Replies

Would someone care to provide a list of American bishops who (a) have not resigned; (b) have not yet retired; and (c) are themselves (not their predecessors) credibly accused of coverups ? The most egregious case I can think of Mahoney, who’s both retired (finally) and protected by the liberal media.

National Catholic Reporter (i.e. Fishwrap) editor-at-large Tom Roberts had a blistering commentary in yesterday's edition that (despite it being the Fishwrap) is IMO worth reading:

In contrast, in the ongoing abuse crisis in the church, only one bishop who oversaw a cover-up, Cardinal Bernard Law, was removed from a position after public outrage and the outrage of his priests in Boston reached such a pitch that the Vatican had to do something. That something was to transfer him to a cushy position in Rome, where it was easier for him to get to the meetings of the six influential Vatican congregations -- offices in the Vatican bureaucracy -- on which he was allowed to retain membership.
He recently hosted a lavish party in Rome to celebrate his 80th birthday. It was attended by some of the top figures within the Vatican bureaucracy.
Cardinal Anthony Joseph Bevilacqua, who oversaw the cover-up of hideous crimes against children committed by numerous Philadelphia priests, was able to slip quietly into retirement on the grounds of St. Charles Borromeo Seminary in Overbrook, a suburb of Philadelphia. The Vatican never uttered a word of reprimand for the institutional harm to children that he helped to hide during his tenure and that is detailed in a Philadelphia grand jury report.
His successor, Cardinal Justin Rigali, and some in his administration repeatedly violated the bishops' own norms for handling sex abuse and repeatedly misrepresented to the public the nature and extent of the problem. A second grand jury report resulted in the indictment of Msgr. William Lynn, former vicar for clergy, for failing to remove abusive priests. He was at the time the highest-ranking Catholic clergyman charged in the scandal.
Rigali recently slipped quietly into retirement. Again, no word of rebuke from the Vatican.
Bishop Robert Finn of the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph, Mo., became the highest-ranking clergyman charged in the abuse scandal when he and the diocese were indicted for failing to report child abuse. But Finn is staying in place, determined to run the diocese, and apparently no one can tell him, much less force him, to step aside for the good of the church while dealing with his legal entanglements.
No word of rebuke has issued -- not from fellow bishops nor from Rome -- of Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Neb., who has flatly refused to comply with the minimal controls put in place by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops during its spring meeting in Dallas in 2002.
And former Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony has been allowed to quietly slip off the national stage while leaving behind a mountain of documentation that would blow the lid of the archdiocese if released, say prosecutors, victims' lawyers and others involved in assessing cases. No one knows quite how much has been spent keeping the documents -- which were supposed to be released as part of an earlier settlement agreement -- under wraps.

Another example not listed above is Archbishop Rembert Weakland, who resigned his office voluntarely at age 75, despite having a gay lover, yet received all retirement benefits due a former bishop. From a sacerdotal point of view, Weakland walked away with a clear conscience. And Weakland's successor, Archbishop Jerome Listecki, had the chutzpah to blame the priests, not Weakland and not the Archdiocese, for the Archdiocese of Milwaukee having to file Chapter 11 Bankruptcy because of all the abuse that went on under Weakland.

“Bishop Robert Finn of the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph, Mo., became the highest-ranking clergyman charged in the abuse scandal when he and the diocese were indicted for failing to report child abuse.”

Uh, he reported the child abuse, and the priest involved is gone.

As your article admits, all of the bishops who were involved in the sex abuse cases are gone. The house has been swept clean.

I was asking about bishops who were still active and not retired or dead.

Bruskewitz not putting up with the mickeymouse requirements that the USCCB tries to impose is no crime. He's also on record as telling parents in his diocese to report molesting priests to the police immediately, but you don't mention that.

The Finn case is ongoing. I'm not convinced that he's guilty of anything.

Bevilacqua is not only retired for close to 15 years, he suffers from cancer and Alzheimers. What do you recommend we do with an old, sick man like that?

Mahony's also retired. Neither the fishwrap nor the LA Press had anything bad to say about him when he was in power.

Not impressed with their list.

Why am I not surprised when Catholic-hating Protestants line up with Catholic-hating left-wing Catholics to trash actual Catholics?

The real irony here is that the National (anti) Catholic Reporter has been pushing the bishops to defy the Pope and continue to allow homosexual priests for years. They have absolutely no credibility when it comes to this subject. If anything, they and their ilk enabled the abuse crisis.