Personally, I have always believed that the zero-tolerance approach to clergy sex abuse by the entire USCCB, and adapted for our own diocese, is stupid.That is correct, ladies and gentlemen! You heard it straight from the horse's mouth. The Archbishop simply copied the policy from the USCCB exactly as Tim Rohr stated in his blog. Therefore, the sex policy was never made weak by Archbishop Apuron nor was it written by Archbishop Apuron.
This policy was never made weak by Archbishop Apuron because the Archdiocese copied the same policy. This policy also did not favor any bishop accused of sex abuse. Why? Because according to Tim, the policy says that an accused bishop must remove himself. Tim Rohr stated in his Blog:
Thus, Archbishop Apuron, by virtue of his own policy and his own example of its implementation, MUST REMOVE HIMSELF and permit an independent investigation to move forward."By virtue of his own policy......"That is correct, ladies and gentlemen! You heard it straight from the horse's mouth. Therefore you ask....how is it that the sex abuse policy was made weak? The truth shows that the goal of the jungle is simply to demonize Archbishop Apuron however they can even if it means to change their song and dance.
For those who wish to make comments under this post, please stick to the OP. This post shows that Archbishop Apuron did not weaken the Archdiocesan sex policy because (as Tim Rohr admitted in 2014) it was a copy and paste of the USCCB. Perhaps, the policy devised by the USCCB was weak in itself, but Archbishop Apuron did not purposely made the policy weak. Why? Because he was not the one who created the policy in the first place. The Archdiocese adapted it from the USCCB exactly as Tim Rohr himself stated.