Cardinal Law Faces Uncertain Future
B O S T O N, Dec. 14, 2002 -- As Bernard Law makes his expected flight back to Boston this weekend, he still technically will be a cardinal — but a cardinal without an archdiocese and with an uncertain, even unknown, future.
"The particular circumstances of this time suggest a quiet departure," he wrote in a statement Friday on his resignation as Roman Catholic archbishop of Boston.
For 18 years, Law was a powerful figure in Boston, a man of tremendous moral and political influence.
But 11 months of mounting scandal over his handling of priests accused of molesting children eroded his stature, until finally Pope John Paul II accepted his resignation. Some observers theorize that the beleaguered archbishop of Boston may have even insisted upon it.
"He quite clearly had come to the realization sometime in the last week that he could no longer effectively function as the leader of the archdiocese," said Walter Robinson, a member of the Boston Globe investigative team that broke first the story last January.
No Public Schedule
The cardinal has no public schedule for after he returns. On Sunday, when he usually celebrated Mass and gave the homily at Holy Cross Cathedral in Boston's South End, it will likely be Auxiliary Bishop Richard G. Lennon, the man appointed to serve as the apostolic administrator of the Boston archdiocese until a permanent replacement can be selected.
It has long be rumored that when he stepped down, Law would be given a Vatican sinecure as a reward for his long service and close relationship with the pope. It is no longer certain that is the case, now that he is so tainted by scandal that he felt compelled — or was forced — to resign.
Law and his former top aides still face the prospect of having to testify before a grand jury looking into possible criminal violations by those who allowed accused pedophile priests to remain in service. But even Massachusetts Attorney General Thomas Reilly concedes that state law makes it virtually impossible to hold any manager criminally liable for the acts of a subordinate if the manager did not know the subordinate would commit a crime.
Related Stories
ABC News Live