Vatican letter: Irish bishops were warned in '97 not to report all child-abuse cases to police

[Brickbat]

Source: AP via Star Tribune

DUBLIN - A newly revealed 1997 letter from the Vatican warned Ireland's Catholic bishops not to report all suspected child-abuse cases to police — a disclosure with the potential to fuel more lawsuits worldwide against the Vatican, which has long denied any involvement in cover-ups.

The letter, obtained by Irish broadcasters RTE and provided to The Associated Press, documents the Vatican's rejection of an Irish church initiative to begin helping police identify pedophile priests.

The letter's message undermines persistent Vatican claims that the church never instructed bishops to withhold evidence or suspicion of crimes from police. It instead emphasizes the church's right to handle all child-abuse allegations, and determine punishments, in house rather than hand that power to civil authorities.

Catholic officials in Ireland declined AP requests on the letter, which RTE said it received from an Irish bishop.

Read more: http://www.startribune.com/world/114105409.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O%3ADW3ckUiD3aPc%3A_Yyc%3AaUvckD8EQDUr

---

Sick. But by all means, consider the Vatican's leaders to be saints.

Edited for bad link.

[tomm2thumbs]

1. Cover Up

big time cover up

[elleng]

6. Huge.

Thought Ratzinger might have been involved. Maybe not, as he was head of Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congregation_for_the_Doctrine_of_the_Faith

[msanthrope]

16. No--this means Ratzi was DEFINITELY involved. He was Prefect

of CDF, and he would have directed how the cases were to be handled.

As Prefect, he is the one who would have determined what canon law controlled, and he would have told the Ambassador what to write.

That a bishop has revealed this is incredible--it is a DIRECT assault on Ratzi.

[elleng]

21. Good. Thanks

[Nothing Without Hope]

35. Exactly! It was Ratzi and the bishop is brave and honorable n/t

[sakabatou]

22. No kidding

[xchrom]

2. recommend

[formercia]

3. The Pope is God's representative on Earth

so, I guess God supports covering up Child Abuse too.

Time for Reconstruction II.

[MsPithy]

15. The god of the christian bible also supports

rape, genocide, (committed by himself) slavery and a father, Abraham, killing his own child to prove the father loves god more than his own son. Sick, sick, sick! No wonder the symbol christians pray to, the cross, is the representation of unspeakable torture.

[TexasProgresive]

29. Bill Flores is my congressional rep

but I don't support his views.

[hulka38]

30. But I saw the puff of smoke from the chimney

when God directed the cardinals to pick the new Pope. I'm so confused now.

[indimuse]

4. Pedophiles and LIARS!! n/t!

[davidthegnome]

5. Despicable

They sure as hell aren't saints - though who knows, in this day and age maybe they'll give Benedick sainthood after he's gone.

[Generic Brad]

39. He gets arrested, is found guilty and is then convicted, I will feel better

Would that qualify as a miracle?

[GillesDeleuze]

7. is this JPII's miracle i have been hearing so much about. nt

[msanthrope]

17. Naw--this is about he current Pope--Ratzi, who was head of the office

that handled these matters.

Amabassadors don't interpret canon law--the Prefect of the CDF does.

[glinda]

36. Haha! That is funny in more ways than one.

[Bluenorthwest]

8. The man who ordered this, they call a Saint....

Some kind of faith that is.

[glinda]

37. Ratzi ordered it. He was the conservative opposite of PJPII who was

becoming ill of health.

[GillesDeleuze]

41. shock! shocked to find gambling... y'know the rest. bt

[Stuart G]

9. This one says it all...if true..and looks like it is..Catholic Church totally guilty since 97 .. nt

[FiveGoodMen]

34. Or, at least, since 397 or thereabouts

[Stuckinthebush]

10. Evil

So evil.

[Jefferson23]

11. The letter puts to rest or should any doubt some may have had.

But has there been doubt all these years? What percentage of those who practice this faith trust what the Vatican has
fed them all these years I wonder. I'm not a christian, so I have no idea.

From the OP:


"The letter is of huge international significance, because it shows that the Vatican's intention is to prevent reporting of abuse to criminal authorities. And if that instruction applied here, it applied everywhere," said Colm O'Gorman, director of the Irish chapter of human rights watchdog Amnesty International.

To this day, the Vatican has yet to endorse any of the Irish church's three major policy documents since 1996 on reporting suspected child abuse to civil authorities. In his 2010 pastoral letter to the Irish people condemning pedophiles in the ranks, Pope Benedict XVI faulted Ireland's bishops for failing to follow canon law and offered no explicit endorsement of Irish child-protection efforts by the Irish church or state.

O'Gorman — who was raped repeatedly by an Irish priest when he was an altar boy and was among the first victims to speak out in the mid-1990s — said evidence is mounting that some Irish bishops continued to follow the 1997 Vatican instructions and withheld reports of crimes against children as recently as 2008.

A third major state-ordered investigation into Catholic abuse cover-ups, concerning the southwest Irish diocese of Cloyne, is expected to be published within the next few months.

[freshwest]

12. This is an example of how religious organizations exist above secular authorities.

Not separate. Above. They are not controlled by government, or else their followers would have realized that and not covered up. They would not have found so many excuses to continue, saying that the church would police itself.

Religions were some of the first organizations in history. Their power is immense as they existed before most governments, nations, even. They continue as nations and leaders rise and fall. They are the fall back authority in the world, like it or not.

We have the first amendment instituted to prevent a marriage of church and state. It is necessary because if they are joined, they leave people without an opposing force to balance things out.

But we don't tax churches, even when they pursue political goals or accumulate great wealth. They exist within our communities, not paying taxes and they are unaccountable. They police themselves within their own opinions.

The church of the past in America, or part of it, anyway, sought to alleviate the suffering of the poor and disenfranchised, and to abolish slavery of all kinds, to bring equality not as mankind created it, but as a divine right for every living creature on the planet. They did what they did because of their interpretation of scripture, which I feel was what MLK did.

The Catholic church has done good and evil. I'm not Catholic, so I don't want to offend those members here who are Catholic or of any religion. The protestant movement has likewise done good and evil. If there is a God as they portray him or her or they to be, they will face judgment in the hereafter, for that is what they preach.

Still the fact remains that a large portion of the people in the world look to these institutions for templates to live their entire lives by; to enshrine, and rejoice in, the things in life they love the most; to stand with them in their troubles and sorrows; to give them help and welfare and advocate for them.

What I know of this subject is not for online distribution, but such abuse is both secular and clerical, and more a function of hierarchy and unaccountability in the way they run their organizations.

The primary offense is that the human being has the desire to understand eternity, to find a purpose, to make one's self better and connect with infinity or the divine. That doesn't require being churched, but in the face of business, nature and politics, many folks need this sort of refuge. For my part, I've left being churched because I no longer believe what I was taught and will not pretend to believe what they do, in order to have their fellowship.

What I'd like to see, but I don't know if the First Amendment prohibits it, is that the religions be treated like any other enterprise of thought and behavior, not given tax-exempt status. It's been abused for a long time and the priest scandal is long-standing and grievous example of how the trust of the faithful has been abused.

Talking as a heretic still seeking my way, this may be part of the human race growing up and not giving their own spiritual development to these different brands of religion, instead finding it on their own and being true to themselves without the hierarchical mindset.

On the other hand, I know families who are strong and united who are now, or at one time were, devout Catholics who frankly, I envy. The ritual of their belief system gave a context to their lives, taught them a code of loyalty and humility in the face of great challenges that has served them better than the some of the individualist practices of protestantism.

So I certainly won't judge the entire group, but they can sue the church and the priests and all of them who let this outrage carry on for as long as they did, straight to bankruptcy court. But what will replace this religion when it is gone, if that is its fate?

Just like those who want the government to go away, we must consider what it will be replaced by. The churches are eager to fill in the vacuum of power that the destruction of any secular authority leaves; in fact, they seem to plan on it. If people have not grown up enough to organize their lives productively without the church, will they fall into a different, new, but more than likely more authoritarian model?

I've seen that already, with people leaving the older denominations and seeking those who meet their political or social criteria, and not much in the way of progressive thinking. Some of our current crop of politicians and pundits come to mind.

As far as the children that were abused, and are continuing to be abused at this very moment around the world, under the guise of authoritarian religion or any other system, are first and foremost human beings. They deserve respect and to be honored as the future adults they will one day be; more than that, they deserve to be treated as perhaps many of us would have liked to be treated.

[closeupready]

13. Tax exempt status has NOTHING to do with the First Amendment.

And is only a fairly recent tax provision - since, I believe, the 1950's.

[GodlessBiker]

18. It has *something* to do with the 1st Amendment. Maybe not the whole enchilada, but something.

"The reasoning behind making churches tax-exempt and unburdened by IRS procedures stems from a First Amendment-based concern to prevent government involvement with religion. By avoiding initial inquiries into churches’ validity as houses of worship, government avoids violating the churches’ free-exercise right to define and regulate themselves. Legislators have also responded to public sentiment that churches provide a valuable function in the community, and therefore should receive benefits that other charitable organizations enjoy."

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/rel_liberty/establishment/topic.aspx?topic=tax_exemptions

[closeupready]

20. Okay, yes, there is that; I was referring more to the designation

of churches as 501(c)(3) organizations, which (I believe) has only been around since about 1953 or 1954. I'd have to check on that, though. Cheers.

[freshwest]

23. Thanks. Let's repeal it then. But I wish...

You'd quoted a source for me to cite elsewhere. If you have one, please post it for me, I'd never heard of how that was done. I wasn't aware that churches paid taxes back in either the colonial era nor the early days of the USA.

A certain interpretation of the First Amendment has used been used by the right to claim that taxation would be a force of intimidation and control, thus interfering with 'the free exercise of religion.'

One way or the other, in relation to the OP, the conflict between secular and church law has been hard to reconcile. It appears that government left this to the church to deal with way too many times.

Oops, just an edit... There has been more discussion while I've been away from the computer.

[closeupready]

Yes, sorry for the confusion.

:hi:

[oldhippydude]

27. agreed

You have been spying inside my head.. every time i hear one of them rail about prayer in schools, in god we trust on our money, or any "america is a Christian nation" rap, i cringe

I have been wondering for years why we don't tax the faith industry, instead under Bush we now subsidize them, as in the faith based initiative.. I'm wondering why that has never been challenged in court, under 1st amendment considerations... Of course with this present bunch of theocratic sympathizers perhaps we should wait..

[freshwest]

32. We can't wait, though. The church gets them even before school.

They've taken over the culture of what being a family is about.

I've been very concerned about the growth of the 'faith industry' as you so aptly term it. They have confused politics and business and cherry picked the scriptures. The problem I have with them is that they never seemed to grasp the Golden Rule.

Instead, it's that other golden rule, 'he who has the gold, makes the rule,' the meaner one that they justify. They seem to love the rich and powerful, or their hearts just seem to be very hard. And they're rewriting history.

The RW has had this country in a death grip for a generation. Kids growing up don't know anything but this mindset, they are washed in from birth almost. From the media culture. Whatever it takes, we have to turn this around or America isn't going to survive.

Hopefully, some of the faith-based community can work some changes on that.

[glinda]

38. Replaced by "Evangelical". I so agree with everything you said X10. Think

You should post it as its own thread if possible. Well said.
I fear the Evangelical extreme will attempt to take in some. I also think Ratzi's Edict on the Catholic Church and Promoting Evangelizing was a fear of this happening, being exposed. Some will leave the Church though.

[freshwest]

40. Thanks, I'll try to figure out how to post. We're not going to escape these guys.

This is a discussion that we can't run from, even if one is an atheist. We're going to be dealing with Palin's prayer warriors soon enough. And I would have to make it clear I'm not 'churched' anymore. Everyone is at their own place.

[glinda]

43. I went to private Catholic Schools and grew up strict Roman Catholic. I also left the Church

in 69/70 so.... I have watched from a political angle all of the changes and have a fair sense of your concerns. Your points should be well taken to mind and heart.

[Solly Mack]

14. k/r

[ehrnst]

19. And they want to BEATIFY John Paul 2????

[grahamhgreen]

24. unveiled decades of cover-ups of abuse involving tens of thousands of Irish children since the 1930s

[jsgindc]

25. 1997 ? and they want to make Pope John Paul 2 a Saint?

The Vatican sent the letter.....and who is the head of the Vatican?


And they want to make him a Saint?

[LynneSin]

26. And they've rewarded that pope with a rush to Sainthood

I guess he'll be the Patron Saint of Pedopiles.

[TalkingDog]

28. Pretty much sums it up

[KansDem]

31. Anybody going to prison over this?

Either here or there?

[fascisthunter]

33. the Powerful Never Pay for Crimes

unless there is no use for that powerful person. This is another reason average folks are getting more and more pissed at the elite.

[RainDog]

42. thou shalt not lie

guess that's one the pope forgot.

[yurbud]

44. keep your kids and money away from them

[lovuian]

45. And John Paul II is up for sainthood

is his name on the document?