Donahue, usually a consistent and able defender of the Church, seems this time to be ignoring Bishop Vigano’s allegation that Wuerl was specifically informed of McCarrick’s behavior on at least two occasions, once by Vigano himself. But perhaps more importantly, Donahue appears to be tone-deaf as to exactly whose “scalp” traditional Catholics are seeking.
Even if Wuerl wasn’t specifically informed of McCarrick’s behavior as Vigano claims, Wuerl had to know about the seminarians at the beach house and ski vacations in Italy. He had to know about the covey of young good looking seminarians and monsignors surrounding McCarrick. I knew (second and third hand) and I lived more than 500 miles away. Who in New Jersey didn’t know?
When a pastor of a church announces that he is spending his vacation in Provincetown, that gives you an idea how secure these men of the cloth felt they were.
I have a question about this statement: “...Bishop Vigano’s allegation that Wuerl was specifically informed of McCarrick’s behavior on at least two occasions, once by Vigano himself.”
Did Cardinal Wuerl ever have authority over Cardinal McCarrick? From the time line in Mr. Donohoue’s article, it seems to me that Cdl Wuerl was younger and never in the same area to have authority over Cdl McCarrick.