[dsc]

" is an apt response to your nasty baseless maligning of an untainted bishop"

FR has rules against posting the kind of thing that would be an apt response to that weasel excuse.

A bishop is a public figure, and not another poster here, and it appears to stand unchallenged that abuse took place in his diocese on his watch. You want to tell me that his "gaydar" is so deficient that he had no idea the offending priests suffered from SSAD?

Believe it if you want to, just as you seem to believe that a priest having a private swimming pool installed at church expense is appropriate.

[Notwithstanding]

You have no facts and are posting malicious gossip.

You are maligning a bishop's character with zero facts, and boatloads of specualtion both as to any cover-up and as to any residence he bought or modified.

[Notwithstanding]

You asked a question about Bishop Myers.
I asked a question about you.

Both questions have equal merit.