Now Pope linked to child abuse cover-up

Biggins

goat2 wrote: »

heard it today on radio, it is all over for the catholic church, if the head saw nothing wrong with it, all over , no recovery, not a hope

Just one more thing to be buried, re-written in history and conveniently forgotten about.
Welcome to the Roman Catholic Church where dogma is absolute according to whom it favours.

Poly

Silverharp2 wrote: »

I nominate this as post Fail of the day. Its bad taste and pure ignorance to equate the normal duties of conscripts in the army and the stuff the trials were about. Dont they teach history in schools anymore?

69 wrote: »

I can't say I'm surprised, you don't get promoted to the top of any organization without knowing how it works from the bottom up.[/QUOTE

I think Ratzinger was more invloved in the academic side than in pastoral or parish work.

Lads, Lets not be naive here any more, this is a not like a Fr.Ted case of the raffle money going missing.
This is the systematic abuse of Children and the lengths an organisation went to hide the culprits, this involved the strategic moving of the culprits around to protect them from prosecution.

Silverharp, at what level do you imagine the corruption and blatant criminality stopped?

I would consider myself a good Christian and follower of Christ, right now, if I were Ratzinger I would be ashamed and on my knees begging forgiveness for the sins that were committed against these people.

peasant

Poly wrote: »

I would consider myself a good Christian and follower of Christ, right now, if I were Ratzinger I would be ashamed and on my knees begging forgiveness for the sins that were committed against these people.

The perverse thing is, he's probably doing just that right now ...begging forgiveness from God.

But not from the victims and certainly not from wordly authorities.

fontanalis

I hope what they claim to believe is true as there would be a special place in hell reserved for them. And to think this organisation saw fit to lecture other people on marals and their shortfalls, sickening.

Poly

fontanalis wrote: »

I hope what they claim to believe is true as there would be a special place in hell reserved for them. And to think this organisation saw fit to lecture other people on marals and their shortfalls, sickening.

I do feel sorry for the genuine caring and kind people in the church who do their best to help the needy people in this country.

I’ve had the privilege of meeting some of them. This must be devestating for them.
I’ve also met some arrogant, pompus ar$eholes in the church too.
It's sound very American and cliched but" What would jesus do?"

bmaxi

69 wrote: »

Any links to child molestation in the Anglican, Lutheren etc flavours of this catholic church? Or is it just the madcap celebacy policy of the Catholic church that is at the heart of this whole shambles?

I can't supply any links but it's certainly not unknown. I doubt though, that it is anything like as widespread or as institutionalised in these churches, then again they wouldn't have anything like the numbers of the RC church.

fontanalis

Poly wrote: »

I do feel sorry for the genuine caring and kind people in the church who do their best to help the needy people in this country.

I’ve had the privilege of meeting some of them. This must be devestating for them.
I’ve also met some arrogant, pompus ar$eholes in the church too.
It's sound very American and cliched but" What would jesus do?"

I think this shows the disconnect between parish/everyday ordinary people and the upper ranks of the church which frankly seems like an old boys club (literally) that cares only about itself. Like you say there are alot of decent people in the church.
Personally I see a massive difference between a regular priest (doing good work in the community, being there for people through some of the worse tragedies/situations imaginable) and these morons who live a life utterly disconnected from reality. What a waster of their years!

goat2

fontanalis wrote: »

I think this shows the disconnect between parish/everyday ordinary people and the upper ranks of the church which frankly seems like an old boys club (literally) that cares only about itself. Like you say there are alot of decent people in the church.
Personally I see a massive difference between a regular priest (doing good work in the community, being there for people through some of the worse tragedies/situations imaginable) and these morons who live a life utterly disconnected from reality. What a waster of their years!

the pope is as guilty as the rest, since he did not defrock the priest, only moved him on to do more wicked deeds, which means that the head of the roman catholic church has lied his way to the top
the rch has no head now, which means we as catholics should decide by vote what to do with all the property the rch has sell some and hand he proceeds over to the people who have been hurt by this

Amtmann

Are people jumping the gun a bit here? BBC is carrying only a minor article about this at the moment. It doesn't seem to be the media storm that many here are claiming.

ei.sdraob

Furet wrote: »

Are people jumping the gun a bit here? BBC is carrying only a minor article about this at the moment. It doesn't seem to be the media storm that many here are claiming.

