Then-Bp Cupich was the ordinary in Spokane from 2010 to 2014. In 2011, we know that the Jesuit provincial told him about at least seven of the hinky Jesuits at Gonzaga. Cupich had already been Bishop of Rapid City, SD from 1998 to 2010, so he presumably had more than a decade learning the job, and he'd been a bishop throughout the First Crisis. But as far as we know, he did nothing about the Jesuits who were theoretically living under "safety plans" but were free to come and go.
We know that Bp Thomas Daly took over from Cupich in 2015, and the press release a week ago from the diocese said he "was not informed by the Jesuits or Gonzaga University that these men were living at Cardinal Bea House." Whether he was told anything by Cupich is unclear, although the issue seems not to have concerned him much between 2011 and his departure for Chicago.
On the other hand, the hinky Jesuits don't seem to have been a complete surprise to Daly, either, however he learned of them. In 2016, they all suddenly left Gonzaga for California, a complete coincidence, I'm sure. (However, they were relocated to the Sacred Heart Jesuit Center in Los Gatos, California, in the diocese where Daly had previously been auxiliary.) By 2017, the Spokane diocese was updating its policies to be sure that no more hinky Jesuits (or hinkies of any other stripe) could come in without the bishop's knowledge and approval.
The result was, at least from a bishop-as-corporate-manager point of view, Daly had been acting prudently to deflect potential blame from the diocese, should the story become public, which in fact it did. He was also acting as a good shepherd, both protecting potential future victims and protecting the faithful from fallout over any new scandal.
The question is why Cupich, a decade older and with that much more experience as a bishop under his belt, didn't take equivalent action while he was in Spokane.
Let's look at the pattern we began to see in the First Crisis: certain bishops, like Law, Levada, and Mahony, simply had a record of protecting criminally abusive priests. But this didn't happen in a vacuum; they tolerated a great deal more open same-sex conduct and advocacy among all their clergy. There's probably a law enforcement analogy here: when police enforce quality-of-life laws, subway fare evasion or low-level vandalism, the overall crime rate decreases. The same, I strongly suspect, applies to dioceses.
Thus in the Second Crisis, we see similar records with Tobin, McCarrick, and Wuerl. And it's probably no coincidence that there are financial issues with these bishops as well. On the other hand, we're beginning to see bishops like Thomas Daly who are moving proactively, recognizing that it's simply part of a bishop's job to keep the lawn mowed, the windows clean, and the trash picked up. Even if Cupich tries to claim the Jesuit provincial didn't spell things out in words of two syllables or less, why did Daly see and act on a problem, knowing even less than Cupich, when Cupich apparently ignored it?
Although Cupich, if you get right down to it, doesn't strike me as very smart. This may be why he's where he is, and why he's still Pope Francis's point man for dealing with the Second Crisis.
Let's hope Bp Daly continues to advance in his career.
