Pope Benedict's Role in Covering Up Abuse

by blondie 9 Replies latest jw friends

  • blondie
    blondie

    Pope 'led cover-up of child abuse by priests'

    Last updated at 23:22pm on 30.09.06

    Add your view

    Top: Tom Doyle and, bottom, Pope Benedict

    The Pope played a leading role in a systematic cover-up of child sex abuse by Roman Catholic priests, according to a shocking documentary to be screened by the BBC tonight.

    In 2001, while he was a cardinal, he issued a secret Vatican edict to Catholic bishops all over the world, instructing them to put the Church's interests ahead of child safety.

    The document recommended that rather than reporting sexual abuse to the relevant legal authorities, bishops should encourage the victim, witnesses and perpetrator not to talk about it. And, to keep victims quiet, it threatened that if they repeat the allegations they would be excommunicated.

    The Panorama special, Sex Crimes And The Vatican, investigates the details of this little-known document for the first time. The programme also accuses the Catholic Church of knowingly harbouring paedophile clergymen. It reveals that priests accused of child abuse are generally not struck off or arrested but simply moved to another parish, often to reoffend. It gives examples of hush funds being used to silence the victims.

    Before being elected as Pope Benedict XVI in April last year, the pontiff was Cardinal Thomas Ratzinger who had, for 24 years, been the head of the powerful Congregation of the Doctrine of The Faith, the department of the Roman Catholic Church charged with promoting Catholic teachings on morals and matters of faith. An arch-Conservative, he was regarded as the 'enforcer' of Pope John Paul II in cracking down on liberal challenges to traditional Catholic teachings.

    Five years ago he sent out an updated version of the notorious 1962 Vatican document Crimen Sollicitationis - Latin for The Crime of Solicitation - which laid down the Vatican's strict instructions on covering up sexual scandal. It was regarded as so secret that it came with instructions that bishops had to keep it locked in a safe at all times.

    Cardinal Ratzinger reinforced the strict cover-up policy by introducing a new principle: that the Vatican must have what it calls Exclusive Competence. In other words, he commanded that all child abuse allegations should be dealt with direct by Rome.

    Patrick Wall, a former Vatican-approved enforcer of the Crimen Sollicitationis in America, tells the programme: "I found out I wasn't working for a holy institution, but an institution that was wholly concentrated on protecting itself."

    And Father Tom Doyle, a Vatican lawyer until he was sacked for criticising the church's handling of child abuse claims, says: "What you have here is an explicit written policy to cover up cases of child sexual abuse by the clergy and to punish those who would call attention to these crimes by the churchmen.

    "When abusive priests are discovered, the response has been not to investigate and prosecute but to move them from one place to another. So there's total disregard for the victims and for the fact that you are going to have a whole new crop of victims in the next place. This is happening all over the world."

    The investigation could not come at a worse time for Pope Benedict, who is desperately trying to mend the Church's relations with the Muslim world after a speech in which he quoted a 14th Century Byzantine emperor who said that Islam was spread by holy war and had brought only evil to the world.

    The Panorama programme is presented by Colm O'Gorman, who was raped by a priest when he was 14. He said: "What gets me is that it's the same story every time and every place. Bishops appoint priests who they know have abused children in the past to new parishes and new communities and more abuse happens."

    Last night Eileen Shearer, director of the Catholic Office for the Protection of Children and Vulnerable Adults said: "The Catholic Church in England and Wales (has) established a single set of national policies and procedures for child protection work. We are making excellent progress in protecting children and preventing abuse."

    http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23369148-details/Pope+'led+cover-up+of+child+abuse+by+priests'/article.do

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/apr/24/children.childprotection

    Pope 'obstructed' sex abuse inquiry

    Confidential letter reveals Ratzinger ordered bishops to keep allegations secret

    About this article

    Close This article appeared in the Observer on Sunday April 24 2005 . It was last updated at 09:58 on April 25 2005. Pope Benedict XVI faced claims last night he had 'obstructed justice' after it emerged he issued an order ensuring the church's investigations into child sex abuse claims be carried out in secret.

