My husband, a devout catholic, refuses to give to the Bishop's Appeal this year and I don't know what to do. He is angry over the scandal and the fact that it has never been explained where the billions of dollars spent on law suits comes from. He said he will give directly to one of his favorite catholic charities, but not to the Bishops.

We have always given generously to the Bishop's Appeal and now, I am afraid, I will have to give without telling my husband. I have never lied to him before and don't feel right about this.

Does anyone have any suggestions for me?

-- Mary Lu (marylu (mlc327@juno.com),), April 26, 2002

Answers

Don't give to them as long as they are willing to conceal the actions of child-molesters within their ranks. Only turning over serial, predatory, molesters is not good enough. Any offender needs to be dismissed and turned over to the authorities even if it is only a one time offense.

-- Joel Hinckley (hinckley.js@mellon.com), April 26, 2002.

A Bishop's appeal benefits the Church. It doesn't benefit a person. The ones your husband should excoriate are individuals; whether the bishop himself, or a perverted priest.

If the money is more important than her husband's self-respect, Hinckley, and if you are without sin; yes. Keep your money. Nobody has ever bought God's grace.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 26, 2002.

Joel

You sir, are the real fool to judge the situation and where the money goes. For your information the money HAS to go to charity period. If one cent goes to the victims the Church would be liable to the letter of the LAW. It is unlawfull to disperse money to groups that are part of the original intent. It is that simple. You are passing out bad advice.

Marylou

My advice (it is mine only) is to not put pressure on yourself by going behind your husband in donating. It would be better to jog his conscience to have him realize he made a serious judgement. I am not advocating an argument here, but to let GOD take care of it. Everything will even out with healing and patience.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 26, 2002.

Why can you not give and tell your husband you are doing so? You are both individuals and although married may not always see the same picture or make the same choices.

Can't you do with your money what you wish? Although I realize that often their is "our money"..within the marriage, there should healthily also be "my" money and "your" money. Why can't you make the donation in your name alone even if the donation may not be as large as when it was given as a couple?

Although my husband and I are usually on the same wave length concerning politics and religion, I often make donations to groups without checking with him . He respects my individuality and the choices that I make and I his. It seems the problem need not be whether to deceive or not deceive but the ability to be one's own person and the autonomy that goes with such.

-- Joan (godessss@mindspring.com), April 26, 2002.

Money has nothing to do with the problem or the solution. Long after this terrible problem is solved the Catholic Church will be stronger

BUT

I am very troubled by church using SERIAL and Notorious, as their focus...as if it is only a notorious problem if the press and public becomes aware of problem...

1 proven time and an priest should be banned from all contact with kids, and that is whether then child is 8, 10 and ever 16, 17...

-- Michael (NYCconsulting2@aol.com), April 26, 2002.

You can't even find out where money goes in your own parish, let alone the diocese. My advice is to either give locally (where you have a better chance of seeing where the money goes), or instead of money, give time and talent instead.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 26, 2002.

Joan

You would rather cause a divorce would youu you silly baby killer. Your advice and comments are pure rubbish in here, get lost you overgrown "BOIL". You are about as numb as anyone I have ever seen. You are a feminist and a pain. Your ideals are not what I call "Catholic" or Christian for that matter. BEAT IT.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 26, 2002.

GT

Are you advocating that we allow those who desperately need help to starve and whatever else that the Catholic Charities provides in services. Please don't be one of the many fools in this hold the money game. There are real people out there with needs. It is unlawful for the Church to use Charity Money for lawsuits and other problems of similar nature. Where is the so-called common sense we as Catholics have is going. Into the toilet?????

WAKE UP.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 26, 2002.

Is there a specific charity in your diocese that benefits from the appeal, such as a soup kitchen, that you can earmark your check for. We do this...make it out to the soup kitchen. Yes, maybe this is a technicality and frees up money to go to other areas you might not agree with. But it's making a statement that you want your money used for that purpose only.

-- Christina (introibo2000@yahoo.com), April 26, 2002.

No Fred, not at all. People can volunteer in their local soup kitchens, work to counsel mothers to go the adoption instead of the abortion route, etc. And isn't Catholic Charities separate from the Bishop's appeal? And I know that one of the collections that gets a good response usually is the Retirement Fund for Religious.