3000 articles already about it in all sorts of newspapers

but if course its all a lie :rolleyes: and Vatican are denying it all

The pope's spokesman has launched a vigorous counter-attack against a report linking Benedict XVI to a sex abuse cover-up while he was archbishop of Munich from 1977 to 1981.

Father Federico Lombardi appeared to suggest in an interview on Vatican Radio that the pope, who also has strong links to the city of Regensburg, was the victim of a plot.

bmaxi

Poly wrote: »

I do feel sorry for the genuine caring and kind people in the church who do their best to help the needy people in this country.

I’ve had the privilege of meeting some of them. This must be devestating for them.
I’ve also met some arrogant, pompus ar$eholes in the church too.
It's sound very American and cliched but" What would jesus do?"

If you think there are arrogant and pompous people in the church today you should have been around fifty years ago.
As to what Jesus would do, well based on his track record so far, nothing. You'd think that a Deity, who saw fit to change water into wine for a wedding piss-up, and is apparently currently painting self portraits on frying pans and doughnuts, could take time off from His busy schedule to do some little thing to protect those, whom He himself described as "the kingdom of God". If there is a God, then on the last day I'll feel as much justified in asking Him to account for His actions as He will mine.
I'm not in the business of shaking anyone's belief or faith, I really don't care that much but it's time that we stopped touching the forelock to these people. Ireland celebrated her freedom from what was seen as foreign tyranny by voluntarily succumbing to another form, as perpetrated by church and state in collusion.

Tail Wagger

Jase's doe's any of them fancy a nice woman, or are they all sicko's

Ultravid

St. Basil said:

"The cleric or monk who molests youth or boys, or is caught kissing or committing some depravity with them, let him be whipped in public, deprived of his crown (tonsure) and, after having his head shaved, let his face be covered with spittle and let him be bound in iron chains, condemned to six months in prison, reduced to eating rye bread once a day in the evening three times per week. After these six months of living in a separate cell under the custody of a wise elder advanced in the spiritual life, let him make prayers, vigils, and manual work, always under the watch of two spiritual brothers, without being allowed to have any relationship...with young people".

St. John Chrysostom said:

"All passions are dishonorable, for the soul is even more damaged and degraded by sin than the body is by disease. But the worst of all passions is lust between men...The sins against nature are more problematic and less satisfying, so much so that one cannot even say that they procure pleasure, since true pleasure is only that which is according to nature. But when God abandons a man, everything is turned on its head! ".

Tough words indeed, but food for thought. In the latter text, referring to lusts between men, they are not referring to those who struggle and resist same-sex attractions and choose to remain chaste and pure (and therefore please the good God), but to those who have actually yielded to the disordered attractions and commit sins. In these modern times, I suggest that psychologists were listened to by Bishops, so that men were sent back out into the community; instead, they should have been dealt with in a different way.

The elephant is still in the corner of the room folks.

peasant

This is an interesting read:

Interview with the Promotor of Justice at the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, Msgr. Charles J. Scicluna, Regarding Clerical Sexual Abuse Cases

http://www.oecumene.radiovaticana.org/en1/Articolo.asp?c=363896

Please not that the current pope was the head of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith before he became pope.

excerpts from the article:

The accused, then, are three thousand. How many have been tried and condemned?
Currently we can say that a full trial, penal or administrative, has taken place in twenty percent of cases, normally celebrated in the diocese of origin - always under our supervision - and only very rarely here in Rome. We do this also in order to speed up the process. In sixty percent of cases there has been no trial, above all because of the advanced age of the accused, but administrative and disciplinary provisions have been issued against them, such as the obligation not to celebrate Mass with the faithful, not to hear confession, and to live a retired life of prayer. It must be made absolutely clear that in these cases, some of which are particularly sensational and have caught the attention of the media, no absolution has taken place. It's true that there has been no formal condemnation, but if a person is obliged to a life of silence and prayer, then there must be a reason...

A recurring accusation made against the ecclesiastical hierarchy is that of not reporting to the civil authorities when crimes of paedophilia come to their attention.
In some English-speaking countries, but also in France, if bishops become aware of crimes committed by their priests outside the sacramental seal of Confession, they are obliged to report them to the judicial authorities. This is an onerous duty because the bishops are forced to make a gesture comparable to that of a father denouncing his own son. Nonetheless, our guidance in these cases is to respect the law.

