Accused Scottish cardinal admits sexual failings
LONDON • The cardinal who until recently served as Britain's highest-ranking Catholic leader on Sunday acknowledged unspecified sexual misbehavior and promised to play "no further part" in the public life of the church, an admission which comes at an awkward time for the Vatican.
Cardinal Keith O'Brien resigned Monday from his position as archbishop of St. Andrews and Edinburgh after a newspaper published unnamed priests' accounts of unspecified inappropriate behavior.
O'Brien initially rejected the claims, saying he was resigning because he did not want to distract from the upcoming conclave which is due to pick a new pope. But on Sunday, the Church of Scotland issued a statement quoting O'Brien as saying that there had been times "that my sexual conduct has fallen below the standards expected of me as a priest, archbishop and cardinal."
"To those I have offended, I apologize and ask forgiveness," the statement continued. "To the Catholic church and people of Scotland, I also apologize. I will now spend the rest of my life in retirement. I will play no further part in the public life of the Catholic church in Scotland."
The admission was short on details O'Brien gave no clue as to what exactly his sexual misbehavior consisted of but it comes as the Roman Catholic Church prepares to elect a successor to Benedict XVI, who resigned the papacy Thursday.
O'Brien's time as cardinal ended as it began in controversy.
He got off to a rocky start when in 2003, as a condition of being made a cardinal, he was forced to issue a public pledge to defend church teaching on homosexuality, celibacy and contraception. He was pressured to make the pledge after he had called for a "full and open discussion" on such matters.
At the time, O'Brien said he had been misunderstood and wanted to clarify his position. But statements made last week, before the scandal over his behavior broke, suggested he never really changed his mind. In an interview with the BBC, O'Brien said celibacy should be reconsidered because it's not based on doctrine but rather church tradition and "is not of divine origin."