Oh Benny, Benny Benny….you are so guilty of so much knowledge. To late to wiggle out of it…Apologies just don’t cut it.

Benedict is guilty as sin. That seems as clear as anything can be at third or fourth hand. And there’s certainly evidence to support a full investigation. I hope Germany doesn’t let him off because he’s “head of a country” like the cravenly US did a few years ago.
The Church will only demonstrate seriousness about this if it opens all its records from those years (probably up to the present) to governmental and public inspection.

At a Vatican press conference on Friday, Zollitsch said German bishops will examine all cases of alleged abuse, “even those that happened a long time ago.”

In other words the fox will examine the fox’s behavior for deviations.

Zollitsch said trials of accused perpetrators by church tribunals were not intended to supersede or influence criminal trials by civil authorities.
That statement seemed to answer criticism from German Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, who denounced the church’s “wall of silence” around sex abuse. She cited a 2001 letter signed by then-Cardinal Ratzinger, reserving preliminary investigation of abuse charges for the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

In what sense does the reporter mean “answer”? Certainly not in the sense of meeting Justice Minister Sabine’s very reasonable objection to the infamous wall of silence.

This pope has only done what all other members of the Catholic Hierarchy have done…..NOTHING; Choosing instead to ride to their positions of wealth and power over the bloodied, sexually butchered bodies of the children of our church. A Final Divine Judgement awaits the criminally depraved indifference of these men of the Church who sold their souls; but for what?

WHERE DOES THE BUCK STOP?
In a March 9, 2010 press release “concerning cases of the sexual abuse of minors in ecclesiastical institutions,” Fr. Federico Lombardi SJ parrots out the Holy See’s predictable responses to the church’s ever widening problem of sexual abuse, particularly that of minor children.
http://212.77.1.245/news_services/press/vis/dinamiche/a0_en.htm
The institutional Roman Catholic church has reacted to the continuing sexual abuse debacle neither rapidly nor decisively, contrary to what Lombardi states. The Vatican has attempted to distance itself from what has happened in country after country, first categorizing it as an “American problem,” then as a “homosexual problem.” Boston’s Cardinal Bernard Law even went so far as to blame the Boston Globe, publicly calling down the wrath of God on the newspaper.
What was done by church leadership in the United States, for example, it was forced to do by the pressure of public opinion after records, files and correspondence were forced into the public venue in 2002 by Judge Constance M. Sweeney, a very brave, grounded and principled Catholic woman in Boston, Massachusetts.
The church’s response continues to be re-active rather than pro-active while minimizing the systemic and endemic abuse of power and authority which has enabled and exacerbated it on the one hand while covering it up whenever and wherever possible on the other.
The “wide-ranging context” is that in countries from the United States, Canada, Australia and Ireland to Austria, the Netherlands and Germany church authorities have repeatedly and consistently disregarded its own moral and Canon laws as well as the existing laws of the countries’ in which these horrific crimes against humanity occurred.
Lombardi does not mention nor does he admit to the well documented widespread cover-up of the sexual abuse of children by bishops and other church officials in many countries like the United States, that makes the church’s sexual abuse problems particularly egregious. If church authorities had done the morally right thing initially how many children would have escaped being sexually abused by a particular priest?
When are people of good will going to say, enough!
When are state legislators going to change the laws so that justice can be pursued for the thousands upon thousands of victims of childhood sexual abuse who have been unable to access let alone obtain justice?
In most states and probably in most countries existing criminal as well as civil laws give more protection to sexual predators and their enablers then they do to victims of childhood sexual abuse – by anyone. This is deplorable and should not be.
The removal of all statutes of limitation in regard to the sexual abuse of children is the single, most effective way to hold predators and enabling institutions accountable before the law.
The state of Delaware in the United States is one of a very few states in the U.S. which has removed all criminal and civil statutes of limitation in regard to the sexual abuse of children – by anyone. It also legislated a two year civil window for previously time barred cases, again, by anyone. That window closed in July of 2009.
In a civil suit, unlike a criminal suit, the burden of proof that any sexual abuse took place is on the plaintiff. The burden is not on the accused individual or institution to prove innocence, at least not in the United States.
Every victim of childhood sexual abuse should have a right to the pursuit of justice at the very least!
If Delaware can do it other states and other countries should be able to do it and hold sexual predators and any enabling institutions responsible, especially those institutions which chose to ignore their own internal laws.
I was privileged to testify before the Senate and House Judiciary Committees in support of the 2007 Child Victims Law in Delaware.
No rules and no laws of any religious organization or denomination should be allowed to trump the laws of a civilized society where the protection of children is concerned.
The Roman Catholic Church should be held to the highest standard as a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, a Convention that by any objective standard it has grossly violated for decades.
Isn’t it time to formalize those violations as the crimes against humanity they truly are?
Sister Maureen Paul Turlish
Victims’ Advocate
New Castle, Delaware, USA
maureenpaulturlish@yahoo.com

