BishopAccountability.org
	Are Chinks Finally Appearing in the Vatican's Armour? Colm O'Gorman April 10, 2010 http://colmogorman.com/?p=681 The last twenty four hours have seen further dramatic developments in relation to the Roman Catholic Church and its management of child sexual abuse by its priests. Last night Associated Press revealed yet another case which raises questions about Pope Benedict XVI's involvement in the management of paedophile priests. AP published a letter which seems to show that the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger resisted pleas from a US Diocese to defrock a California-based priest who had sexually assaulting children, citing concerns including 'the good of the universal church'. The Priest himself had asked to be defrocked after he was convicted of tying up and sexually assaulting two boys. The request to the Vatican to defrock the priest was first made by the in 1981. In 1982, Oakland bishop John Cummins urged Ratzinger, as head of the Vatican's congregation for the doctrine of the faith, to grant the request. Nothing much appears to have happened until Cardinal Ratzinger wrote to Bishop Cummins that although the argument for defrocking Kiesle was of "grave significance", it was necessary "to submit incidents of this sort to very careful consideration, which necessitates a longer period of time". The letter also notes the "detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke within the community of Christ's faithful, particularly considering the young age". Another priest, George Mockel, wrote to Cummins: "My own reading of this letter is that basically they are going to sit on it until Steve gets quite a bit older," reported AP. The priest, Father Stephen Kiesle, was 38 at the time. Once again the primary concern of the Vatican appears to have been its reputation and the prevention of scandal, with scant or no regard for child protection or victims of abuse. The letter signed by the man who would become the current Pope clearly establishes that the Vatican resisted defrocking the convicted paedophile priest for the "good of the universal Church". This is the fourth case to emerge which raises very serious questions about the handling of clerical sexual abuse cases by Pope Benedict XVI. -In 1980 as archbishop of Munich and Freising, then Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger approved housing for a priest accused of child abuse. The Priest was subsequently allowed to return to ministry with the knowledge of Joseph Ratzinger and despite explicit psychiatric advice that he posed a threat to children. -Cardinal Ratzinger failed to act over complaints during the 1990s about US priest Lawrence Murphy, who abused over 200 deaf boys in Wisconsin -Cardinal Ratzinger allowed a case against Arizona priest Michael Teta to languish at the Vatican for more than a decade despite repeated pleas for his removal -Cardinal Ratzinger resisted the defrocking of California priest Stephen Kiesle, a convicted offender, saying "good of the universal Church" needed to be considered. The Vatican has robustly defended the Pope. But their defence has been both ridiculous and, at times, deeply insulting. The Pope dismissed questions about his mismanagement of clerical sexual abuse as "petty gossip", a phrase repeated by former Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Sodano at an Easter Mass in the Vatican. The Popes personal preacher also provoked public outrage when he likened the challenges put to the Pope with the "more shameful aspects of anti-semitism." The Vatican moved to distance itself from those comments, made at a mass in front of Pope Benedict. Their attempts were very much undermined when the sermon was published in full on the front page of Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano. Then just when one might have thought the Vatican had made every gaffe it was possible to make in defending the indefensible they managed to prove us wrong. The Vatican came out all guns blazing and claimed that accusations that the Pope helped cover up the actions of paedophile priests are part of an anti-Catholic "hate" campaign targeting the pope for his opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage. You couldn't make it up. But it appears that chinks are finally showing in the Vatican's rapidly rusting armour. In a very significant development spokesman, Vatican spokesman Fr Federico Lombardi acknowledged that the Church had lost public trust and said Church law could no longer be placed above civil laws if that trust were to be recovered. This represents a radical shift in both tone and approach by the Vatican. It acknowledges to things. Firstly the Vatican appears to have finally acknowledged that Church, or Canon, Law has been placed above the rule of Civil Law up until this point, effectively meaning that the Church response to clerical sexual abuse was dictated by a code not remotely concerned with child protection, but designed to protect the Church and its clergy. Secondly it is the first time that the Vatican has acknowledged that this is a significant problem, and that it needs to change. If this is the case it is a very welcome development indeed. Earlier this week it was reported that the Vatican was urging Bishops to cooperate with civil authorities in sex abuse cases involving clergy, but this is not yet truly the case as evidenced bu recent comments made in an interview by the Prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy, Brazilian Cardinal Claudio Hummes. He said that instances of sexual abuse by priests were "criminal facts" as well as serious sins, and require cooperation with the civil justice system. "Once the evil deed has been objectively proven, one must resolutely pursue (the case) to the very end by also turning to ordinary justice," he said. The worrying part of his comments is the use of the words "once the evil deed has been objectively proven". This makes it clear that the Cardinal, head of an important Vatican Department, believes that cases should not be reported to civil authorities until they have first been investigated by church officials. It is simply not credible to believe that the very institution which has been proven to be so negligent in the past can be allowed to investigate cases of clerical abuse and be allowed to decide if they need to be notified to the relevant civil authorities. If the Vatican is to prove that it is serious about dealing with its past failures it must act to introduce clear and enforceable church law which requires that all cases which raise child protection concerns relating to the conduct of clergy be reported to the civil authorities. Of course it has quite correctly been pointed out that there are jurisdictions where the civil authorities may not be sufficiently developed to properly address child sex abuse or where reporting could place the lives of both the victim and perpetrator in danger. In such cases the Vatican must refer to an external, independent body to ensure that any victims are properly supported and any perpetrator dealt with effectively. Global church law which places children's rights and child protection at the heart of the response to any future concerns about abusing clergy is what's needed. And as I have said repeatedly over the past number of years, the one man who can act to make that happen is Pope Benedict XVI. Until and unless he does so, Vatican protestations that he is serious about dealing properly with clerical sexual abuse will be utterly meaningless.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.