The sad news about Cardinal O'Brien brings to mind other "problems" with bishops and archbishops who have resigned in different places. Not only that, but to be honest, we surely have to recognise less scandalous failures - but important ones - on the part of bishops. How are bishops chosen? I have often wondered about this. Are most bishops chosen from the ranks of ex-bishop's secretaries or from those who work in Curias or from the ranks of Vicars General? It often seems that a gift for administration is paramount. Should that be the case? Please understand I am not criticising any particular bishop, whether he has come from the ranks of administrators or not, but recent failures and scandals surely prompts questions about whether the usual process of choosing bishops needs to be changed, overhauled or simply torn up.
Scotland must be reeling just now. I remember, of course, the case of Roddy Wright. In the United States there have been serious problems with some top ranking archbishops and bishops. leaving aside major scandals, serious disagreements among bishops has caused delays and bad decisions. Disobedience has also played a part in causing lesser scandals and difficulties in the universal Church. Perhaps the process of choosing bishops is another thing a new Pope will have to deal with.