Opinion ID: 2453320
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Conflicts after Nash's resignation request

Text: Complying with the settlement, Nash wrote the Vatican in May 2005 requesting to be relieved from his vows of priesthood. The Vatican responded with a Latin decree (and English translation) that may have granted Nash's request, or may have fired him. The English version of the decree used the terms dismissal and dispensation. Nash claims the Vatican simply accepted his request for resignationa view supported by a separate assessment by the dean of Nash's law school, Creighton University (a school rooted in the Catholic tradition [3] ). Later negotiations between Bishop Warfel and Nash led to an agreement condoning the following explanation, stated from Nash's perspective: I voluntarily requested the Holy See to return me to the status of a layperson. This request was granted by Pope Benedict XVI in November 2005. That statement was drafted by the church, not Nash. The need to clarify the meaning of the proclamation later came about because Nash filed a defamation suit against J.P. based on J.P.'s rape accusation. The Diocese of Juneau paid for J.P.'s defense in that suit. The result was an October 26, 2006, settlement between Nash and Bishop Warfel of Juneau, in which the parties stipulated how they would characterize the accusations against Nash and his departure from the priesthood. [4] One such characterization was the explanation quoted in the previous paragraph about Nash's departure. In other stipulated language, Bishop Warfel stated that Nash has never been found ... to have committed any sexual assault upon J.P.; that Nash produced evidence of unquestioned authenticity contradicting J.P.'s claims; that the allegations were insufficiently probable to warrant further church actions; and that neither Bishop Warfel nor the Diocese of Juneau opposed Nash's application to the bar. For his part, Nash wrote a letter of apology for his inappropriate attempts at discipline and wrote a statement discussing his actions. In 2007, following his admission to the Iowa Bar, the Juneau Empire ran a story, Court rules former priest can take bar exam, despite allegations. Writing an op-ed in response to the story, Nash used some of the above language. Although the language had been agreed upon, its use led to a spat between Bishop Warfel and Nash. Bishop Warfel wrote Nash to protest Nash's use of Bishop Warfel's settlement statement, as well as Nash's public characterization of the Vatican's action as accepting Nash's resignation. Bishop Warfel continues to believe Nash has incorrectly characterized his departure from the priesthood. [5]