[Jael]

Your queston brings up a point that is missed in all of this: the pope and the bishop were performing a religious act (isuing a religious decree), and therefore he law of the US cannot in any way control how the Church conducts such an act.

Are you actually claiming that a Roman Catholic decree supercedes the law of the US?

[Notwithstanding]

The CONSTITUTION as interpreted by the SCOTUS has concluded that the govt cannot dictate how a religious act is to be done. The church is bound to obey generally applicable laws - but no law that singles out a religion is allowed - unless it is a law that is designed to alleviate govt intrusion into the practice of religion.

You miss the larger point, which is that internal church discipline is a church matter and the state cannot and should not dictate how a church is run. When a law is broken then no cleric should be immune, but as it stands no law was broken and here there is not even a question that the pope acted in a wholly moral fashion.

The pope defrocked a man who three years previsouly plead guilty to a child sex crime. He told the bishop to try to get him the hell out of the community where he caused trouble so as to avoid his presence being a painful memory to those scandalized - yet he realized that there may be an exceptional situation in which no scandal would exist by him remaning in the same community. Even so, once a priest is defrocked the church has no power over the man.

The "journalist" in the NY Post article did a shoddy job and merely wanted to make waves. She succeeded.