Money is not the answer to everything, people can give of their time, too.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 26, 2002.

Why is everyone here pussy-footing around the question Mary Lu asked?

Her husband feels he is entitled to punish the Church, by withholding a contribution. A Catholic who won't pay for bad service! If he gets cold soup in a restaurant, he'll still leave his measly tip, I suppose. But, a Bishop's Appeal? No way! They're all crooks!

If his contribution is given with ''strings attached'' maybe he ought to keep it? Nobody is begging him. It's an appeal to Catholics, in the name of God.

The billions of dollars we get sued for because of a small number of perverts who scandalise their own rleigion; that's not his responsibility. But nobody appealed to him for a billion dollars. Just for anything he cares to contribute.

I'll bet you this is one of those classy guys who tells his kids to beat it when they turn 18. Lol!

God loves a cheerful giver. But he's only cheerful when he receives. What a great Catholic! God will repay him, be sure of it. His wife should have no scruples, BTW-- her heart's in the right place. Except for just one thing:

Mary-- Don't hide it; Give to your Church from whatever you have. Don't rub it in, either. Your left hand isn't supposed to know what your right hand gives. But LET YOUR HUSBAND KNOW! Make him see what class is; under his own nose.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 26, 2002.

Gene

You win. But Joan still loses.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 26, 2002.

If I get bad waitperson service at a restaurant, I don't leave a tip (I hardly ever go to restaurants per se, the food doesn't taste any better whether someone brings it to you or you pick it up at the counter), and if there is something amiss with the food, I send it back. In both cases I do tell the management what was wrong, so they can correct the problem.

I don't know anyone who gives to every single church collection, by the way, we all make choices--everything from the regular collection to building fund collections to the new roof collection, to the school collection to the CCD collection, etc. And don't forget the Diocese takes its 10%, not to mention the Stewardship "assessment".

I don't know if you can legally "earmark" contributions anymore, in any event. At least giving time you know know where it's going.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 26, 2002.

GT,

Along the same logic, would you recommend that we all stop purchasing medical insurance? If you pay for medical insurance, you'll find that they have been constantly raising rates to cover trial lawyers who sue medical professionals for malpractice.

If you spent a day at the Government Accounting Office (GAO), I have no doubt that you would either stop paying taxes or renounce your citizenship.

I think we already discussed this topic. Payoffs to trial lawyers will probably come from insurance policies, not collections. The victims are not the primary beneficiaries of compensation from a successful lawsuit, the lawyers are. Guilty pedophiles aren't being prosecuted (they have no money), the Church is.

You and Mary Lu's husband should realize that you either want to support the mission of the Church or you don't. If a person decides to stop contributing, what does this mean--is the Church that Jesus established now not important for spreading the Gospel? A simple consideration of this position shows that a person may just want to leave the rock-solid foundation of the Catholic Church, but is too afraid to admit it.

Using a phrase I'm not a big advocate of, "WWJD"? Would Jesus say, "Hey, with these lawsuits because of a few bad apples, I want you to abandon your financial contribution to supporting my Church." Recall that just after one of the apostles helped betray Jesus to death (the worst sin of any follower of Jesus), the Acts of the Apostles speaks of new converts selling all that they have to follow Jesus. The contrast should embarrass anyone considering such a action against the Church. Something tells me that most who would consider such a move are not too interested in the Bible or their faith in Jesus...that's just my opinion, though. I'm curious, if one's loyalty to the Church is so easily shaken by a lawsuit, how would that person respond if his/her life (or the life of a family) were threatened. Would that be cause to "lay low" and reject the Church (as St. Peter did three times) until things got "better"?

Pray for faith,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 26, 2002.

You may ''punish'' a poor waiter. But our Church isn't supposed to wait on us; she isn't our employee. She is the Mother of all the faithful, in the world.

