McElroy's not fit to be a priest, let alone a bishop

 ...and Pope Francis has endorsed him to the point where he could be the next pope!

The Pillar is a trustworthy news source which you can rely on to give you un-sensationalised facts. However, on McElroy JD Flynn states:

"I’d also mention accusations that have been raised against Cardinal-elect McElroy on social media over the weekend: the charge that he “protected” or “covered up” for former cardinal Theodore McCarrick’s sexual abuse and coercion, after he was informed of allegations about that abuse in 2016.

It is true that McElroy was informed about allegations against McCarrick in 2016, in a letter from psychotherapist Richard Sipe. The letter mentioned that Sipe had “interviewed twelve seminarians and priests who attest to propositions, harassment, or sex with McCarrick,” and asked McElroy to address it.

In 2016, McElroy was Bishop of San Diego, with no authority over McCarrick, and no authority to investigate him. The bishop says that he sent Sipe’s letter to the apostolic nunciature or the Holy See, even though he declined some meeting requests from Sipe — which McElroy says he declined because Sipe hadn’t been forthcoming with him about the details of his allegations.

If McElroy’s account is true — that he received unnamed allegations, couldn’t get the names, and sent them on to his superiors — it does not seem to me that demonstrates a “cover-up,” largely because I’m not sure what else the bishop was supposed to do — he lacked the authority to investigate, and he says he couldn’t get additional information from the person informing him.

Today the bishop would direct such a person a third-party reporting line, and, again, inform ecclesiastical authorities. But in McElroy’s case, the third-party reporting line didn’t exist.

There might be more to the substance of the charges against McElroy than I have understood — but if I’ve got the facts right, I must admit I’m not clear on what else he was supposed to do with what he received."

Flynn's reaction here surprises me. McCarrrick was not the only person Sipes discussed with McElroy. McElroy’s behaviour suggests he had no time for those bringing allegations of sexual abuse to his attention, see, for example: http://www.awrsipe.com/interviews/question5.pdf the whole thing is available online see: http://www.awrsipe.com/Correspondence/McElroy-2016-07-28-rev.pdf

This is the key portion in Sipe’s letter to McElroy:

“My appeal to you has been for pastoral attention to victims of abuse and the long term consequences of that violation. This includes the effects of suicidal attempts.”

When JD Flynn asks “what he was supposed to do with what he received,” the answer is simply: what Sipe asked of him. He didn’t ask for a tribunal or a push for canonical sanctions … just to receive and care for victims.

Did Flynn actually read the letter? If he did, he might have answered his own question. JD appears to be minimizing and excusing abuse cover-up as well as misstating the record. Doesn't look like he even read Sipe's letter to McElroy, or his follow-up making clear McElroy refused to meet with Sipe. JD also ignores Viganò's testimony that McCarrick handpicked McElroy for San Diego.

Now watch Anthony Stine break down the McElroy appointment here:

If you are interested in this topic you might also find Timothy Gordon's take of interest: