Speaking of this case, things aren't fuzzy. Complaints were made, the nature of the man's crimes was known. A member of the hierarchy spoke with the man, I believe during the mid eighties, the man did not deny any of the allegations and in fact admitted to one case that had not been reported. He was NOT reported to the authorities. He remained a priest. He remained in a situation where he could and indeed did continue his offences on a large scale. The gathering of Bishops called it 'unimaginable' that the perpetrator would be handed over to the authorities.

What's not clear about that Joe? Don't you think the people who shielded the man and his crimes from justice should shoulder some of the blame?

I have no solution for the problem but removing abusing priests from office and let justice take it's cause would be something of a start wouldn't it? And I mean ofcourse, these having these actions take place immediately, not after letting a situation fester for a decade and a half. Because that's the thing Joe, the church is only seen to be acting when it can no longer avoid it. Not immediately and decisively when it needs to.