I am no fan of Cardinal Law and I think he has much to repent of, but for the sake of accuracy it should be noted that almost all the crimes of homosexual priests happened before Law became Archbishop of Boston in 1984. His sin --- and it's a grave sin --- was, principally, negligence.
Law had all these priests' personnel files and paid scant attention to them. Priests with records of seriously bad behavior related to homosexual vice, alcoholism, and drug abuse were sent off on therapeutic sabbaticals and then placed back in parish work on the dubious strength of psychiatrists' or therapists' recommendations that they were "O.K. now."
Irresponsible. Disgusting. Pastoral malpractice to a very disturbing degree. But it's not the same as "condoning pedophiles." It's more like a jaw-dropping naivete: "These psychologists say this priest is recovered." "This priest wouldn't lie to me." And so forth.
I think the history of the Archdiocese shows that this kind of negligence became routine, not because of sloth or laziness, but (paradoxically) because of workaholism. For example, when Cardinal Law became archbishop of Boston, he found over fifty agencies reporting directly to him. He worked like a wheelhorse; but you can safely say that he pushed the problem of bent, spiritually sick priests WAY down on the priority list. WAY down. Priority? Somewhere between 50 and infinity.
My personal opinion is that he shouldn't have been given a prominent post in Rome. He should have had to kneel outside the door of the Cathedral for a decade or so in sackcloth and ashes, begging those who entered therein to pray for the salvation of his soul.
It's not? - Is your dictionary a bit different than mine? - look up condone again.
.