    The order was made in a confidential letter, obtained by The Observer, which was sent to every Catholic bishop in May 2001.

    It asserted the church's right to hold its inquiries behind closed doors and keep the evidence confidential for up to 10 years after the victims reached adulthood. The letter was signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who was elected as John Paul II's successor last week.

    Lawyers acting for abuse victims claim it was designed to prevent the allegations from becoming public knowledge or being investigated by the police. They accuse Ratzinger of committing a 'clear obstruction of justice'.

    The letter, 'concerning very grave sins', was sent from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican office that once presided over the Inquisition and was overseen by Ratzinger.

    It spells out to bishops the church's position on a number of matters ranging from celebrating the eucharist with a non-Catholic to sexual abuse by a cleric 'with a minor below the age of 18 years'. Ratzinger's letter states that the church can claim jurisdiction in cases where abuse has been 'perpetrated with a minor by a cleric'.

    The letter states that the church's jurisdiction 'begins to run from the day when the minor has completed the 18th year of age' and lasts for 10 years.

    It orders that 'preliminary investigations' into any claims of abuse should be sent to Ratzinger's office, which has the option of referring them back to private tribunals in which the 'functions of judge, promoter of justice, notary and legal representative can validly be performed for these cases only by priests'.

    'Cases of this kind are subject to the pontifical secret,' Ratzinger's letter concludes. Breaching the pontifical secret at any time while the 10-year jurisdiction order is operating carries penalties, including the threat of excommunication.

    The letter is referred to in documents relating to a lawsuit filed earlier this year against a church in Texas and Ratzinger on behalf of two alleged abuse victims. By sending the letter, lawyers acting for the alleged victims claim the cardinal conspired to obstruct justice.

    Daniel Shea, the lawyer for the two alleged victims who discovered the letter, said: 'It speaks for itself. You have to ask: why do you not start the clock ticking until the kid turns 18? It's an obstruction of justice.'

    Father John Beal, professor of canon law at the Catholic University of America, gave an oral deposition under oath on 8 April last year in which he admitted to Shea that the letter extended the church's jurisdiction and control over sexual assault crimes.

    The Ratzinger letter was co-signed by Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone who gave an interview two years ago in which he hinted at the church's opposition to allowing outside agencies to investigate abuse claims.

    'In my opinion, the demand that a bishop be obligated to contact the police in order to denounce a priest who has admitted the offence of paedophilia is unfounded,' Bertone said.

    Shea criticised the order that abuse allegations should be investigated only in secret tribunals. 'They are imposing procedures and secrecy on these cases. If law enforcement agencies find out about the case, they can deal with it. But you can't investigate a case if you never find out about it. If you can manage to keep it secret for 18 years plus 10 the priest will get away with it,' Shea added.

    A spokeswoman in the Vatican press office declined to comment when told about the contents of the letter. 'This is not a public document, so we would not talk about it,' she said.

  • sir82
    sir82

    Boy, some of this sounds awfully familiar...

    put the Church's interests ahead of child safety.
    "I found out I wasn't working for a holy institution, but an institution that was wholly concentrated on protecting itself."
    an explicit written policy to cover up cases of child sexual abuse by the clergy and to punish those who would call attention to these crimes by the churchmen.
    total disregard for the victims and for the fact that you are going to have a whole new crop of victims in the next place. This is happening all over the world."

    Hmmm, what other religious organization can we think of with similar policies? Anyone? Anyone?

  • Hope4Others
    Hope4Others

    he issued a secret Vatican edict to Catholic bishops all over the world, instructing them to put the Church's interests ahead of child safety.

    The document recommended that rather than reporting sexual abuse to the relevant legal authorities, bishops should encourage the victim, witnesses and perpetrator not to talk about it. And, to keep victims quiet, it threatened that if they repeat the allegations they would be excommunicated

    The bast**rds! Can I say that?

