What have you read recently? I read the legal document that Fr. James DeOreo filed against the Diocese of Lafayette in Indiana in March 2024. You might ask, “Why?” I have a soft spot for canceled priests. I wholeheartedly believe that there are some good priests, faithful to the Magisterium, who have had their lives negatively and unfairly impacted by someone above.
I reflect on John the Baptist. How and why was he out in the desert? Can we all agree from scripture that he was a pretty good guy? Is it possible he was one of the original canceled priests? I don’t think it’s a stretch. Maybe King Herod told the chief priests and the elders, “Shut this guy up about my new wife, or I’m gonna raise your taxes.” I try to look at things through a historical lens and seek similar motivations to see if things make sense.
Fr. DeOreo’s offense was supposedly causing a young man’s eating disorder. Some of you reading this might be confused, have heard differently, or just plain don’t believe me. You’re free to read the same court document filing that I did [here].
As I read the filing, I try to consider, where is it coming from? Was Fr. DeOreo’s intent to attack a diocese or person in order to discredit them? Or is he looking to score some quick cash? He wouldn’t be the first. In this case, I don’t think it feels like either of these. Could it be that it was filed because someone intentionally tried to destroy his life, his good name, and vocation? It sure seems possible.
The Catholic Priesthood is not like an ordinary job. Most of us can do what we do somewhere else, probably getting a raise in the process. The difference in the Catholic priesthood is that as a diocesan priest, you can’t simply quit and go do the same vocation somewhere else. In my opinion, typical employment rules and laws might not be perfectly applicable to a priest’s “employment” compared to the rest of us.
It was no secret that Fr. DeOreo is conservative, both in his outward appearance and what he says. The bishop of the diocese would not be considered conservative. Evidence for my conclusion is that he’s ensured there is not a single available Traditional Latin Mass anywhere in his diocese. When a parish priest put in kneelers for communion reception, that priest was removed and sent off for re-education for another lame reason. When a priest called out evil, he was pulled from ministry and eventually reassigned to the poorest, most remote parish in the diocese. Another deeply orthodox priest, known for celebrating the Traditional Latin Mass, was assigned to singlehandedly manage six churches, each spread over a large geographic area. Despite his dedication, he was stripped of his ability to celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass. This overwhelming burden eventually led to his burnout, causing him to leave the priesthood. This is all within one diocese … all within four years. As I read and ponder, this sure reads like a textbook canceling. Somehow, I’ve not run across liberal priests being canceled, only conservative, orthodox ones. The liberal priests seem to be allowed to do just about anything. If they do leave the priesthood, it is voluntarily.
What is the purpose of my writing? We need to keep these canceled priests in our prayers. We need to financially support them. We need to pay attention and ensure they are treated fairly. When they aren’t treated fairly, we need to shed sunlight on things, as sunlight is the best disinfectant. It was the chief priests and the elders that condemned Jesus by overwhelming majority. Some would argue our percentage is just as bad right now in the USCCB. Fr. DeOreo is in my prayer, my thoughts, and my actions. May he be in yours as well.
Update on Fr. DeOreo’s Appeal
A Summary of the Appeal Filing by Father DeOreo’s Attorney
By Corpus Christi for Unity and Peace
In late September 2024, Father DeOreo’s attorney filed an appeal contesting the decision of the lower court’s ruling whereby they dismissed Father DeOreo’s case essentially claiming that the Church cannot be sued under the First Amendment. The diocese has filed a response to the appeal on November 27 but it was rejected by the court as deficient and had to be refiled. As of the print of this analysis, that filing was cured. CUP will analyze the response filed by the Diocese of Lafayette and post an update on our website.
Below is a summary of the recent case filing by Fr. DeOreo’s attorney made in October.
Summary of Issues and Case:
Statement of Issues:
The issue is whether the First Amendment, under the Church Autonomy Doctrine or Ministerial Exception, prevents a church employee from seeking damages for a press release issued by the Church that falsely accused him of criminal sexual misconduct. (Commentary by CUP: especially when Bishop Doherty has already testified that Father DeOreo was never canceled for any allegations of sexual misconduct and the diocesan tribunal concluded there was no sexual misconduct before the press release was issued.)
Statement of the Case:
Father DeOreo filed a complaint in March 2024 against the Diocese of Lafayette-in-Indiana and Fr. Theodore Dudzinski (the Vicar General), claiming defamation and fraud. The complaint addresses a statement issued by the Diocese that falsely accused Father DeOreo of inappropriate conduct with a minor. The Diocese moved to dismiss the case under T.R. 12(b)(6) and Anti-SLAPP claims. The trial court dismissed the defamation claim, citing First Amendment protections. Father DeOreo filed an appeal in September 2024.
Statement of Facts:
- Employment and Allegations: Father DeOreo, a Catholic priest, was accused in January 2021 of causing a minor’s eating disorder. The Diocese found this allegation unsubstantiated.
- Second Allegation and Investigation: In October 2021, a new allegation of sexual misconduct with a minor emerged. The Diocese again found the allegations unsubstantiated.
- Diocesan Actions: Despite these findings, the Diocese issued a decree limiting Father DeOreo’s ministry and later suspended him in March 2022 for perceived violations, not due to evidence of misconduct.
- Public Statement: The Diocese then issued a public statement falsely suggesting Father DeOreo’s suspension was related to sexual misconduct, causing damage to his reputation.
The trial court dismissed the defamation claim based on First Amendment grounds, and Father DeOreo appealed the decision.
Summary of Argument for Appeal:
The First Amendment, including the Church Autonomy Doctrine and Ministerial Exception, does not prevent courts from considering a defamation claim made by a priest against his church employer if the Church knowingly published a false and defamatory statement implying criminal sexual misconduct by the priest.
The Diocese of Lafayette issued a false press release accusing Fr. DeOreo of criminal sexual misconduct, despite knowing the allegations were untrue. This action subjects the Diocese to the same legal consequences as any other entity under the law. Father DeOreo’s lawsuit focuses solely on the public and defamatory nature of the press release, not on his employment or ministerial status.
The trial court mistakenly dismissed Father DeOreo’s defamation claim, citing First Amendment protections. However, Father DeOreo argues that his claim is a secular issue of defamation, not a matter requiring scrutiny of church doctrine. Therefore, the dismissal should be reversed, and the case should proceed to trial.
Lafayette Diocese Hires the Big Guns
One has to wonder: why would the Diocese of Lafayette hire three attorneys from Sidley Austin, a top-notch and aggressive firm with litigators from Washington D.C., if they were confident in their stance on this matter? Sidley Austin is renowned for its formidable appellate litigators, possibly the best in the United States. Having worked with Sidley Austin in a business context, I can attest to their “take no prisoners” approach. This is what the parishioners of the Diocese of Lafayette are funding, at exorbitant rates for each of these trial attorneys.
Please pray for all involved.