NEW YORK
The Economist
SUNDAY services at Saint Patrick’s Cathedral in New York featured a portrait at the altar of Edward Cardinal Egan, who died on March 5th. After the funeral today his body will be interred in a crypt at the cathedral. The ceremonies in tribute to his life and work have been fairly subdued. This is perhaps apt. Cardinal Egan, who presided over New York’s archdiocese from 2000 to 2009, may have had an imposing presence and a powerful baritone voice, but he kept a low profile. He was rarely in front of a camera. He hardly ever gave interviews. Indeed he was an enigmatic figure for many New Yorkers and a polarising leader among Catholics. He was not universally loved by his flock.
Cardinal Egan arrived in New York in 2000 with an impossible task: to fill the shoes of John Cardinal O’Connor, his beloved predecessor. New York’s cardinals tend to be a charismatic bunch, but Cardinal O’Connor was uniquely powerful. As the unofficial head of the Catholic Church in America, he was courted by presidents. He was not afraid to take on politicians, even well-known Catholics. He threatened to excommunicate Geraldine Ferraro, a vice-presidential nominee, and Mario Cuomo, a former governor, for their pro-choice stance in the abortion debate. Presidents attended his funeral and thousands of ordinary New Yorkers queued to view his remains. He was dubbed the patron saint of the working poor. But while witty and gregarious, Cardinal O’Connor was a poor administrator. He could not balance a budget to save his life. …
His response to the sexual-abuse scandal in 2002 also won few fans among the clergy or the faithful. Connecticut newspapers, including the Hartford Courant, reported that when he was bishop of Bridgeport he knowingly transferred priests accused of paedophilia to different parishes and postings. He denied this, saying he actually sent accused priests to a well-respected psychiatric institution for evaluation. He claimed that priests were permitted to return to pastoral duty only when the institution recommended it—despite evidence of known offenders working within the church. He eventually said in a letter read from pulpits that “if in hindsight we also discover that mistakes may have been made as regards prompt removal of priests and assistance to victims, I am deeply sorry.” For many in the church, and especially the victims of sexual abuse, this apology seemed insincere. To prevent another abuse scandal, the US Conference of Bishops in 2002 set up a review board of laypeople to serve as a watchdog for the church in America. The cardinal reportedly took issue with this body, however, as he did not believe lay people should have oversight over a bishop.
Note: This is an Abuse Tracker excerpt. Click the title to view the full text of the original article. If the original article is no longer available, see our News Archive.