    He should be sent to prison with all the other no good pedophiles, obstructing justice big time.

    hope4others

  • choosing life
    choosing life

    Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Secret tribunals, not informing authorities, allowing men in positions of authority to have access to more innocent victims, all of these could have come from an article about jws.

    Maybe blowing the lid off of the Catholic Church will do the same for the Watchtower Society. It is interesting that the church the WBTS says they despise so closely resembles the structure of the WBTS itself. Authoritarian structure lends itself to such abuses.

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips

    The British "newspaper" The Observer tells us the following:

    Pope 'obstructed' sex abuse inquiry

    Confidential letter reveals Ratzinger ordered bishops to keep allegations secret

    Jamie ("I'm too unqualified to hold my job") Doward, religious affairs correspondent

    Sunday April 24, 2005

    Pope Benedict XVI faced irresponsible know-nothing claims last night he had 'obstructed justice' after it emerged he issued an order ensuring the church's investigations into child sex abuse claims be carried out in secret. The order was made in a

    confidential publicly available letter, obtained in a death-defying feat of investigative journalism by The Observer by downloading it from the Vatican's web site where it has been available for years [ HERE, YOU MORONS ] , which was sent to every Catholic bishop in May 2001 before the U.S. sex scandal even broke out .

    It asserted the church's right to hold its inquiries behind closed doors (gasp! next they'll be wanting grand juries to do that!) and keep the evidence confidential

    for up to 10 years after the victims reached adulthood whereas what we all know they should do is put the inquiries on CourtTV and hold regular press conferences and put all the humiliating charges and counter-charges out in public so we can sell more newspapers and have a media feeding frenzy and ruin the reputations of all involved by humiliating both innocent victims and priests who have been falsely accused. The letter was signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who was elected as John Paul II's successor last week. (Dum! Dum! Dum!)

    Please pay no attention to the fact that the document was part of the implementation effort for a set of norms that Pope John Paul II himself h ad just enacted nineteen days earlier in a letter [ HERE / TRANSLATION WITH NORMS APPENDED ], so Ratzinger was just doing what his boss told him to do. That shouldn't get in th e way of a good smear on the new pope.

    Ambulance-chasing Lawyers acting for abuse victims claim without any foundation it was designed to prevent the allegations from becoming public knowledge or being investigated by the police. They accuse Ratzinger of committing a 'clear obstruction of justice'. Yes! By saying that the Church's own internal investigation is to be secret, that totally prevents victims from contacting the police and reporting what happened to them. It stops them from obtaining their own civil legal representation. And it stops them from holding press conferences and explaining what happened. You can't have both a closed-door internal Church investigation and a civil investigation at the same time. Everybody knows that!

    The letter, 'concerning very grave sins', was sent from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican office <irrelevant historical smear> that once presided over the Inquisition </irrelevant historical smear> and was overseen by Ratzinger.

    It spells out to bishops

    the church's position on a number of matters which canonical crimes fall under the CDF's jurisdiction, ranging from celebrating the eucharist with a non-Catholic to sexual abuse by a cleric 'with a minor below the age of 18 years'. Ha! Fooled you, didn't we! You thought this document was about the sex abuse scandal (which hadn't yet broken out in the U.S.) and how to cover it up, when really it was simply a clarification of which crimes the CDF has jurisdiction over! Ratzinger's letter states that the church can claim jurisdiction in cases where abuse has been 'perpetrated with a minor by a cleric' and thus prevent the state from doing diddly about them--Not! It says that the CDF has jurisdiction over these cases as far as church law is concerned, saying nothing about what civil courts may do.

    The letter states that the

    church's jurisdiction time that the CDF has to hear the case before its competence expires 'begins to run from the day when the minor has completed the 18th year of age' and lasts for 10 years. Which says nothing about how long the secrecy lasts, despite what we said in the second paragraph, and which is actually an increase in the amount of time that one normally has to file a complaint, which is normally only three years [ SEE CANON 1362 §1 ].

