The Mysterious Working of Bill Donohue’s mind

A friend writes me:

Just got on my desk a faxed release from the Catholic League, responding to the Rembert Weakland news.

“[I]t needs to be asked what social good is served when current disclosures of past indiscretions are made public? The time has come to invoke an ethical statute of limitations,” Donohue says. He goes on to decry “sexual McCarthyism,” and blames American society because “we sponsor a libertine understanding of sexuality that puts a premium on genital liberation and yet are appalled by the psoychological and physical consequences that such a vision entails. We also expect that every person of the cloth will at all times restrain his libido while everyone else is free to throw constraint to the wind.”

Finally, this: “[T]hose who always harbored an agenda against their most-hated prelate think it’s time to rejoice. Count the Catholic League out.”

I’m really puzzled by this response from Donohue. This man who was sexually set upon by Rembert probably isn’t acting from the purest of motives. He was 28 years old when the incident happened, and he certainly seems like he was trying to exploit the situation to make money. That said, the REAL scandal here is that an archbishop paid nearly half a million dollars in money that was meant for the support of the Church and the poor to buy the silence of a man whose pants he tried to get into. Why doesn’t Donohue see that, I wonder?