And what about countries where bishops do not have this legal obligation?
In these cases we do not force bishops to denounce their own priests, but encourage them to contact the victims and invite them to denounce the priests by whom they have been abused. Furthermore, we invite the bishops to give all spiritual - and not only spiritual - assistance to those victims. In a recent case concerning a priest condemned by a civil tribunal in Italy, it was precisely this Congregation that suggested to the plaintiffs, who had turned to us for a canonical trial, that they involve the civil authorities in the interests of victims and to avoid other crimes.

A final question: is there any statue of limitation for delicta graviora?
Here you touch upon what, in my view, is a sensitive point. In the past, that is before 1898, the statute of limitations was something unknown in canon law. For the most serious crimes, it was only with the 2001 motu proprio that a statute of limitations of ten years was introduced. In accordance with these norms in cases of sexual abuse, the ten years begin from the day on which the minor reaches the age of eighteen.

Is that enough?
Practice has shown that the limit of ten years is not enough in this kind of case, in which it would be better to return to the earlier system of delicta graviora not being subject to the statue of limitations. On 7 November 2002, Venerable Servant of God John Paul II granted this dicastery the power to revoke that statue of limitations, case by case following a reasoned request from individual bishops. And this revocation is normally granted.

If you read this this between the lines, underneath all the semblance of justice and openess, this is basically a "how to" on cover-ups ...backdoors aplenty to choose from

Ultravid

VATICAN CITY, 13 MAR 2010 (VIS) - Given below is the text of an interview, published today by the Italian newspaper "Avvenire", with Msgr. Charles J. Scicluna, promoter of justice of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, concerning the investigative and judicial activities of that dicastery in cases of "delicta graviora", which include the crime of paedophilia committed by members of the clergy:

Msgr. Charles J. Scicluna is the "promoter of justice" of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. He is effectively the prosecutor of the tribunal of the former Holy Office, whose job it is to investigate what are known as "delicta graviora"; i.e., the crimes which the Catholic Church considers as being the most serious of all: crimes against the Eucharist and against the sanctity of the Sacrament of Penance, and crimes against the sixth Commandment ("thou shall not commit impure acts") committed by a cleric against a person under the age of eighteen. These crimes, in a "Motu Proprio" of 2001, "Sacramentum sanctitatis tutela", come under the competency of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. In effect, it is the "promoter of justice" who deals with, among other things, the terrible question of priests accused of paedophilia, which are periodically highlighted in the mass media. Msgr. Scicluna, an affable and polite Maltese, has the reputation of scrupulously carrying out the tasks entrusted to him without deferring to anyone.

Question: Monsignor, you have the reputation of being "tough", yet the Catholic Church is systematically accused of being accommodating towards "paedophile priests".

Answer: It may be that in the past - perhaps also out of a misdirected desire to protect the good name of the institution - some bishops were, in practice, too indulgent towards this sad phenomenon. And I say in practice because, in principle, the condemnation of this kind of crime has always been firm and unequivocal. Suffice it to recall, to limit ourselves just to last century, the famous Instruction "Crimen sollicitationis" of 1922.

Q: Wasn't that from 1962?

A: No, the first edition dates back to the pontificate of Pius XI. Then, with Blessed John XXIII, the Holy Office issued a new edition for the Council Fathers, but only two thousand copies were printed, which were not enough, and so distribution was postponed sine die. In any case, these were procedural norms to be followed in cases of solicitation during confession, and of other more serious sexually-motivated crimes such as the sexual abuse of minors.

Q: Norms which, however, recommended secrecy...

A: A poor English translation of that text has led people to think that the Holy See imposed secrecy in order to hide the facts. But this was not so. Secrecy during the investigative phase served to protect the good name of all the people involved; first and foremost, the victims themselves, then the accused priests who have the right - as everyone does - to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. The Church does not like showcase justice. Norms on sexual abuse have never been understood as a ban on denouncing the crimes to the civil authorities.

Q: Nonetheless, that document is periodically cited to accuse the current Pontiff of having been - when he was prefect of the former Holy Office - objectively responsible for a Holy See policy of covering up the facts...

A: That accusation is false and calumnious. On this subject I would like to highlight a number of facts. Between 1975 and 1985 I do not believe that any cases of paedophilia committed by priests were brought to the attention of our Congregation. Moreover, following the promulgation of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, there was a period of uncertainty as to which of the "delicta graviora" were reserved to the competency of this dicastery. Only with the 2001 "Motu Proprio" did the crime of paedophilia again become our exclusive remit. From that moment Cardinal Ratzinger displayed great wisdom and firmness in handling those cases, also demonstrating great courage in facing some of the most difficult and thorny cases, "sine acceptione personarum". Therefore, to accuse the current Pontiff of a cover-up is, I repeat, false and calumnious.

