One of NZC's commenters, LeftRightOut, wants to know why Pope Benedict did not accept the resignations of two bishops "implicated by the Murphy Commission". He says, "At least these two men attempted to do the [honourable] thing, Benedict will deny them that. Why?" He then quotes an apparently damning BBC article:
However, all is not as it seems. Three things are true. 1) The men did attempt to resign, but not willingly. 2) They were bishops during the period covered by the Murphy Report, but were not criticised in the report. and 3) The pope did reject their resignations, but was asked to by the bishops themselves.
So the damning BBC article didn't give all the facts, thus perpetuating the impression that the Holy Father enables child abuse - when nothing could be further from the truth.
Related link: Atrocious attack on the Holy Father by Andrew Sullivan
Pope Benedict XVI has not accepted the resignations of two Irish bishops who resigned at Christmas. Eamonn Walsh and Raymond Field announced their resignations on Christmas Eve 2009. The pair, who were both auxiliary bishops of Dublin, said they hoped their resignations would help bring peace to the victims of sexual abuse. They were bishops during the period covered by the Murphy Commission which examined abuse in the Dublin diocese. ~ BBC
However, all is not as it seems. Three things are true. 1) The men did attempt to resign, but not willingly. 2) They were bishops during the period covered by the Murphy Report, but were not criticised in the report. and 3) The pope did reject their resignations, but was asked to by the bishops themselves.
Neither of the two auxiliaries ever wanted to resign. Neither had been criticized in the Murphy Report, and they felt unfairly targeted by the media and some victims’ groups. It was Archbishop Martin’s apparent refusal to give them his full support that eventually pushed them to resign. A number of sources close to the two men have told Catholic World Report that, feeling “unjustly treated,” both prepared detailed dossiers to present to the Holy See detailing why their resignations ought not to be accepted. Both men, sources claim, were concerned “that if their resignations were accepted the impression would be given that they had done something wrong.”
At the same time an intensive letter-writing campaign was launched and dozens of clerics wrote to the Vatican to protest the way the two long-serving prelates had been treated by Archbishop Martin.
Their campaign for vindication has been successful and it is hard to interpret the move in a way that is not embarrassing for Archbishop Martin. To put it bluntly: the Holy See had the stark choice between the archbishop and his two auxiliaries, and it chose the latter. ~ Catholic World Report
So the damning BBC article didn't give all the facts, thus perpetuating the impression that the Holy Father enables child abuse - when nothing could be further from the truth.
Related link: Atrocious attack on the Holy Father by Andrew Sullivan