The problem for Houston is that I can't avoid thinking there must have been other reasons behind Steenson's sudden and premature retirement. St Mary's and even Our Lady of the Atonement are water under the bridge, after all.The impression I get as a new Catholic is that bishops have a lot -- a lot -- of latitude. Just the cases I've seen in recent years confirm that. Bishop of Victoria, BC Remi De Roo stayed in his post for 37 years, retiring at the canonical age of 75, despite violent disagreement with Vatican teaching and financial scandal. Archbishop of Miami John Favalora had his retirement expedited by only eight months, although he'd been at the center of allegations regarding a rampant gay culture in his archdiocese.
Cardinal Roger Mahony retired at the canonical age of 75 in 2011 despite steady releases of evidence from at least 2004 that he had actively concealed cases of child sexual abuse by priests under his authority. Following his retirement, his successor limited his ability to function publicly as a bishop, but critics called the action a mere slap on the wrist.
So what was it that led to Steenson's retirement, "with immediate canonical effect", at age 63? The performance of all three Ordinariates has been equivalent -- essentially, dismal. There's no reason to single Steenson out for mere fecklessness. So, what was it?
