Canon expert: Vatican protected bishops for centuries

[Voltaire2]

The ongoing canonical trial of Guam Archbishop Anthony Apuron is significant in that it’s only the second time in centuries a bishop has been put on trial by the church, said Thomas Doyle, a Catholic priest and former board member of the Canon Law Society of America.

...
There have been 95 cases filed in federal and local court on Guam, accusing priests and others associated with the church of child sexual abuse, including several cases which allege some children reported the abuse to other church officials who didn't help them.

If the accusations are true, Guam’s last three bishops and archbishops, including Apuron, sexually abused children or knew about clergy sexual abuse on island and did nothing to stop it.

Apuron was temporarily removed from his position in the local church in June 2016 following abuse allegations lodged against him by three former Agat altar boys and the mother of a deceased altar boy. They have accused Apuron, who was a village priest in the late 1970s, of rape and molestation.

[link:http://www.guampdn.com/story/news/2017/07/29/canon-expert-vatican-protected-bishops-centuries/522175001/|

[Warpy]

1. Bishops and priests

Thomas Beckett was protecting a priest accused of rape from facing civil law while the church did nothing to defrock and remove him. Finally, Henry II had him whacked and Rome made him a saint.

Women have born the brunt of sex abuse by clergy, especially as girl children. It was only when the rape of altar boys came out that the whole scandal became important. I guess little girls are fair game while poor, defenseless little boys are not.

It's also not exclusive to the RCC, but other religious groups have no problem with the rapists among their clergy facing the music in civil and criminal courts.

The RCC protected them and when the outrage grew too great, simply shuffled them around to other locations.

[BigmanPigman]

2. This is the tip of the iceberg and has been going on for hundreds (probably longer)

years. This occurs throughout all societies and religions, politics, and businesses. They protect their own.

Religion is a profitable business and often highly political (look at the reasons for so many wars throughout 2,000+ years) and is as corrupt and hypocritical as governments and businesses are. Being run by mostly men makes it even more suspect of sexual wrong doings.They rake in so much money and don't even pay taxes...corruption again. Don't ever trust them or you will be fooled.

[trotsky]

3. One could say that pederasty and covering it up became part of the institution itself.

Given what we've learned I don't know how one could deny it.

[guillaumeb]

4. Given that the "institution" itself was not at fault,

one who tries to avoid simplistic framing can indeed deny it.

[trotsky]

5. Given that the behavior clearly became part of how the institution operated,

I'd say my statement is accurate.

Or do you think religious institutions are always perfect and can never have flaws? Talk about simplistic framing!

[guillaumeb]

6. No, the terrible behavior was a part of how certain individuals operated.

So I still feel your statement was inaccurate. It reflects more your own apparent focus rather than the focus of the Institution.

And your last statement is easily refuted by the simple action of reading my actual posts focusing on negative behavior as it occurs in religious people and institutions.

[trotsky]

7. Your personal opinion is duly noted. n/t

[guillaumeb]

8. As was your pivot. eom

[trotsky]

11. Dude, really. Learn what words mean.

The subject of the OP was that the RCC has been covering up child sex abuse for centuries.

My "pivot" noted that such behavior had basically become part of the institution itself.

Pivot implies that I'm changing the subject. My post WAS about the subject - the long-term coverup of the abuse of children within the RCC. If an institution engages in a behavior for centuries, it's fucking part of the institution.

THIS kind of shit is how you keep humiliating yourself.

[guillaumeb]

14. Physician, heal thyself.

Your misstatements of my positions are numerous. You took an item and read into it what you desired to read.

[trotsky]

16. Problem is, if I ask for clarifications of your positions...

you don't provide them, or the clarification just reiterates the position.

Tell me what I've said that's wrong about you, linking to the actual post, and tell me why it's wrong.

You took an item and read into it what you desired to read.

One word for you: mirror.

[guillaumeb]

18. At one point, I mentioned that I can only define Christianity for myself.

I was then accused of attempting to define Christianity.

[trotsky]

21. Link to the post, and my criticism of it. n/t

[Act_of_Reparation]

12. A pivot is an attempt to change the subject.

Like when one brings up religious child abuse and another tries to talk about politics instead.

[Lordquinton]

10. Certain individuals

Like the pope and cardinals, and priests. You know the people who make up the institution.

[Act_of_Reparation]

13. And we don't have a problem with the culture of policing in this country...

...it's just a few bad apples, amirite?

[edhopper]

15. The Republican Party is good

and works in the best interest of all the people.

It's just a few, scarce individuals within the Party that are making things bad.

Can't condemn the whole Party for what is going on.

That sound about right?

[beam me up scottie]

9. Wait, what? Not at fault? Haven't you heard about Crimen Sollicitationis?

Sex abuse and international secrecy imposed by the Vatican
Friday 6 June 2014

For 80 years, the Catholic Church did more than discourage the reporting of child sexual abuse, it enforced a policy of strict and absolute secrecy, punishable by excommunication. Noel Debien and Tiger Webb report on ‘crimen sollicitationis’, a papal decree with direct practical effects long after it was repealed.

***

Tapsell is talking about the air of secrecy surrounding the Catholic Church’s response to allegations of clerical sex abuse. For him, the reason for this secrecy isn’t conspiratorial; it’s the result of a clearly defined canon law. This argument makes up the bulk of his new book, Potiphar’s Wife: the Vatican’s Secret and Child Sexual Abuse.

‘I don’t like using words like smoking guns,’ Tapsell says, ‘but canon law imposes secrecy, and the law is there to be obeyed.’

***

From the Latin for ‘crime of solicitation’, this directive—unusually, not published for public viewing by the Holy Office until 2001—set the standard operating procedure for the Church in dealing with allegations of the sexual abuse of minors. Internal church trials were to be conducted in the strictest secrecy, under threat of automatic and immediate excommunication, only undoable by personal papal decree. Crimen was in force until 1983, but its direct effects on clergy behaviour were long lasting. Another similar policy Secreta Continere updated Crimen, and was released in 1974 by Pope Paul VI creating the Pontifical Secret to replace the Secret of the Holy Office . The Pontifical Secret is still in effect under canon law.

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/religionandethicsreport/sex-abuse-and-international-secrecy-imposed-by-the-vatican/5505698

Ratzinger signed the document which protected pedophile priests and forced victims into silence; it was the official policy of the Church.

How can you possibly say that the institution wasn't at fault? Seriously? Seriously?

[trotsky]

17. "How can you possibly say that the institution wasn't at fault?"

Religious privilege.

[beam me up scottie]

19. Exactly.

[guillaumeb]

20. I answered that long ago.

Actually, I answered it above in the thread.

[trotsky]

22. Correction: you responded.

You didn't answer.

There's a big difference.