Church Sex Abuse Scandal 'Has Now Reached' The Pope: AP

[DeSwiss]

Church Sex Abuse Scandal 'Has Now Reached' The Pope: AP

Huffington Post | NICOLE WINFIELD | 03/12/10 07:23 PM | AP




VATICAN CITY— Germany's sex abuse scandal has now reached Pope Benedict XVI: His former archdiocese disclosed that while he was archbishop a suspected pedophile priest was transferred to a job where he later abused children. The pontiff is also under increasing fire for a 2001 Vatican document he later penned instructing bishops to keep such cases secret.

The revelations have put the spotlight on Benedict's handling of abuse claims both when he was archbishop of Munich from 1977-1982 and then the prefect of the Vatican office that deals with such crimes – a position he held until his 2005 election as pope. And they may lead to further questions about what the pontiff knew about the scope of abuse in his native Germany, when he knew it and what he did about it during his tenure in Munich and quarter-century term at the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

*snip*

Hours later, the Munich archdiocese admitted that it had allowed a priest suspected of having abused a child to return to pastoral work in the 1980s, while Benedict was archbishop. It stressed that the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger didn't know about the transfer and that it had been decided by a lower-ranking official. The archdiocese said there were no accusations against the chaplain, identified only as H., during his 1980-1982 spell in Munich, where he underwent therapy for suspected "sexual relations with boys." But he then moved to nearby Grafing, where he was suspended in early 1985 following new accusations of sexual abuse. The following year, he was convicted of sexually abusing minors. The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, issued a statement late Friday noting that the Munich vicar-general who approved the priest's transfer had taken "full responsibility" for the decision, seeking to remove any question about the pontiff's potential responsibility as archbishop at the time.

*snip*

The pope, meanwhile, continues to be under fire for a 2001 Vatican letter he sent to all bishops advising them that all cases of sexual abuse of minors must be forwarded to his then-office, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and that the cases were to be subject to pontifical secret. Germany's justice minister, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, has cited the document as evidence that the Vatican created a "wall of silence" around abuse cases that prevented prosecution. Irish bishops have said the document had been "widely misunderstood" by the bishops themselves to mean they shouldn't go to police. And lawyers for abuse victims in the United States have cited the document in arguing that the Catholic Church tried to obstruct justice.

*snip*

"An obligation to secrecy/confidentialtiy on the part of participants in a canonical process could undoubtedly constitute an inhibition on reporting child sexual abuse to the civil authorities or others," it concluded. In the United States, Dan Shea, an attorney for several victims, has introduced the Ratzinger letter in court as evidence that the church was trying to obstruct justice. He has argued that the church impeded civil reporting by keeping the cases secret and "reserving" them for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. "This is an international criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice," Shea told The Associated Press.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/12/popes-former-diocese-admi_n_497167.html">MORE

- It boils down to this: They had a pedo priest in their midst and they tried to hide him for five years or so -- even though he had "no accusations" against him. Meaning that the families of his victims were either scared or bought off, or both - and their kid(s) were shut up for time being. But eventually their pedo priest gets caught by the authorities when they run into someone they couldn't buy. Then, and only then, did he go to jail.

Meanwhile RatBoy here, fifteen years later, tries to staunch what is now a steady overflowing of perverts (from every nook and cranny of the RCC), with Vatican missives telling everyone that they need to hush it all up. Because knowledge of their fore-knowledge and complicity in all this is dynamite and could literally bankrupt and blow-up their whole operation. So this is a Super-Duper-Pontifical-Swear Secret (I'm now doing the proper hand signals and gestures with my tongue to prove I speak with god's authority on this).

But now the shit has hit the proverbial fan and everybody knows everything, or is about to, and the thing's about to bust wide open -- and now here he is -- Pope Benny -- with his Slapp-Happy Brother, and his pimps and male "prostitute semenarians" all up in the newspapers everywhere -- and in the end here he is -- the little boy who gets caught with his finger (if you'll pardon the euphemism) in the dike.

How appropriate.......
==============================================================================
DeSwiss


http://www.atheisttoolbox.com/">The Atheist Toolbox





"Superstition, born of paganism and adopted by Judaism, invested the Christian Church from earliest times. All the fathers of the
Church, without exception, believed in the power of magic. The Church always condemned magic, but she always believed in it: she did
not excommunicate sorcerers as madmen who were mistaken, but as men who were really in communication with the devil." ~ Voltaire

on edit: spelling

[hlthe2b]

1. Who could possibly be surprised...

This Ratzinger should NEVER have been named Pope... It was well known during John Paul's Papacy that Ratzinger was his pedophilia consigliere--he fixed things for the Vatican. If he had any morals whatsoever, he'd resign the papacy. (I won't hold my breath)

[glinda]

7. also he was far more conservative than PJP II was and even Catholic news has disliked him.

Ratzinger had, I think, a total jealously and hate for PJP II.

[DeSwiss]

15. There is very little.....

...that surprises me anymore about the degree and depth of the vagaries and ignobility of The Church.

[rug]

2. This thread will be more popular than porn in prison.

[darkstar3]

4. How would YOU know that?

:evilgrin:

[rug]

5. I've heard things.

[BrklynLiberal]

3. I would be really stunned if anything at all is done about this..

Sadly...it will just go on and on.

[DeSwiss]

16. I must unfortunately agree with you.

There is little justice anymore. Particularly among the Holiest of Holies.

[The Magistrate]

6. It Had To Happen, Sir....

It has reached a point where Catholic clergy is best presumed guilty till proved innocent.

[rug]

8. All 400,000? That's not very judicious.

[The Magistrate]

9. Perhaps Not, Sir, But One Grows Weary Over The Years Of This

That a Catholic clergyman has participated in the covering up of abuse, or engaged in abuse, is becoming a pretty safe wager. Certainly the higher ranks of Catholic clergy are beginning to look like one large and unified conspiracy to protect abusers and commit the felonies involved in shielding them from the justice of the state.

[rug]

10. The worse it is, the wearier it is, the more urgent the law.

And it is worst used bluntly.

[The Magistrate]

11. Sometimes, Sir, A Cancer Is Too Widespread For Surgery

An organization that has so coddled and tolerated these crimes does not deserve continued existence.

[rug]

12. How do you propose to extinguish it?

[The Magistrate]

13. Nothing To Do With Me, Sir

It looks like it may come to collapse under the weight of its own crapulence....

[rug]

14. I think that was first said in 1253.

[RainDog]

22. LOL! the weight of its own crapulence!

great phrase.

well, 6000 priests in the U.S. are known to have abused children, according to City of Angels.

Now there are reports of 200 complaints from people in the Netherlands, the cases in Germany (I don't know the numbers yet and once someone actually talks, this makes it safe for others to come forward.) There are also investigations now in Italy and Austria.

I'd never heard of the prophecies of Malachi until recently. I don't believe them, but it would be sort of, um, fitting that this cover up would bring about the financial ruin of the church because, well, of course, it's the fulfillment of the prophecies of Malachi.

An AP article about the current abuse cases:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_cfU5TnimDgvhfygQBB2NlzikuQD9EDRVS00

Quinn noted that stories of systemic physical, sexual and emotional abuse circulated privately in Irish society for decades, but only moved aboveground in the mid-1990s when former altar boy Andrew Madden and orphanage survivor Christine Buckley went public with lawsuits and exposes of how priests and nuns tormented them with impunity.

Floodgates opened for Irish complaints that have topped 15,000 in this country of 4 million. Three government-ordered investigations have shocked and disgusted the nation, which has footed most of the bill to settle legal claims topping euro1 billion (nearly $1.5 billion).

...In Spain, more than a dozen priests have been convicted of child abuse in recent decades and two potentially larger-scale cases are attracting attention.

Ireland was until relatively recently the most enthusiastically Catholic country in Europe. Its half-dozen seminaries exported priests worldwide. All but one of those seminaries is closed now, illustrating the rapid falloff in Mass attendance as the economy has advanced and secularism has spread.

it seems that, while the vatican itself does not have to take responsibility for bishops (one of whom is now the pope) who covered up and perpetuated abuse by their actions, individual dioceses have been made to pay damages? And this is one way the church will be bankrupted.

The fallout from the truth coming out will further damage the church as more people turn away from it.

And lots of us will be cheering for that to happen.

[RainDog]

23. ..but why does Ireland have to pay damages because of abuse by the church?

as of 1.5 billion U.S. dollars as of this time.

[DeSwiss]

17. I know I always presume them guilty. Especially now.

Because the actions of The Church (of failures thereof), as regards the protecting of the innocent in their charge has left me little choice.








{And Magistrate, its really great to have you back.);)

[Christa]

18. May it be the beginning of the end

For the RCC

[DeSwiss]

20. Let's all hope that this guy has pants on underneath that sign! n/t :-)

[Angry Dragon]

19. There are many within the church

that follow the teachings of their god. It is the ones that feel that the church needs protecting and not the souls that they claim that need saving. I feel it is time to bring the whole church to trial. Arest the pope for any cover-up he has participated in, sue the church for damages.

[DeSwiss]

21. Well that all sounds good....

...the problem is, in the mean time while they continue to send money to it, it's running amok ruining lives. While I'd be the last person to send someone toward The Church in order for someone to try and help them solve their problems, clearly The Church has become a menace to society and needs to be brought under control. Or better still - abolished altogether.


- I think that it's well past the time that we put delusion in its proper place: The Asylum.....

[Joe Chi Minh]

24. Ms Winfield doesn't appear to have mentioned this claim, made

by "one of the bishops closest to Benedict", in the Guardian article on the subject, linked below:

"He (Muller) lashed out at Germany's justice minister, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, who had talked of a Catholic wall of secrecy. Müller said she belonged to a humanist association which he claimed was a kind of "masonry" that "considers paedophilia normal and wants to decriminalise it".

