Of course he is.But he is known to stay under the radar scope pretty well which is pretty well borne out by the dearth of information in the Dallas article.Since he is not very smart and he is not very holy and since the diocese is not very Catholic,in numbers or intensity of belief,it shows there is something else going on here. I think its the protection he is afforded by the large and rich homosexual community. I believe 4 or 5 of his 5 or 6 vicars are of that persuasion.He does lie about just about everything but I can't believe that an interested media would be bamboozled unless they were in support of his agenda.
I notice yours was on the list also. Since you have spoken about how clean your diocese is,does the information support what you know?
I think that if the list was refined to reflect legitimate immoral,unethical or illegal activity and the cover up of same,the actual number "problem bishops" would be reduced to about 40 or 50 at most.And in half of those the situation is probably equal to or worse than the Boston situation.
Your thoughts?