Christus Dominus and the USCCB

I've been reading (along with MANY others) the story emerging out of Dallas about the conspiracy of our bishops to keep the pederasty story quiet for lo these many years, and I began to wonder, "At what point did this all begin, and is there a nexus with the formation of our episcopal conference, the USCCB?"

I did a little research, and found that although Catholic bishops in the USA had been collegially working together on certain joint 'projects' [i.e. succor for war victims, national welfare for the poor, etc.], there was not what you'd call a standing conference as there is today. The USCCB's website places the beginning of its current existence in

"1966 when the National Conference of Catholic Bishops (NCCB) and the United States Catholic Conference (USCC) were established. The NCCB attended to the Church's own affairs in this country, fulfilling the Vatican Council's mandate that bishops "jointly exercise their pastoral office" (Decree on the Bishops' Pastoral Office in the Church, #38). [emphasis mine]

NCCB operated through committees made up exclusively of bishops, many of which had full-time staff organized in secretariats. In USCC the bishops collaborate with other Catholics to address issues that concern the Church as part of the larger society. Its committees included lay people, clergy and religious in addition to the bishops. On July 1, 2001 the NCCB and the USCC were combined to form the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). USCCB continues all of the work formerly done by the NCCB and the USCC with the same staff. The bishops themselves form approximately 50 committees, each with its own particular responsibility.

The staff work is overseen by the General Secretariat which is led by Reverend Monsignor William P. Fay, General Secretary.

I find interesting that peculiar turn of language which insists that the work they do is mandated by the documents of the Second Vatican Council. Here's the actual text of Christus Dominus in question:

Decisions of the episcopal conference, provided they have been approved legitimately and by the votes of at least two-thirds of the prelates who have a deliberative vote in the conference, and have been recognized by the Apostolic See, are to have juridically binding force only [emphasis mine] in those cases prescribed by the common law or determined by a special mandate of the Apostolic See, given either spontaneously or in response to a petition of the conference itself.

I don't read the Vatican II document as mandating a standing bureaucracy, or a permanent legislative capacity. But there's something more . . .

Is it not about the same time that this monolith was created that bishops began to shuttle perverts around? Sure, it happened before, but is it a coincidence that in the late sixties and early seventies it becomes systematic, endemic?

I'm not given to paranoia as a rule, but I've never much trusted the concept that bishops exercise their offices ONLY in collegiality. I think much weakness comes from the fear of appearing out of step with their brethren (and, as one wag would put it, with their sistren also). Why is it that the bishops have agreed to put their response to the Kerry Kommunion Kapers on hold until they all meet and discuss it? Isn't each one of them endowed with a sufficient dose of Holy Spirit's authority to make such a decision on their own? Is this issue a response to Rome's questions (as in Christus Dominus)? Or is it merely weakness of the members, depending too much on the solidity of the exoskeletal conference?