Cold comfort to Benedict's exultant critics, hideous though the clerical cover-up culture has been.

www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/13/vatican-defends-pope-munich-abuse

[RainDog]

25. Muller makes a baseless claim to try to smear critics of the church

this is bullshit. where is there any evidence of this beyond someone who is trying to cover up for KNOWN pedophiles?

[Joe Chi Minh]

27. You think he invited a libel suit? Hardly likely.

[darkstar3]

35. Actually, it would be slander, since he said it, and the written form is someone else quoting him,

and yes, I think he did invite a slander suit. After all, he publicly made statements of a personally damaging and insulting nature that he cannot support with any kind of documentation. That's pretty much right on the money for slander.

Furthermore, if that's the ONLY defense you can mount regarding the truthfulness of this bishop's claims, then you are way in over your head. You don't think a high-ranking Catholic official in an incredibly Christian/Catholic European country would enjoy a certain level of legal immunity? For that matter, bring it on home to America: Pat Robertson and Rush Limbaugh, disgusting pigfuckers though they may be, are not stupid men, and would not willingly land themselves in a court case over something they've said. However, on many occasions, they have both made statements that can only qualify as slanderous. Your claim here that the bishop wouldn't open himself to a slander suit is no different from a wingnut stating that Rush Limbaugh's statements against Michael J. Fox are true because he wouldn't open himself up to a slander suit.

[DeSwiss]

26. As a general rule of law.....

....the truth is an absolute and complete defense against an accusation of slander (or, as in this instance) a set up based upon untruths.

However, as we have seen in this article, what has been reported here is only the facts about RatBoy's history and the fact of his being in charge of the diocese when all this took place. And in such a role as the leader, he bears the responsibility for what took place under his jurisdiction.

And as for the of casting aspersions, this asshole Bishop Muller ought to watch his own tongue for being liable in the spreading falsehoods about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabine_Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger">public officials. And I don't think that the "malice aforethought" on his part, will that difficult to show....

[Joe Chi Minh]

28. You don't think he considered he could be subject to a libel suit, if he lied? Hardly likely he

didn't consider it and discount it. In fact, fanciful in the extreme, wishful thinking. Clearly, the organisation in question would not be lobbying in secret, and it seems unlikely that her membership or otherwise could be impossible to verify.

[DeSwiss]

29. I don't know enough about.....

...German libel law to say.

- I can only hope it is one of many lawsuits in the offing for The Church. With any luck it'll bankrupt them out of business.....

[RainDog]

30. so, admitted pedophiles within the church are somehow not at fault

because Müller makes this claim? is that what you're saying?

and are you also trying to say that the abuse that occurred and was investigated in Ireland and the U.S. doesn't matter because of Müller's claim about one person in a town in Germany?

and are you also trying to say that the abuse that is being investigated in The Netherlands, Switzerland, Spain, Italy and Poland is also because of the one person in a town in Germany?

And, even if Müller's claims are true, that a German official is part of a pedophile ring - does that mean his good buddies are not? No.

But, yes, I do want to find out about this person and the claims made against her by Müller, who was a bishop in the region that is now having to defend itself against abuse... including abuse by the pope's brother.

[RainDog]

31. so who is the woman that Müller is, and by extension, you, making claims about

"a secret masonic organization that desire to legalize pedophilia."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabine_Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger

Since December 12, 1990 Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger is a member of the German Bundestag. On May 18, 1992 she was sworn in as Federal Minister of Justice of Germany. In 1995 there was a broad public discussion in Germany about the invulnerability of the private domain by means of acoustic observation (Großer Lauschangriff, literally "big listening attack"). In this argument she strongly objected to expanding the state's right to interfer in citizen's private domain. After the members of the FDP decided in a poll to support the conservative lead of the CDU in this matter, she resigned from her office on January 1, 1996. <1>

On October, 28th 2009 she was appointed Federal minister of Justice. It is her third term.

In other words, this is a woman who RESIGNED ON PRINCIPLE because her political party sided with those who would choose to violate people's rights to privacy.

Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger is widowed, after her husband died in 2006. Her father, Dr. Horst Leutheusser, was also a lawyer, and deputy mayor of Minden as member of the CDU. Her uncle, Wolfgang Stammberger, was one of her predecessors as minister of justice (from 1961 to 1962).

what do you have to prove anything one of the Ratfucker's bag men has to say?

[darkstar3]

32. That's because Ms. Winfield understands that

ad hom tu quoque, especially unsourced and unfounded ad hom tu quoque, doesn't make an argument.

[DeSwiss]

33. Not to mention the fact that....

....it would impossible for Ms. Winfield to comment on an article's contents that wasn't printed until two days after her's was posted.

[darkstar3]

34. True that.

That'll teach me to trace back ridiculous claims so I can thoroughly lay the smack down instead of just pointing out ill-used logical fallacies by themselves. Thank you. :)