[…] the bishop sat quietly, his right hand trembling slightly as he ran his index finger along his mouth, chin and the cleft between his nose and upper lip.
He was dressed in a grey sportcoat, khaki pants and a tan shirt with the top few buttons undone. He wore glasses and his grey hair was neatly combed and gelled.
The bishop in question is Raymond Lahey, a man found in possession of hundreds of pornographic photos concerning nude boys, some of them extremely graphic and even concerning torture. In case you think the photos had been put there by, well, chance (??) his computer also had tales concerning torture.
The article doesn’t mention with one word the homosexuality of the chap. It doesn’t even waste one word to wonder how on earth can it happen that a homosexual becomes a bishop.
I know that I am being unfair here, but at times I get the impression that in the Sixties and Seventies if one wasn’t scum one didn’t have the possibility of becoming priest, at all. I know, it’s the magnifying lens effect of the press, but for heaven’s sake it can’t be that they didn’t see what kind of rubbish they were getting in. I wonder whether this chap, for example, ever had the possibility to exercise any direct or indirect influence regarding acceptance of seminarians.
If he had, it’s not difficult to imagine of which sort it was. How many others like him?
I’d bet a pint that this bishop wasn’t a staunch defender of the Tridentine Mass, but rather one of the liberal types. Am I wrong?
NuChurch: the gift that keeps on giving.