Do you feel you may ''punish'' the Mother, GT? Because your money isn't used in a particular way? I can see letting your voice be heard. But to keep that old money in your pocket-- why? You'll die one day; and someone else will take it. Lawyers, probably; or the government. Those who never gave you a thing. The Church may be infested with idiots these days. But would we punish her for the actions of this handful? I won't. I'll look for better days to come. Maybe I'm stupid.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 26, 2002.

Thank all of you for your comments to my question.

I have decided to give on my own, however, I will not give as much as I usually do. And, I will tell my husand about it. I have never lied to him before and I certainly am not going to lie to him now.

Eugene, I do not appreciate the nasty things you said about my husband. He is involved in the church, does give his time and has done so for many years. He does have a right to be angry about what has been going on. We are the parents of 5 children and can't imagine how we would feel had that happened to one of ours.

He has his favorite charities and he will give to them.

Eugene, you praise yourself on being a good Catholic, yet, I see that you say some very unkind things to people on this board, people who do not agree with your way of thinking.

Perhaps you know where the money comes from that continues to pay for the billions of dollars in law suits for sexual molestation? Perhaps if someone has an answer to that question, my husband may feel differently about giving. I am sure the church will survive this year without my husband's contribution. My church has already gone beyond its goal.

If it comes to my marriage or the Bishops, I am afraid that my husband comes first, not the Bishops or cardinals who are responsible for this. I do think you owe me an apology, Eugene.

After all, people are entitled to feel how they feel and lots of very devoted catholics feel the same way that my husband does. It does not make him a good man to take a stand on something he believes in.

Dorothy Day, a saint, stood up to the hierarchy of the church many times - stood up to them for what she believed in. They did not see eye to eye on many things, but she did what the good Lord told her to, not the Bishops or the Cardinals.

You do not know what my husband does for people, or for his church, Eugene, so please do not disrespect him or me the way you have.

I am sorry I asked the question. Eventually, I would have figured out the right thing to do myself, but it is nice to get different opinions.

Eugene, I think you should work on humility. When you go to confession, make sure you tell the priest how you speak to people on these boards. I am very hurt and very disappointed.

Michelle

-- Mary Lu ((marylu (mlc327@juno.com),),), April 26, 2002.

First of all, let me correct someting. I said it does not make my husand a 'good' man, meant to say bad man for taking a stand.

Also, Eugene, I don't think we can compare this situation to tipping or not tipping a waitress who has provided bad service.

Yes, Eugene, you are right, the number of molesting priests is small, but the hierarchy of the church knew about it and let it continue...there is quite a difference here. I cannot believe you are comparing it to service received by a waitress.

Maybe you don't mind being lied to by those who manage your church, but some people do, Eugene and have a right to feel the way they do.And God is not going to punish my husband or anyone else who does not give to the Bishop's Appeal this year - do you know why, Eugene? Because Jesus would want us to defend the children, Eugene, that's why and that may be the only we we can show our support for them and it may be the only way we can tell the Bishops and the Cardinals that we will not reward bad behavior, lies, or corruption and that is what has been going on in our precious church, Eugene, corruption - whether you want to believe that or not. I am giving because I do not want to hurt the good priests, nuns, brothers who do so much.

When the dust settles, maybe my husband will think differently. If not, I do not think his conscience will bother him at all.

It is not his conscience I am concerned about. I am concerned about the conscience of the hierarchy of our church - especially Bishop Law. How does he sleep at night? Only God knows.

Think before you speak, Eugene and stop acting so holier than thou when someone has an opinion that is different from you. A lot of people feel the same way as my husband does and he is not an angry catholic looking to bash the church. This is just something he feels very strongly about and he is not cheap either.

So shut your mouth, Eugene, or think before you speak. A little more kindness from you may be nice for a change. You act like judge and jury on this board. Mary Lu

-- Mary Lu ((marylu (mlc327@juno.com),),), April 26, 2002.

Dear ML--
I was wrong to needle your hubby. If he is the charitable person you say he is, he won't be too shocked or offended. he'll realise where I'm coming from.

You're right about my hasty responses, of course. Until I die, I'll have many faults. That is only one of them. I'm hot under the collar these days, because many people keep dumping on the Catholic Church.

