John Doe v. the Holy See

I would like to follow up on Rick’s earlier posting of the Oregon federal district court case of John Doe v. the Holy See. It seems that Mr. Anderson, counsel for John Doe, has prevailed in convincing the court that the tort exception to the law of foreign sovereign immunity makes the Holy See vulnerable to civil suit. Judge Mosman’s Opinion and Order [Download Holy_See.pdf ] merit careful study. With the deepest and sincerest respect to the judge, I believe that he has the law wrong. Priestly and religious life are not constitutive of an employer-employee relationship. In my opinion, this is one of the errors made by the court in its conclusion. Rick is correct in asking for the assistance of canonists here. But if it is a correct assessment, I am sure many priests, brothers, sisters, and laity would be surprised to find themselves labeled as employees and agents of the Holy See. Within the judge’s decision lies a variety of mischiefs that I think the judge, Mr. Anderson, and many others do not intend. But, there they are. As I said, the judge’s decision requires a careful study taking into account the expanse to which his conclusions may affect international relations. In the meantime, the two trains to which I have alluded to in earlier postings continue running in opposite directions on the same track. But now, they have increased their speed, and I fear for the outcome.    RJA sj