What would it take to be a bishop who wasn't involved in covering up abusive priests, given the widespread nature of abuse and priest-transferring and the lack of any bishops having gone public?
You might find some people who had 'weird' roles in fairly remote locations? But I'm actually drawing a blank. I suspect there isn't a bishop left who hasn't moved a priest due to suspicions they don't want addressed.
Without in any way excusing the "transfer to avoid scandal" behaviour, we should probably take note that this isn't restricted to the Catholic church (or even religious bureaucracies) by any stretch. You'd probably be hard pressed to find a school-board, hospital, government bureaucracy, or large corporation where the executive layer of management hasn't engaged in this kind of behaviour to one degree or another, especially where the possibility of actually bringing criminal charges to bear would be tricky and potentially very public.
no subject
http://rfmcdpei.livejournal.com/3398074.html
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject