US bishops still under suspicion, Times editorial says
February 15, 2011
An editorial in the New York Times argues that the US bishops have failed to recover their credibility in the aftermath of the sex-abuse scandal. Citing the recent report of a grand jury on the Philadelphia archdiocese, the Times observes that there are still widespread suspicions that the bishops have not removed all accused abusers from active ministry. The editorial’s argument is difficult to dismiss, since the grand jury voiced exactly those suspicions.
In Pittsburgh, a Tribune-Review editorial notes that the Philadelphia grand jury harshly criticized the retired Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua, and wonders: “Did the same thing happen under Bevilacqua's watch in the Diocese of Pittsburgh between 1983 and 1987?” The question illustrates the suspicions that the Times editorial mentions.
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: jflare293129 -
Feb. 16, 2011 6:10 PM ET USA
Sooner or later, in my dreams, the New York Times will shock me: They'll readily acknowledge their general agenda and intentions, or else a credible person will demand them being accountable to others. Why would I be even remotely concerned about alleged actions from 10, 20, 30, or 60 years ago, when I can't say "sin" in public today and be taken seriously?
Posted by: aclune9083 -
Feb. 15, 2011 10:06 PM ET USA
Why would anyone care about an article in the New York Slime (to quote Fr. Benedict Groeschel).? It thrives on lack of charity and scandal and employs no ethical standards to ensure accurate, balanced reporting of the news. The Gray Lady has been dead for a long time, and we all suffer from her demise.