The rest can be read here:
http://212.77.1.245/news_services/press/vis/dinamiche/e1_en.htm

There is also this:

NOTE ISSUED BY HOLY SEE PRESS OFFICE DIRECTOR

VATICAN CITY, 13 MAR 2010 (VIS) - Holy See Press Office Director Fr. Federico Lombardi S.J. today issued a note entitled "A clear route through stormy waters".

"At the end of a week in which a large part of the attention of the European media has been focused on the question of sexual abuses committed by people in institutions of the Catholic Church, we would like to make three observations: ...

read more:
http://212.77.1.245/news_services/press/vis/dinamiche/e0_en.htm

fontanalis

To be fair they mightn't know how to dal with crimes. You'd have to do something awful like get pregnant out of wedlock before they could offer advice.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0313/abuse1.html

Ultravid

"We can say that about 60% of the cases chiefly involved sexual attraction towards adolescents of the same sex, another 30% involved heterosexual relations," he said.

"The remaining 10% were cases of paedophilia in the true sense of the term; that is, based on sexual attraction towards prepubescent children."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8565986.stm

Elephant. Room. Corner.

fontanalis

Ultravid wrote: »

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8565986.stm

Elephant. Room. Corner.

What elephant?

Ultravid

fontanalis wrote: »

What elephant?

The exact nature of the majority of the abuse. There is an article attached to this post, it is addressing this issue.

kev9100

Ultravid wrote: »

Tough words indeed, but food for thought. In the latter text, referring to lusts between men, they are not referring to those who struggle and resist same-sex attractions and choose to remain chaste and pure (and therefore please the good God), but to those who have actually yielded to the disordered attractions and commit sins. In these modern times, I suggest that psychologists were listened to by Bishops, so that men were sent back out into the community; instead, they should have been dealt with in a different way.

The elephant is still in the corner of the room folks.

I don't want to be rude, but what the hell are you talking about? I apologise if i have misunderstood you, but are you really comparing homosexuality to what these bastard priests did?

Ultravid

kev9100 wrote: »

I don't want to be rude, but what the hell are you talking about? I apologise if i have misunderstood you, but are you really comparing homosexuality to what these bastard priests did?

Did you read the article I attached to my last post? If you didn't, then we have nothing to discuss.

Biggins

Seperate news item:

In an interview with German magazine Der Spiegel a former choirboy Thomas Mayer said he was raped by older boys at a time when Ratzinger ran the choir.

He also said Ratzinger had violent fits of outrage during rehearsals.

"Ratzinger, I saw him extremely angry and irascible during rehearsals," Mayer said. "Several times I saw him throw a chair at the male voices, which I was part of." Once he was so angry that he spat his dentures out.

Ratzinger recently acknowledged that he had "given slaps" at the beginning of his tenure and that he had always had a "bad conscience" about it and felt "relieved" when a law banning corporal punishment was made in the early 1980s.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20100313/twl-vatican-fights-to-distance-pope-from-4bdc673.html

Make of the whole article what one can!
The pope can't say he didn't know priests didn't misbehave in his early days - not when one so close to home is also abusive!
He should have learned right - the right way to deal with such issues from an early start, its not like he hadn't the opportunity to do so.
His brother doing the slapping alone was giving him the chances to grow and learn.

kev9100

Ultravid wrote: »

Did you read the article I attached to my last post? If you didn't, then we have nothing to discuss.

Unfortunately no as my computer won't let me open it. Can you give a brief summary?

Ultravid

kev9100 wrote: »

Unfortunately no as my computer won't let me open it. Can you give a brief summary?

Child Molestation by Homosexuals and Heterosexuals
by Brian W. Clowes, Ph D, David L. Sonnier
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=6506

Carry

Biggins wrote: »

Seperate news item:



http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20100313/twl-vatican-fights-to-distance-pope-from-4bdc673.html

Make of the whole article what one can!

That's Theo Ratzinger, the pope's older brother, not that Ratzinge rwho is pope.
Just to clarify.

Carry

I'm really not surprised by all these revelations. All my adult life I believed, no, I knew, that any monotheistic faith (that is, christian, muslim and jewish faith) is just a power thing not different from any other dictatorship which enforces their believes on people by manipulation and violence.
But let's stick to the roman catholic church in this case, the original church of christianity.

No matter how christianity started, and as far as I remember there were originally a few revolutionary ideas behind it, but christianity claimed eventually world domination, still does, as soon as they got organised.

To claim power first thing is to keep the peasants stupid and ignorant, preaching fire and brimstone and to put literally the fear of god into them.
Next is to eliminate everything and everyone who disputes their power.

Christianity created the Dark Ages by eliminating any culture, any knowledge anything and anyone who stood in their way. Especially women, who bear children and knew how to heal %2

Ultravid

Scandal in the Church

Talk about garbage may be a hard thing to hear, but why do you think we have had so much scandal in the Church recently? So many men who felt like garbage took up the priesthood to cover over their pain—rather than heal it—and yet it leaked out anyway onto the lives of innocent victims. And why did Carl Rogers succeed in ruining those religious orders? So many men and women who felt like garbage underneath their habits turned to humanistic psychology to feel good about themselves without having to be bothered about discipline and obedience. They threw away the “old-fashioned and up-tight” ideas of sin and hell, and, finding themselves with nothing to repent, they soon found their religious lives collapsing around them, more useless garbage for the garbage pile.*





*http://www.chastitysf.com/q_humanistic.htm#SC

kev9100

Ultravid wrote: »

Child Molestation by Homosexuals and Heterosexuals
by Brian W. Clowes, Ph D, David L. Sonnier
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=6506

Ok, I've read your article and I have to ask, are you serious? That was one of most convoluted and disgusting pieces of trash I've read in a long time. It does'nt even provide links for the so-called scientific research that allegedly backs up their bigoted claims. If you genuinely do believe that rubbish, I really do feel sorry for you.

Ultravid

kev9100 wrote: »

Ok, I've read your article and I have to ask, are you serious? That was one of most convoluted and disgusting pieces of trash I've read in a long time. It does'nt even provide links for the so-called scientific research that allegedly backs up their bigoted claims. If you genuinely do believe that rubbish, I really do feel sorry for you.

Facts and figures don't lie. You may, however, prefer to take your cue from the homosexual activists. That's your choice I guess. Please don't feel sorry for me, rather those who have been abused.

Carry

My post got cut off and wasn't complete. Apologies if there is a rule about it, but got carried away: Here's the rest:

Carry wrote: »

I'm really not surprised by all these revelations. All my adult life I believed, no, I knew, that any monotheistic faith (that is, christian, muslim and jewish faith) is just a power thing not different from any other dictatorship which enforces their believes on people by manipulation and violence.
But let's stick to the roman catholic church in this case, the original church of christianity.

No matter how christianity started, and as far as I remember there were originally a few revolutionary ideas behind it, but christianity claimed eventually world domination, still does, as soon as they got organised.

To claim power first thing is to keep the peasants stupid and ignorant, preaching fire and brimstone and to put literally the fear of god into them.
Next is to eliminate everything and everyone who disputes their power.

Christianity created the Dark Ages by eliminating any culture, any knowledge anything and anyone who stood in their way. Especially women, who bear children and knew how to heal %2

They have actually the "fear of god" of women. Might be a reason why they prefer altar boys? Just a bitter remark on the side.

They spread christianity not by the their god's word of love and forgiveness but by fire and sword – be a christian or die.
They tortured and raped and killed and genocided, just to be in power.
They were (as an organisation) always on the side of those in political power, be it in Nazi Germany, be it in Ireland while doing deals with the English (give us back our religion and we keep the peasants submissive). Not to mention their power on education, health and whatnot they still have in the 21st century in Ireland. Or elsewhere.

They are still fighting any enlightenment, they are fighting for a world which doesn't exist anymore.

I am truly delighted that even the pope is exposed by now and that the scandal shows how corrupt this criminal organisation is. What the Irish news never mentioned is that the German victims' association or their representatives expressed that there is no such thing that an archbishop doesn't know about movements in his diocese. The catholic church is an hierachical, bureaocratic and dictatorial organisation after all. Every placement of a (abusive) priest goes through the usual movements. There is no way that any canon is allowed to make his own decision. That's a scapegoatism to protect the pope. Like in the Mafia.

What I'm afraid of is that power always wins. As someone mentioned here, they'll sit it out, rewrite history and go on as always. There are too many brainwashed believers…

They brainwashed the whole christian world, no, even the whole world, by even antagonising all the other religions and cultures. I truly think that the roman catholic church is – in their own belief – the true devil in this world.