The heavy reliance of the notion of "scandal" is so maddening. It seems to make optics supreme. Based on what's reported here, it's impossible to tell whether the Vatican thinks Sevilla actually did inappropriately retaliate against Fontana, or just did the right thing in a way that gave rise to incorrect impressions. And what's up with these investigations constantly failing to interview obviously relevant parties? Not the way to restore trust. Thanks for the continued reporting on Vos Estis.
Personally, I think Vos Estis is just allowing the foxes to guard the chicken coop. Basically useless for restoring trust in the US bishops. Were those cleared really innocent or were they just "investigated" by friends who would never have found them guilty no matter what they did? We'll never know.
The heavy reliance of the notion of "scandal" is so maddening. It seems to make optics supreme. Based on what's reported here, it's impossible to tell whether the Vatican thinks Sevilla actually did inappropriately retaliate against Fontana, or just did the right thing in a way that gave rise to incorrect impressions. And what's up with these investigations constantly failing to interview obviously relevant parties? Not the way to restore trust. Thanks for the continued reporting on Vos Estis.
I’m just an English major. Scandal to me is the way the Vatican is turning a blind eye to bishops who are ACTUALLY causing scandal.
Personally, I think Vos Estis is just allowing the foxes to guard the chicken coop. Basically useless for restoring trust in the US bishops. Were those cleared really innocent or were they just "investigated" by friends who would never have found them guilty no matter what they did? We'll never know.