“No rules and no laws of any religious organization or denomination should be allowed to trump the laws of a civilized society where the protection of children is concerned”. said, Sister Maureen Paul Turlish.
As well as the troubles of the RCC, this brings to mind the Church or churches in Oregon recently in the news for allowing their children to die because only prayer was used to help their sick children.

I see the Vatican officials are circling the wagons around the Pope. The NYT tells us

In a note read on Vatican Radio on Saturday, the Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said it was “evident that in recent days there are those who have tried, with a certain aggressive tenacity, in Regensburg and in Munich, to find elements to involve the Holy Father personally in issues of abuse.” He added, “It is clear that those efforts have failed.”

also, regarding the infamous wall of silence they tried to drop over any charges against priests and such:

In the interview on Saturday, Monsignor Scicluna also addressed accusations that the Vatican was obstructing justice by imposing secrecy on reports of abuse.
In 2001, Benedict, who was then in charge of Vatican investigations of abuse allegations, sent a letter to bishops counseling them to forward all such cases to his Doctrine of the Faith office, where they would be subject to secrecy.
Monsignor Scicluna dismissed the idea that secrecy was imposed “in order to hide the facts.” Rather, he said, it “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.”
But he said church secrecy had “never been understood as a ban on denouncing the crimes to the civil authorities.”

Here are the pertinent parts of the Wikipedia article on that letter

As, assuredly, what must be mainly taken care of and complied with in handling these trials is that they be managed with maximum confidentiality and after the verdict is declared and put into effect never be mentioned again (20 February 1867 Instruction of the Holy Office, 14), each and every person, who in any way belongs to the tribunal or is given knowledge of the matter because of their office, is obliged to keep inviolate the strictest secrecy (what is commonly called “the secrecy of the Holy Office”) in all things and with all persons, under pain of automatic (latae sententiae) excommunication, incurred ipso facto without need of any declaration other than the present one, and reserved to the Supreme Pontiff in person alone, excluding even the Apostolic Penitentiary.

“The document thus imposed absolute secrecy on the conduct of the trial, even after it had ended and its verdict, favourable or unfavourable, had been put into effect. An oath of secrecy was to be taken not only by the members of the tribunal but also by the person or persons denouncing the priest, by the witnesses, and by the accused priest himself, who was free to discuss it only with his defence counsel (Section 13 of the document).”
“The oath of office to be taken by the members of the tribunal was given as Formula A:”

… I do promise, vow and swear that I will maintain inviolate secrecy about each and every thing brought to my knowledge in the performance of my aforesaid function, excepting only what may happen to be lawfully published when this process is concluded and put into effect … and that I will never directly or indirectly, by gesture, word, writing or in any other way, and under any pretext, even that of a greater good or of a highly urgent and serious reason, do anything against this fidelity to secrecy, unless special permission or dispensation is expressly granted to me by the Supreme Pontiff.

