Vatican To Court: Priests Are Not Our Employees - AP/MSNBC

[WillyT]

Vatican to court: Priests are not our employees
By NICOLE WINFIELD - AP
updated 1 hour, 52 minutes ago

<snip>

VATICAN CITY - The Vatican on Monday will make its most detailed defense yet against claims that it is liable for U.S. bishops who allowed priests to molest children, saying bishops are not its employees and that a 1962 Vatican document did not require them to keep quiet, The Associated Press has learned.

The Vatican will make the arguments in a motion to dismiss a federal lawsuit on jurisdictional grounds filed in Louisville, Kentucky, but it could affect other efforts to sue the Holy See.

The Vatican's U.S. attorney, Jeffrey Lena, said it will include a response to claims that the 1962 document "Crimen Sollicitationis" — Latin for "crimes of solicitation" — barred bishops from reporting abuse to police.

Lena said Sunday there is no evidence the document was even known to the archdiocese in question — much less used — and that regardless it didn't mandate that bishops not report abusive priests.

Lena said the confidentiality imposed by Crimen did not trump civil law and was applied only in formal canonical processes, which bishops had the discretion to suspend if there was a conflict with reporting laws.

"It is important that people — particularly people who have suffered abuse — know that, contrary to what some plaintiffs' lawyers have consistently told the media, the canon law did not bar reporting of these crimes to the civil authorities," Lena told the AP.

'Smoking gun' document?

The document describes how church authorities should deal procedurally with cases of abuse of children by priests, cases where sex is solicited in the confessional — a particularly heinous crime under canon law — and cases of homosexuality and bestiality.

The attorney behind the Kentucky case, William McMurry, said in a recent e-mail that the document is "a smoking gun."

"It's evidence of a 'written' policy that demands no mention be made by a bishop of priest sex abuse," he said. "Since our case, and no other, is about holding the Vatican accountable for the bishops' failure to report to civil authorities, any policy that gags the bishop is relevant and material."

<snip>

Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37182162/ns/world_news-europe/

Wow... the Vatican is sounding like a Multi-National Corpo.... Or, the Republican Par...

Oopsie...

:shrug:

[Ruby the Liberal]

1. Happy to K&R this. May they get the whole book thrown at them.

The RCC - aiding & abetting child abuse under written directive since 1962.

[Hekate]

10. Many of us would like to see the Good Book thrown at them as well

Like so, only with thunderbolts: :argh:


Hekate

[malaise]

2. It's always about money for corporations

and the Roman catholic church is one of the oldest on the planet. :puke:

[Ikonoklast]

3. "I swear I do not know that man!"

...St. Peter, at Gethsemane.

[Hekate]

9. Ouch

[SpiralHawk]

4. Wow - this is such a republicon strategery

to pretend your cronies are not your cronies.

It's kinda like Peter denying Christ. I see you had the same thought, Ikono...guess it's kind of a natural acknowledgement of the way it is.

Sooooo republicon.

[Vinnie From Indy]

5. A clear case for a RICO prosecution

n/t

[kenny blankenship]

6. They are independent contractors! They pay for their own funny hats

Since when do Catholic prelates and priests have to obey orders from Rome? Since never! It has nothing whatsoever to do with us, the office of the Pope, or Vatican City Enterprises. Go ahead and sue your brains out. We got 6 seats on the Supreme Court.

[Solly Mack]

7. So Catholic priests in America don't work for the church, don't fall under the hierarchy,

and are in no way connected to the Vatican.

LMAO

Oooh...they're the private contractors of Jesus? The X(e) of God?

lololololololol

[amborin]

13. "private contractors" lol

[Soylent Brice]

16. "The X(e) of God"

:rofl:

[elehhhhna]

8. Priests are freelance subcontractors? lol, right.

[mysuzuki2]

12. actually, in a strange sort of way, they are

priests are treated as self-employed individuals under the US tax code. This is also true of protestant ministers and Rabbis. Probably true for Imams and Wiccan priestesses too as far as I know. I have no idea if this has any legal significance to the pending litigation, and it certainly doesn't mean their superiors have no moral responsibility. Anyway, I thought I would point this out since I seldom pass up an opportunity to be a pedantic asshole.

[pleah]

11. K&R

http://www.asherheimermann.org

[Goblinmonger]

14. Time for another link to the "Pope Song"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHRDfut2Vx0

Disclaimer: Lots and lots of F-Bombs.

[Scuba]

15. Who cares....

Who cares if they're employees or not? If I'm a Boy Scout leader and it's reported to me that a particular troop leader is molesting boys, I'm not goint to transfer him to a new troop. I'm gonna call the cops.

These guys didn't call the cops. They covered up a crime.

Particularly henious considering they were entrusted with the care of these children, but clearly put the public image of their church above the well-being of its members.