Mary, don't you think it's a bit strong to speak of "a pope who has assisted in the aftermath at least of tying boys up in a rectory." He allowed the guy to be transferred thirty years ago, instead of referring him for prosecution; and chances are that he did not realize how serious the problem was. He should have done better, but I do think you're being a bit overly dramatic.

I do think it's important to avoid the soap opera and stick to the facts.

So, what WERE the facts? We still don't know. It's time for the bishops to tell us. The time for secrecy is long past, because the bishops showed us they could not be trusted to act properly under cover of secrecy.

-Joe-