“The ecclesiastical penalty for violation of secrecy by members of the tribunal was automatic excommunication. For the accused priest, it was only automatic suspension a divinis. No ecclesiastical penalty was imposed on accuser(s) and witnesses, unless violation of secrecy occurred after an explicit warning given in the course of their examination”
Clearly no member of the tribunal was going to report anything to the authorities and unless they open all those records to the prosecutors and the public (withholding names as appropriate) we’ll never know what explicit warnings were given. But we can guess.

I see I screwed up the html on that a little; I hope you can keep track of what’s in the article, what’s in the letter and what’s commentary in the Wiki article and what’s my commentary. You could just go to the links and read what’s there.
We need a “sandbox” where we can try our html to see how B’net will interpret it before we post it.

The church may actually be getting worried that the fires of hell are getting close to the supreme dude…Benny. They will continue to lie for him, take blame for him, because that is what they have been trained to do. Protect the almighty church and the chief dude. Benny’s and the churche’s problems aren’t over yet.

Some of you seem a little skeptical of the claims that the Pope knew nothing and knows nothing. So, nnmns, pagansister, and others….allow me to join my voice with yours in a loud chorus of “Really……I mean REALLY”! “He knew/knows nothing? REALLY?”
Each of the recent article seem to echo the old adage “all roads lead to Rome”. Yet each have suggested or reported that the Pope somehow was totally unaware.
I guess it is possible, that even though the Pope’s brother was head of the choir, that the brother knew nothing…or, if he did…that he did not tell his brother.
I guess it is possible that although the Pope had been archbishop of that diocese……that he knew nothing.
I guess it is possible that although the Pope had been head of Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. And, that while head directed all cardinals/bishops/archbishops to forward all files on any sexual abuse allegations to his office….that he knew/knows nothing.
I guess it is possible that for whatever reason, the hierarchy of the Church did not think it important to keep the Pope updated on the many, many, many, many allegations of sexual abuse by priest in many countries. So, perhaps it is possible that he knew/knows nothing.
I guess it is also possible that pigs fly and Hell has frozen over…but, I doubt it. Though, I find it easier to believe that pigs are flying and Hell has suffered an ice storm that to swallow this whale of a claim that the Pope knew/knows nothing. But, perhaps that is just me.
Peace!

What is so hard to believe I don’t have as many people or remote sites that report to me as the pope does. I have no way of knowing what is done in some mission across the country let alone in another country. Even once a report is made there is a lot of investigating that have to take place and that is done by HR. People making accusations without proof seem immature or so focus on their contempt that the contempt filters information that they use to come to their conclusion.

THANKS JohnQ! I laughed through your post…while you were bringing up very pertinent points!!!!
cknuck, can you be that naive that you think Benny had no clue what was happening? He wasn’t always Pope Benny…he was in the lower ranks for awhile…and I’m almost sure things were happening even when he was a lowly priest! Hope nothing happens in your group that leads to you…and folks think that since you were in charge (or whatever rank you have) that you should have known.

Yes, cknuck, just what are you? Sometimes you are a counselor, sometimes an administrator with some number of people and “remote sites” reporting to you and HR people doing your investigations.
What are you, cknuck?
Oh, and if the high mucky mucks didn’t know (which I very much doubt) they were derelict in their duties to the people they were supposed to be serving (but who they seem to have thought existed to serve them).

Possibly this will be a topic tomorrow evening but I want to point out that a courageous group representing Catholic hospitals support the health care reform bill in the House. If you read the article you’ll see they, who care for hundreds of thousands or millions of people, care more about getting health care to the people who don’t have it and so many of whom die each year because of that; these hospital folks care more for those unserved folks than they care about getting the t’s crossed and the i’s dotted in just the right way.
On the other hand those paragons of virtue the Catholic bishops and the Pope care more about those t’s and i’s than they do about the 45,000 or so people who die each year because they don’t have health care.
Just look at who might sabotage better, more secure, more affordable health care for Americans and wonder why such scoundrels should have such power.

the traffic jams, paperwork log jams, inferior heath care this package might create will kill just as well.

cknuck you’re really desperate to find a reason to be against this, aren’t you.

