What is the second reflex? Since blanket denials won't work at this time, then a Nixonian "limited hangout", while more slime and accusation is hurled at any who dare mention the double-standards?
I have little reason to have much doubt that the LA Times was badly misquoting this priest. There is only small doubt remaining as to the veracity of the information he claims is true. He could be wrong...at least in part. But to have this made up out of whole cloth --- for it to be purely fabrication? Uh-uh. I'm not buying that. Not for one second, though I'll confess you didn't actually come out and say that.
He wasn't slimed for talking about child abuse. He was suspended for publicly advocating heresy and trying to stir up a public campaign to support his views. That's why I posted what he actually said and what his archbishop actually said.
Had he merely brought out to light clerical sexual abuse or the like...and his bishop reacted in the way he did, the archbishop would have been wrong. However, that's not what happened, was it?
And that's where the LA Times distorted things.