The Roman Catholic bishop of Orange County is suing a former charity administrator for libel, an escalation in the prelate’s dispute with influential church philanthropists who have complained to the Vatican about his firing of a nonprofit board.
Bishop Kevin Vann and the Diocese of Orange’s chief financial officer are seeking a retraction, financial compensation and punitive damages from the ex-administrator for an email in which they contend she gave a “false narrative” that suggested that charity funds might be used to cover clergy sex abuse claims.
The Superior Court suit filed earlier this month is the latest development in the bishop’s ongoing conflict with a group of high-dollar donors and other church insiders. Vann terminated the group from the independent Orange Catholic Foundation board in June after they rebuffed his request for millions of dollars in emergency pandemic funding. The board members reported the bishop to the Holy See for allegedly acting beyond his authority and violating state and church law, accusations the bishop denies.
The suit does not name any of the well-connected real estate developers, attorneys, corporate executives or others tossed from the board or the misconduct accusations they made to church officials in Rome and Washington, D.C. It focuses instead on an email written by an administrator ousted after the board firings.
In a July note with the subject line “You can’t make this stuff up,” Suzanne Nunn, a longtime philanthropy consultant who had served as the foundation’s interim executive director, gave 47 peers at Catholic dioceses and organizations around the country a behind-the-scenes account of the dust-up with the bishop.
She laid out Vann’s March request for money to cover an $8-million shortfall related to COVID-19, the directors’ decision to reject the request based on their fiduciary duties and the subsequent firing of the entire board.
“Is this considered a hostile takeover to distribute funds the diocese needs to cover debt? Lawsuits? Is this an overstep of authority?… No one knows” Nunn wrote, adding, “Does the Foundation Board have a fiduciary responsibility to fight this takeover to protect the donor intent and Foundation assets?… All rhetorical questions, but something to consider.”
Those questions are central to the suit brought by Vann and diocesan Chief Financial Officer Elizabeth Jensen. They allege that since Nunn referred elsewhere in the note to molestation lawsuits, her queries amounted to an untrue and defamatory assertion that the church was seeking to seize the foundation money to cover those lawsuits rather than the purposes donors intended.
Paying for sex abuse claims is a sensitive topic. A new state law lifted the statute of limitations for some abuse accusations, and Catholic dioceses along with other organizations are bracing for an onslaught of costly litigation that many benefactors do not want to finance.
An attorney for the bishop and Jensen wrote in the suit that the bishop and Jensen had contemplated “what would happen if they turned the other cheek.”
“If no one corrects the record, donors will not donate … because donors will think their money will be used for illicit purposes. In turn, the needy will suffer,” wrote lawyer Todd Theodora….
The above comes from a Nov. 1 story in the L.A. Times.
What a mess. The military has an acronym which applies here, but I will not repeat. Sounds like only the lawyers will win financially here. Apparently the Bishop has upset several major donors with the Board terminations. Remember, Bishop, the faithful in the pews provide the cash to pay the bills, including for the new Cathedral.
I don’t live in that diocese, but if I did I’d stop giving to Vann. His cathedral is ugly, besides.
He inherited the cathedral from Bishop Brown, so, ugly or not, he’s not to blame.
Wrong. Bishop Vann oversaw the redesign of the cathedral from tip to tail.
So the bishop does something immoral and illegal in the pursuit of money, then he files a lawsuit seeking more money and blaming the people he fired unjustly for doing wrong. Sounds about right for a lefty bishop. Why doesn’t God clean house?
Hubris and contempt for the laity , the fact that this foundation was set up because the hierarchy could not be trusted with the money shows the character and lack of humility of this man . That he is wasting time and resources of the church on this gives credence to his opposition.
bad optics
at the very least
Irresponsible Church!! The Bishop stupidly, severely hurting prominent laymen who have a serious responsibility– ending up in a genocide, the Diocese needlessly shooting itself in the foot! And oh, yes!! That stupid, ugly modern “un-Cathedral” Cathedral… or whatever-you-call-it…!!!! Better to do like Rev. Billy Graham– pitch a tent, and evangelize!!
People will think twice about donating their hard earned money to this diocese.There are no lack of responsible Christian charities.
money is fungible!
not a dirty word – check it out
an auditor’s nightmare or dream-come-true
depending on the perspective of the financial detective work
an audit that will never happen