Despite the two little digs here to promote feminist nuns and marriage for priests, she seems to have it right. In fact, I think Law's behavior may be just an extreme example of a larger pattern evident among the rather decadent American Catholic hierarchy. For years they have demonstrated the worst sort of cowardice in the face of prominent Catholics who trample on Church teachings about sexual matters. When challenged to excommunicate these shameful renegades, the bishops invariably cite "pastoral" concerns, using language much like Law chose in support of this rapist priest. I wonder if many of them have not been afraid the government had the goods on them--and that speaking up might prove more than a tad embarrassing.
I think this new story will hurt Cardinal Law almost as much as yesterday's story about how he protected the founder of NAMBLA.
Because now we have proof of a double standard:
Gay male priests? Go ahead and rape to your hearts content.
Heterosexual male priests? If you leave to get married, you forfeit all pension rights and are considered an outcast.
Nuns? If you violate the dress code, you get fired.
Which one of these three categories does Cardinal Law personally fit in? Its pretty obvious, isn't it?