Roeser, fired upon, prepares for war

Tom Roeser stays by his report that the Rockford diocese was pulling its candidates out of Mundelein seminary at the time he published it:

In checking with responsible authorities I am confident that the situation which I reported was accurate at publication. Since authorities in Rockford and Chicago deny this existed, fair enough-their denial is summarized on this website and reproduced in full on the Catholic Citizens website.  [Can’t find it]

This is hardball.  He got a letter from the Chicago archdiocese’s Office of Legal Services dated 7/29, the day he posted the offending report.  (He didn’t get the letter until 8/4: it was sent to an old address.)  This blogger has been distinctly asleep at the switch, not having seen this 8/4 report until now.

[The letter] is from one John C. O’Malley who says I “personally published defamatory statements” on July 29, 2008 saying that the Rockford diocese “has decided it is finished with Mundelein.” A memorandum from the director of communication of the Rockford diocese to the director of communications for the archdiocese of Chicago deny [sic] this as does the bishop of Rockford. “Given that you personally published these defamatory statements,” writes O’Malley, “I am compelled to bring their falsity to your attention.”

Ominous. 

Roeser is to:

1. “Remove the defamatory statements from [his] blog entry.”

2. Print a retraction of the false statements contained therein”

3. “Refrain from making any further untrue statement regarding the relationship between St. Mary of the Lake Seminary, Mundelein and the diocese of Rockford.”

“And,” continues the lawyer,

4. “I must demand that you distribute your reaction to” websites which republished them.

Roeser has hired counsel and quotes his “favorite colonial hero,”

William Prescott of Pepperell, Middlesex county, Massachusetts, a colonel in the Revolutionary War who commanded Americans at Bunker Hill.  . . . .  “Men, don’t fire unless fired upon. If they mean to have war, let it begin here”

to make his intentions clear.

The lawyer asks Roeser to inform the archdiocese of “seminarians propositioning any individual . . . so that the allegation can be fully investigated.”

To which Roeser:

Rest assured, sir not only the archdiocese will be notified but more importantly those empowered to take swifter action than the archdiocese has exerted previously.

There’s more, including reference to the bishop of Rockford’s denying the Mundelein pull-out and saying no “official source” was contacted and if one were contacted “by any reliable media source,” he and his staff would “set the record straight.”

Hmmm.

If there is still room for comment in this account of Roeser v. Archdiocese, let it be this: The day the archdiocese enters open court to sift through these matters will be a frosty, frosty day in the nether regions. 

This institution just spent $12 million to stay out of court — among other, nobler reasons, to be sure.  Would it now go to court merely to punish a blogger?

Note: Not only are the Rockford and Chicago denials not at the Catholic Citizens site.  Neither is Roeser’s “A Special Note to Readers: The Article Still Stands,” quoted above, easily found at www.tomroeser.com.   A little googling led to Dad 29: Wisconsin native, conservative critic of everything, which had the link.

Moments later: Oops, my first inkling of this was at Voice from the Desert: Supporting survivors of clergy sexual abuse and examining the cover up, causes, and effects of that abuse, to which I tip the hat.