Bernie Law arrived in Boston in the mid-80's. I remember the time frame, because we were still living in NJ when he was appointed. By the mid 90's he had already begun to implement changes in the way these matters were handled. I wouldn't call that years and years of covering up for anyone. No, he didn't take care of matters as quickly as he might have, but he was also dealing with an entrenched bureaucracy in the Chancery; the people who HAD dealt with this problem before he arrived, and with people who didn't like him because they considered him way too conservative for Boston.
You are now implying that he didn't have the power to bring justice to the victims, but when you heard that about the parents in some cases being unable to do anything about what was happening, you blamed the parents.
You have different standards for different people.
I can understand your sentiment about not wanting to have innocent blood on your hands, with respect to certain questionable bishops.
Just want to say that I had been engaged in pretty intense discussions about one Bishop Hubbard in the past couple of years here.
If nothing else, just consider the fact that even Hubbard himself never denied the that he had brought in an overwhelmingly large number of known homo seminarians and priests into the diocese during his tenure.
Care to take a stab at this "innocent move" within the context of current scandals?