Mr. Sinkspur praised the Boston Globe. I have the misfortune to see that rag every single day. If it were focussed on protecting the children, then that's fine. However, they are focussed on everything but. They are focussed on changing the discipline of the Church by trashing celibacy, changing the teaching of the church to allow homosexuality, abortion and women priests. Liberals couldn't care less about children. They just want to exploit this scandal for all it's worth to damage the Church in order to damage its authority to teach about sexual morality. I have not heard a single liberal voice speak out against Judith Levine's recent book promoting pedophilia. I have not said I am against measures to ensure protection against the abuse of children. In fact I am strongly in favor of very strict measures, including one strike for those against whom an accurate allegation is made. But no, I will never agree that in order to protect children we have to trash and vilify all priests trash celibacy, overthrow the entire Catholic concept of the priesthood, change priests into Protestant ministers and make the laity decide points of doctrine by democratic vote. Strict clerical discipline and the protection of children can be accomplished without doing such. And doing such would be to change the Catholic religion into a different religion, and it is unfair to insist that a religion must change to suit one's subjective predilictions. I think I am probably more concerned about resolving the issue of child abuse than you or Sinkspur, who seems to want to exploit this crisis to promote his own vision of the Church under a new Protestant reformation.
Thank you for this post. You said it all. Keep up the good work. God bless you.