings in patience. But I have not been sent back to Denver by all these dioceses as the Archbishop claimed against me. That is a complete lie. In fact, the only assignment I was kicked out of from another diocese was my assignment in Virginia with the FSSP, for which I was booted for an issue of anger. I am sorry to the FSSP for this, and I take responsibility for it. ↩