I ought to be calm, but it isn't my nature. I don't confuse anybody; you always know where I stand. You and your husband are opposite my types. You confuse people. You call yourselves faithful to the Church. Yet you lambast her pastors and her bishops. If you'd at least mention in passing, how many decent and holy priests you've met in your lives. Or how much you love good priests; as I suppose you do. Then when Bozoes like myself over-react, you heap scorn on them.OK, I owe you and so many others here an apology. Forgive me-- I'm sorry.

Let me know, Mary-- if there's any other things I should remember to confess to the priest. Or I won't be able to sleep tonight, Ma'am.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 26, 2002.

There are people who prefer to give directly to the homeless person on the street, as opposed to the organizations that are caring for them. Is that wrong? Hardly, you're just choosing to give in another way, that's all. That is the same with the Church--people belong to and help with different groups associated with the Church. Not giving to this one particular collection does not mean that someone has completely lost faith.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 26, 2002.

Eugene,

I look at the same situation but get a different answer than you do. You say we should give to the church but then go on to accuse Mr. Lu of wanting to *keep his money* or *punish* the church.

From my perspective, God doesn't need money, and His church will continue either in Poverty or wealth. That you can depend on, as we have Christ's word that it will not fail. So from a strictly *faith*- based viewpoint, I don't think that money should enter the discussion at all, as if his *faith* in God and the church isn't shaken, his monetary contributions aren't really important IMO.

OTOH, there's a second aspect of the church, that of a very large organization run by people. God never said that *this* part of the church would be error-free, and one wouldn't expect it to, as it is composed of fallible people. So if this part of the church is ***in error*** in how it deals with child molesters, I think Mr. Lu has every right to do what he thinks is the best way to correct it. Not to punish, as that isn't his place, but to correct the problem. An example for this could be the public schools in Philadelphia. They are terrible, and more and more money has been pumped into them over the years (now I think the cost per student is ~$7000) but no improvements have been made in the kids' performance. The school system is obviously NOT doing the right thing to correct the problem, but OTOH within itself has not found the motivation to do so, and now the .gov in Harrisburg is stepping in to address the problem which I think probably will result in increased scores (assuming the teachers' union doesn't get a keep things as they are contract).

While I wouldn't want .gov involved in the church, perhaps Eugene if you don't give the humans in the church reason to change, they won't. If someone who is an ordained Bishop in the church could knowingly let a serial child molester keep abusing kids, what's to magically change his way of thinking now?

So I would vote to put some form of pressure on the human side of the church to *force* change within it. One form of external pressure that was put on the American church was the call to the Vatican. Perhaps it's enough, perhaps more is needed, but in either event, I see nothing wrong with Mr. Lu trying to do his part as a Catholic to better his church, if he thinks that not giving them money will force a change for the better. The cynical side of me says this may actually do some good, too. How could a shepherd of the church allow evil to flourish within the church? To my way of thinking, they must have been putting some other role of theirs before their primary job of caring for their flock. If that is still their state of mind, perhaps that other temporal role will pay attention to a 50% drop in income.

Frank

P.S. Before you disagree with this, remember, I'm NOT saying that Christ's church is in error, I AM saying that some of its members definitely are. You and I and Mr. Lu all have a duty to correct what we can IMO, lest people be turned away from the church.

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), April 26, 2002.

So, Tony, if a kids is 16 or 17 that makes it okay to be 'raped' by a priest??? This is legal in some places, you say? Well this is not 'some place' Tony, this is the U.S.A. where it is not legal and it is immoral. Sounds like you would defend Satan himself if he was a member of the Church - because that is what these priests are - they are members of Satans warriors - sounds like you might be too. I can't believe you said it is okay...what kind of board is this, anyway? You certainly don't sound very Christian to me the way you talk to people. You proud yourselves on being Catholic? Well, you certainly wouldn't convert me.

-- MaryLu (-- marylu (mlc327@juno.com), April 26, 2002.

MaryLu,

You wrote to Tony:

"I can't believe you said it is okay...what kind of board is this, anyway? You certainly don't sound very Christian to me the way you talk to people. You proud yourselves on being Catholic? Well, you certainly wouldn't convert me. " Mary Lu, Please reconsider your position. Here are some facts:

1) Tony has a few loose bolts in his head.

