The responses to the documents revealed in the cases of child molestation in the Chicago archdiocese have been very interesting.
First, there is the now non-shocking way that covering for rapists was handled. You just take it for granted now that nobody was doing their job and these evil people were basically running the show, in fact if not in name.
Second, there doesn't seem to be a real move to actually confront the problem now. I think Pope Benedict went a long way with the aforementioned defrocking of priests and removal of bishops and attempted reform of groups like the LOC, but the hardcore problems are still there. Here, I renew my call for the entire Catholic episcopacy to be given the Henry II treatment in penance for these sins and those bishops involved to be given monastic exile.
Third, and perhaps also not shocking, is the measures people will take to defend their favorites. We alluded to this earlier. Consider a few articles on the goings on in Chicago. They hardly mention Cardinal Bernardin at all. This item from the Huffington Post doesn't mention him even once. Has anyone called for a re-examination of his rather influential legacy? I haven't heard one. Instead, I'm hearing blame placed on Cardinal George (who is involved to a much lesser degree), Pope Benedict (who just let anything and everything go apparently), diocesan staff (who steered Bernardin in the wrong direction), and a whole bunch of other people who have only a remote connection (if any) to the situation.
My guess is such criticisms never emerge from our current media. My guess is that Cardinal Bernardin gets the posthumous version of the Rembert Weakland treatment.