Not so sure about the headline, with memories evoked of Richard Nixon’s famous “I am not a crook.” But NC Reporter is not letting this story go, and that’s a good thing.
Besides the headline critique, I’d like to see someone who buys ink by the carload or its digital equivalent put this question: Presuming Francis has been convinced of offenders’ guilt in many other abuse cases, what does he see missing from this case of episcopal see-no-evil-ism?
Is there an analysis anywhere of what usually tips the scale, has done so in other cases, that — in Francis’ view — is not available in this one? What did he see in those other cases?
Or, to call up the big Nixon question of decades ago, what did Francis know (about Bishop Barros, enough to give him a pass) and when did he know it?
Blithe Spirit 