2) Tony has admitted that he is not Catholic

3) Tony has admitted that he is not Christian.

4) Tony's posts don't seem to make sense to anyone but himself.

He also believes that Democracy is evil and that the government should only provide a national defense. Most of his posts have nothing to do with Catholicism, and he regularly insults Catholicism.

You asked what kind of board this is. This is a public board for discussing topics related to Catholicism. That does not mean that non-Catholics aren't actively participating. We have a diverse set of voices here, and many people are non-Catholic, non-Christian, or non-theistic.

Please keep this in mind. You and your husband are in my prayers. Please remember me in yours.

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 26, 2002.

Please, Mary Lu:
Whatever you feel about me, don't go judging this forum on the words of Tony. --He has a screw loose! (Sorry, Tony.)

If you think we have any common ground with him, think again. No, there's no one in our forum who will ever condone a sinning priest. Never! I have no sympathy with one of these perverts.

I would not even condone one who secretly went to a prostitute, or who stole the Church's money. All these are grave sins; BUT-- the sin of pederasty or pedophilia is not just a mortal sin. It's a VILE and FILTHY mortal sin. So, don't take the ramblings of Tony as an indicator of our Catholic forum.

I'm slowly beginning to arrive at a different perspective. I think about it a lot; and soon I hope to contribute a new thread. Just give me about 12-24 hours. This is a very deep subject for me. For everybody, I hope.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 27, 2002.

I'm okay with you Eugene. You just get on my nerves when you get so fresh and defensive about the church as if someone with a different view from yours isn't a good catholic, or looked at like they are catholic bashing. I love my church, Eugene, and so does my husband. He is probably a better Catholic than me - he doesn't even miss mass when he is sick!! You have to work at trying to understand that this situation right now is a very emotional issue for some people. It does not mean that we are not good catholics. We are not attacking our faith, our religion, or our church. We are hurt, Eugene, very hurt that we have corruption in the hierarchy and have been lied to. Enough on that subject, really. It is getting tiresome now.

But, I will say one thing. One expects this kind of behavior in our government, we just do not expect it in our church. We have all been through a lot since 9/11/01, our country is at war, what is going on in the Middle East, anxiety every where, anger everywhere - there is so much 'evil' going on in the world, Eugene - I feel Satan's eerie presence everywhere. The one place I could always go to for comfort was my church (I still can) but there is a stain on our church now and I did not cause that, nor did you, nor did the victims, nor did the good priests.....our spiritual leaders did, Eugene....

So, bear with us. We get angry to and we get hurt and sometimes we have to decide not to 'reward bad behavior' because then we enable people to continue to behave badly because they know we will always be there to pick up the pieces, Eugene, and many people just do not want to do that this time. This did not happen overnight and it is not going to be fixed overnight.

There are many charities - St. Vincent DePaul, Mother Teresa's Sisters of the Poor, St. Francis of Assisi Breadline (my favorite), the homeless, S.N.A.P. (Survivors of Abuse by priests), many organizations need money - organizations where people do not live in fancy homes (like the cardinals), do not drive around in very fancy cars, do not take trips all over the world....for now, maybe people are going to give elsewhere - not forever, but for now, Eugene, for now...and then there is always the pastor himself - he could use the money to do whatever he wants with it.....oh, the Retirement for the Religious...

Have a nice weekend, Eugene, God Bless and let us continue to pray for all - the church, the world, the President, and our enemies too... Mary Lu :)

-- MaryLu (mlc327@juno.com), April 27, 2002.

Mary Lu,

You wrote:

"many organizations need money - organizations where people do not live in fancy homes (like the cardinals), do not drive around in very fancy cars, do not take trips all over the world...."

As you send roughly a third of your income to the Federal Government, I wonder what you think of the way that our governmental officials live:

1) Our president?

2) Out Governors?

3) Our ambassadors?

I'll also remind you that the US has a large portion of its population in poverty without health care. And the US government is trillions of dollars in debt. Something like:

$5,000,000,000,000. (est)

Have you ever been to a US ambassador's official residence? OK, so can we begin selling off these embassies? Can we sell the White House? Can we sell the governers' mansions to pay off the government's debt?

Just because the papers blast the Catholic Church day in and day out, should this allow us to forget that the rest of the world is no paradise either?

Frankly, though I'm angry that a lot of innocent priests and bishops being treated with prejudice just because they wear a collar to work, I'm glad that the Church will remove its few bad apples.

In Christ,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 27, 2002.

Tony,

Please see the thread with your name in it before posting.

Moderator

-- Moderator ("Catholic_moderator@hotmail.com"), April 27, 2002.

Tony--

Change your intelligence into nickels and dimes and you might have bubble gum money. I'll bet you like bubble gum. You probably have it in your hair every morning! Lol!

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 27, 2002.

Sorry, I get so enrage when moralist tells me I'm wroung, according tour U.S.A state laws in most states, a person of the age of 17 or 16 are able to consent tour sexial activitys with adults 18 years and over. Sometimes it goes as low as 14 in some states, however these law change yearly, so one would have to keep up with it. Kind of odd with new mexico thoe, oh well, who an I to question the law, anyways I'm not Catholic I'm a humanist, so satan to me is only my worst thought imaginable or in certain issues.

-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), April 27, 2002.

By the way, you can find the chart here http://www.ageofconsent.com/ageofconsent.htm

-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), April 27, 2002.

Government debt is mostly a lie, it serves the need of greed and lie of the econamy for what it is worth, the World Bank are the ones that determan if a country is rich or poor, they do this by raising and lowering the value and rage of the all mighty doller, they can, transfer these around tour countrys where naturial resource is availble and assure the lowest price for the rich consumers, while the poor end up working there life away and starve in poverty. It is the government that gets most of the money, it cause crime and polution and low rage slavery as well. The WTO has got to GO.

-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), April 27, 2002.

Just found this website. I'm a priest - pastor of a small rural parish. Last weekend, I began the pitch for the diocesan appeal. We haven't had any lawsuits here. People are still holding back, because of the national problem. I'm frustrated with decisions bishops have made, too. I assure you, if the collection drops, if the appeal is not met, bishops will become more responsive, more accountable to the laity. If your husband chooses to withhold his contribution to the diocesan appeal, I would give him the benefit of the doubt that he does so on the basis of some principle of calling the diocese/hierarchy to account. I would also hope that he gives to some other charity. I am frequently reminded that the parishioners vote with their contributions. While that has never deterred me from preaching the truth of the Gospel or administering the parish in difficult times, it has always reminded me of my accountability to the laity as well as to the chancery. Perhaps the withholding of contributions to the diocesan appeal may encourage the chancery to much-needed reforms. I see this as a legitimate, i.e., non-sinful means of protest. There are other means to fulfill the obligation to support the Church, one of the six precepts of the Church. Peace, Fr. Brian Stanley

-- Fr. Brian Stanley (frstanley@cbpu.com), April 27, 2002.

Dear Father;--I haven't said that withholding help to the bishops is a sin. It can result from a sinful regard for money however. There are some Christians for whom money is all-important. But, I agree that under this particular condition, unrest among the laity, it isn't a sin.

It's mean-spirited and cold; toward our holy mother Church. I would not have that on my own conscience.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 27, 2002.

Noticed some talk about diocesan "bishop's appeals" being all or mainly for "charity." Anyone who thinks that's true ought to ask chancery for a detailed accounting of how the money is used. They will provide categories and percentages.

Some "bishop's appeals" give large amounts to Catholic Charities (homeless shelter, soup kitchen, unwed moms, elderly), education of seminarians (if they have any), subsidizing poor parishes, chancery's administrative costs, "donor development" (paying for the appeals), and purchase of land for new parishes (if diocese growing instead of shrinking).

-- (@@@.@), April 27, 2002.

Speaking of which, a person I knew who worked for the church for many years said that "Stewardship" (is that the old name for The Bishop's Appeal or a different one--I keep thinking they're the same because of the pledge aspect) was NEVER meant to be a permanent fundraiser--it was originally designed to run 5 years to get the dioceses out of debt, until someone decided it was a cash cow and continued it.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 29, 2002.