Now, back to the subject at hand. Here’s an article recounting that Cardinal Sean Brady, leader of the RCC in Ireland, was present at a session where two victims of a child-abusing priest were forced to sign statements vowing they would not mention the abuse to anyone but an “approved” priest.

However, speaking in Armagh yesterday, he [Cardinal Brady] defended his role in the meetings where children were sworn to silence. The Cardinal, replying to questions about why he failed to act against the paedophile priest, insisted that he had done so by being part of a process that resulted in Smyth having his licence removed. He said that three weeks after he submitted a report to the Bishop of Kilmore, Smyth was suspended from practising as a priest in the Diocese of Kilmore and throughout the country.
However, Smyth continued to sexually abuse children and later confessed he had done so until at least 1993.
Asked why he did not report the allegations to the proper authorities, Cardinal Brady said: “Even today the appropriate person to do that is the designated person — I was not that person.

That certainly speaks to the mindset of these people who had no concern for the innocent children and immense concern for their colleagues and their institution.

We’ll try that again.
Now, back to the subject at hand. Here’s an article recounting that Cardinal Sean Brady, leader of the RCC in Ireland, was present at a session where two victims of a child-abusing priest were forced to sign statements vowing they would not mention the abuse to anyone but an “approved” priest.

However, speaking in Armagh yesterday, he [Cardinal Brady] defended his role in the meetings where children were sworn to silence. The Cardinal, replying to questions about why he failed to act against the paedophile priest, insisted that he had done so by being part of a process that resulted in Smyth having his licence removed. He said that three weeks after he submitted a report to the Bishop of Kilmore, Smyth was suspended from practising as a priest in the Diocese of Kilmore and throughout the country.

However, Smyth continued to sexually abuse children and later confessed he had done so until at least 1993.

Asked why he did not report the allegations to the proper authorities, Cardinal Brady said: “Even today the appropriate person to do that is the designated person — I was not that person.

That certainly speaks to the mindset of these people who had no concern for the innocent children and immense concern for their colleagues and their institution.

nnmns: There is also an article on the Catholic Health Assn. backing the health care bill on The Deacon’s Bench blog, Saturday March 13. Interesting responses to it there!
I heard about the Irish Cardinal Brady’s excuse for not turning in Smyth’s abuse on NPR…because he “was not that person!!” He wasn’t the “designated person?” That points out that the RCC has a bunch of empty headed robots in it! NOT the designated person!!! Stupid, stupid, stupid. Children continued to be molested because Brady wasn’t the correct person to tell the authorities????

I read this yesterday PS, Carol Keehan, Chief Executive of the Catholic Health Association, representative of the Catholic Hospitals, said on the Groups website, “That although the Health legislature isn’t perfect it represents a major first step toward covering all Americans and would make great improvements for millions of people”. It’s about time thinking people who aren’t politically motivated in their comprehension come out as she has and give their opinions.

Give the pope a break… he was only following orders.

Sir Magpie DeCrow, I really hope you are kidding….The pope was only following orders? From who…GOD? Anyone with an ounce of sense would report abuse….except robots…and actually they might!

to pagansister:
My comment “… he was only following orders” was sly reference to the fact he was once a Hitler Youth, when the Nazis were in power in Germany. I personally could never join a church led by a person with such links to such a foul group of murderers (regardless of the mitigating circumstances). When I heard he was elected I had a feeling it would be bad news. Unfortunately he did not disappoint.

all of these comments are rather tacky, certainly juvenile, incorrect as to the facts, and certainly offensive.

Work From Home