The Bishop Finn affair is sad but he is not the real victim, okay?

Over at One Peter Five they  came out strongly in defense of Bishop Finn. They feel and they’re hanging onto that feeling like a dog with a bone, that the bishop had to step down not because he failed to call the police but because the forces of evil were after him anyway. Several readers objected to that idea and the comment box turned into a battlefield. Since the argument can’t be won and the whole situation is depressing,  1P5 doesn’t want to talk about it anymore .

Well now. I like Steve Skojec  and I like reading most of the writers on 1P5 but I can’t follow the reasoning here.  I don’t doubt that some bad people went after Bishop Finn because they prefer  the diocese to be something like an Episcopalian/Unitarian/New Age mix but  in trying to quietly fix Fr. Ratigan, the bishop handed his enemies an golden opportunity. My late father in law, Big Daddy used to say, “Everybody pees in the pool some time but that boy did it from the diving board.” This isn’t about “our guy” and “their guys”. This isn't about liberals, conservatives or traditionalists. This is about the bishop's legal and spiritual duty to his flock.

The excuse that the bishop was trying to save Fr. Ratigan’s priesthood because he was under the impression that the problem was “only” pornography is not acceptable especially for a man who wrote "Blessed Are the Pure in Heart - A Pastoral Letter on the Dignity of the Human Person and the Dangers of Pornography."  Can you see St. Jean Vianney saying, “It’s only pornography?” Can you see St. Anthony Mary Claret or St. Padre Pio  tolerating a fellow priest who had pornographic interests? Can you in your wildest imagination see St. Thomas Becket, the man who excommunicated his king and friend saying  “only pornography”? I cannot.

Pray for Bishop Finn, pray for Fr. Ratigan and if you have tears to shed, let them fall for the little girls who were violated by Fr. Ratigan.