    It orders that 'preliminary investigations' into any claims of abuse should be sent to Ratzinger's office (Yes! He really said that! "Send them to my office! Don't send them to anybody else. Send them to me only. Only I am to see them. Me. Me. Me.") , which has the option if it feels like taking the afternoon off of referring them back to private tribunals in which the 'functions of judge, promoter of justice, notary and legal representative can validly be performed for these cases only by priests' --it being, of course, a bad idea to let priests be judged by "a jury of their peers . "

    'Cases of this kind are subject to the pontifical secret,' Ratzinger's letter concludes. Breaching the pontifical secret at any time

    while the 10-year jurisdiction order is operating carries penalties, including the threat of excommunication.

    The letter is referred to in documents relating to a lawsuit filed earlier this year against a church in Texas and Ratzinger on behalf of two alleged abuse victims whose lawyers are obviously incompetent . By sending the letter, lawyers acting for the alleged victims frivolously claim the cardinal conspired to obstruct justice.

    Daniel ("I'm too incompetent to address this matter") Shea, the lawyer for the two alleged victims who discovered the letter, said: 'It speaks for itself. You have to ask: why do you not start the clock ticking until the kid turns 18? It's an obstruction of justice.'

    Canon law expert John Q. Obvious pointed out that the "clock" of when the complaint can be filed does not start "ticking" when "the kid turns 18." The "kid" can bring an action against the priest even if he is under 18 years of age. What the norms do is guarantee that he has until he is 28 to bring the action so that he isn't forced to bring the action while he is still a child in order to get it heard.

    Father John Beal, professor of canon law at the Catholic University of America, gave an oral deposition under oath on 8 April last year in which he admitted to Shea who used thumbscrews to wring the tearful and much-resisted admission out of him that the letter

    extended clarified the church's CDF's jurisdiction and " control " (Dum! Dum! Dum!) over sexual assault crimes in terms of he Church's internal law .

    <guilt by association smear> The Ratzinger letter was co-signed by Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone who gave an interview two years ago in which he hinted at the church's opposition to allowing outside agencies to investigate abuse claims.

    'In my opinion, the demand that a bishop be obligated to contact the police in order to denounce a priest who has admitted the offence of paedophilia is unfounded,' Bertone said. </guilt by association smear>

    Shea criticised the order that abuse allegations should be investigated only in secret tribunals. 'They are imposing procedures and secrecy on these cases in terms of their own law . If law enforcement agencies find out about the case, they can deal with it. But you can't investigate a case if you never find out about it. If you can manage to keep it secret for 18 years plus 10 the priest will get away with it,' Shea added. "Because obviously if a Church investigation is under way, or if the ecclesiastical statue of limitations has expired, that totally binds the hands of civil authorities. We're living in a theocracy, after all. There's no point in the victim contacting the civil authorities to report the matter. They're powerless unless the Church allows them to do something here."

    A n unnamed and therefore sinister spokeswoman in the Vatican press office who obviously doesn't hang out on the Vatican web site very much declined to comment when told about the contents of the letter. 'This is not a public document since you'd have to, like, go on the Internet to find it , so we would not talk about it,' she said.

    SHEESH!!!

    http://www.jimmyakin.org/2005/04/observe_this.html

  • justhuman
    justhuman

    It is a shame how do Church leaders they put above everything their Church public image. This are the main similarities between the Pope and Watchtower leaders, since both are trying to save their public images.

    No matter what is the cost, above all is the safety of the children and their protection against any molester. Children are above any religious leadeship and above the image of any Church, that is why they should be protected.

    You find all kinds of people in any religion, either is called Christian or Budhist, or Muslim. You will find abusers in all of them, as you will find descent people among all of the religions. The point is how does the leadership on each on of them response to the problem of Child Abuse? Do they cover up the issue in order to save their pupblic image and pretending that nothing happened? Or no matter the cost they report abusers to the authorities so that they will stand on trial against their evil actions?

    I believe the religion and specially Christian dominations should stand as a guardians against any child abusers...

  • Kenneson
    Kenneson

    If the Pope's words are to have any relevance, they will effect change. If not, they are just words. Time will tell.

  • LtCmd.Lore
    LtCmd.Lore

    I hearby dub him: Pope Been a Dick.

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    After millions perhaps billions of dollars paid out and not all the claims yet litigated, the Catholic Church has found that trying to squash the victims has proved to be very expensive and creates PR problems with the "good" Catholics.

    Please enlighen me. How has the Catholic Church tried to squash the victims?

    The Catholic Church at one point in this debacle opened up the way legally (accidentally) for victims to access church documents on this.

    Accidentally? Evidence?

    It wasn't until 2002 and the small but persistent group at SNAP won their first major legal battle in Boston, that things really started rolling. The church still has not disciplined the pedophiles or those in the administration that protected them. Seeing that the current pope headed up the stonewalling process, any verbal apologies are of little weight.

    What would be acceptable discipline in your view? There were already measures in place:

    Crimen Sollicitationis

    The kind of sexual advances dealt with in Crimen sollecitationis was specified in the 1917 Code of Canon Law as follows:

    Canon 904. Ad normam constitutionum apostolicarum et nominatim constitutionis Benedicti XIV Sacramentum Poenitentiae, 1 Iun. 1741, debet poenitens sacerdotem, reum delicti sollicitationis in confessione, intra mensem denuntiare loci Ordinario, vel Sacrae Congregationi S. Officii; et confessarius debet, graviter onerata eius conscientia, de hoc onere poenitentem monere.
    Canon 2368 §1. Qui sollicitationis crimen de quo in can. 904, commiserit, suspendatur a celebratione Missae et ab audiendis sacramentalibus confessionibus vel etiam pro delicti gravitate inhabilis ad ipsas excipiendas declaretur, privetur omnibus beneficiis, dignitatibus, voce activa et passiva, et inhabilis ad ea omnia declaretur, et in casibus gravioribus degradationi quoque subiiciatur

    In accordance with the apostolic constitutions, in particular the constitution Sacramentum Poenitentiae of Benedict XIV of 1 June1741, a penitent must within one month denounce to the Local Ordinary or the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office a priest guilty of the crime of solicitation in Confession; and a confessor must, under a grave obligation of conscience, inform a penitent of this duty.
    Anyone who has committed the crime of solicitation dealt with in canon 904 is to be suspended from celebrating Mass and hearing sacramental confessions and, if the gravity of the crime calls for it, he is to be declared unfit for hearing them; he is to be deprived of all benefices and ranks, of the right to vote or be voted for, and is to be declared unfit for all of them, and in more serious cases he is to be reduced to the lay state.

    The 1983 Code of Canon Law is more succinct:

    Canon 1387. Sacerdos, qui in actu vel occasione vel praetextu confessionis paenitentem ad peccatum contra sextum Decalogi praeceptum sollicitat, pro delicti gravitate, suspensione, prohibitionibus, privationibus puniatur, et in casibus gravioribus dimittatur e statu clericali.

    A priest who in confession, or on the occasion or under the pretext of confession, solicits a penitent to commit a sin against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue, is to be punished, according to the gravity of the offence, with suspension, prohibitions and deprivations; in the more serious cases he is to be dismissed from the clerical state.

    The document above from which I excerpted a portion discusses the policy for handling certain sins and hearings on whether the priest should be removed from his position

    It calls for confidentiality to protect the victim and the silence was mandated so the victim could actually come forward and report the crime without fear of being publicly known.

    Whether the policies spelled out in canon law are good or unrealistic is up for debate. But to say the documents referenced in the OP show a Vatican ordered cover up is an extremely distorted misrepresentation of what the purpose of the documents were.

    Burn

  • blondie
    blondie

    BTS, all you have to do is go over to the www.snapnetwork.org site and read what they have been doing. I attend their conferences and have met the attorneys involved in these cases as well as heard about the experiences of victims in almost all 50 states and several countries. There is no way I can condense this information for you. If you want more information, contact them for their first hand information.

    Blondie

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit