Barely a week after Cardinal Ratziner became Pope Benedict XVI, he faced claims of obstructing justice after it emerged he issued an order ensuring the Church’s own investigations into child sex abuse claims be carried out in secret. The order was made in a confidential letter which was sent to every Catholic bishop in May 2001.
It asserted the Church’s right to hold inquiries behind closed doors and keep the evidence confidential for up to 10 years after the victims reached adulthood.
The letter, ‘concerning very grave sins’, was sent from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican office that was overseen by Ratzinger.
It spelt out to bishops the Church’s position on a number of matters including sexual abuse by a cleric ‘with a minor below the age of 18 years’.
Ratzinger’s letter stated that the Church can claim jurisdiction in cases where abuse has been ‘perpetrated with a minor by a cleric’.
The letter states that the Church’s jurisdiction ‘begins to run from the day when the minor has completed the 18th year of age’ and lasts for 10 years.
It ordered that ‘preliminary investigations’ into any claims of abuse should be sent to Ratzinger’s office, which had the option of referring them back to private tribunals in which the ‘functions of judge, promoter of justice, notary and legal representative can validly be performed for these cases only by priests’.
“Cases of this kind are subject to the pontifical secret,” Ratzinger’s letter concluded.
Breaching the pontifical secret at any time while the 10-year jurisdiction order is operating still carries penalties, including excommunication.
The letter is referred to in documents relating to a lawsuit filed earlier this year against a church in Texas on behalf of two alleged abuse victims.
By sending the letter, lawyers acting for the alleged victims claim the Pope, as cardinal, conspired to obstruct justice.
Ratzinger was originally named as a defendant in the case but, when he became Pope Benedict he succeeded, as Vatican head of state, in being granted immunity from being sued in the US.
Daniel Shea, the lawyer for the two alleged victims who discovered the letter, said: 'It speaks for itself. You have to ask: why do you not start the clock ticking until the kid turns 18? It's an obstruction of justice.'
Father John Beal, professor of canon law at the Catholic University of America, gave an oral deposition under oath on 8 April last year in which he admitted to Shea that the letter extended the church's jurisdiction and control over sexual assault crimes.
The Ratzinger letter was co-signed by Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone who gave an interview two years ago in which he hinted at the church's opposition to allowing outside agencies to investigate abuse claims.
'In my opinion, the demand that a bishop be obligated to contact the police in order to denounce a priest who has admitted the offence of paedophilia is unfounded,' Bertone said.
Shea criticised the order that abuse allegations should be investigated only in secret tribunals. 'They are imposing procedures and secrecy on these cases. If law enforcement agencies find out about the case, they can deal with it. But you can't investigate a case if you never find out about it. If you can manage to keep it secret for 18 years plus 10 the priest will get away with it,' Shea added.
A spokeswoman in the Vatican press office declined to comment when told about the contents of the letter. 'This is not a public document, so we would not talk about it,' she said.
Jee added to this, well no, actually, let's talk about it!
Originally posted by JeeMoral considerations aside, is it 'obstruction to justice' to not report a crime?
Barely a week after Cardinal Ratziner became Pope Benedict XVI, he faced claims of obstructing justice after it emerged he issued an order ensuring the Church’s own investigations into child sex abuse claims be carried out in secret. The order was made in a confidential letter which was sent to every Catholic bishop in May 2001.
It asserted the Church’s righ ...[text shortened]... about it,' she said.
Jee added to this, well no, actually, let's talk about it!
Private inquiries are not obstructing justice unless they deliberately conceal evidence.
Catholics should have been all over Benedict for this 'jurisdiction' crap. Unfortunately, clan behaviour is everywhere. It's a travesty and just another reason for a clear separation between church and state.
Originally posted by PalynkaWhat about the fact that, because of the secrecy of confession, kids are not protected and usually the offender is just moved to another church where he'll be in contact with other children?
Moral considerations aside, is it 'obstruction to justice' to not report a crime?
Private inquiries are not obstructing justice unless they deliberately conceal evidence.
Catholics should have been all over Benedict for this 'jurisdiction' crap. Unfortunately, clan behaviour is everywhere. It's a travesty and just another reason for a clear separation between church and state.
It was surely the initial aim of the secrecy of confession to protect people and not put them in danger.
Originally posted by JeeSecrecy of confession? That wasn't under discussion here. No, I don't think priests should be forced to report confessions.
What about the fact that, because of the secrecy of confession, kids are not protected and usually the offender is just moved to another church where he'll be in contact with other children?
It was surely the initial aim of the secrecy of confession to protect people and not put them in danger.
Originally posted by shavixmirDunno who Gary Glitter is but I am with you for the velvet underground bit 😉
Mohammad, Popes, Gary Glitter....they're all shagging kids willy nilly.
Isn't it time we called a halt to superstitious religion, killed Gary Glitter and started listening to the Velvet Underground?
Originally posted by Palynkayep I know, sorry for that. Just thought about a thread about the attitude of the church in regard to priests commiting those acts.
Secrecy of confession? That wasn't under discussion here. No, I don't think priests should be forced to report confessions.
Originally posted by JeeI mean, it's hard on them to force them to report confessions. The point of confessions is also about repentance and if a pedophile is willing to go to a priest under confession (knowing he won't report him) there could be at least a chance of the priest helping him.
yep I know, sorry for that. Just thought about a thread about the attitude of the church in regard to priests commiting those acts.
Of course, this recent Vatican position of defending pedophile priests is a sledgehammer to this type of argument.
Originally posted by PalynkaYep, agree on all that.
I mean, it's hard on them to force them to report confessions. The point of confessions is also about repentance and if a pedophile is willing to go to a priest under confession (knowing he won't report him) there could be at least a chance of the priest helping him.
Of course, this recent Vatican position of defending pedophile priests is a sledgehammer to this type of argument.
The only problem here is that it's the same situation in civil society or the religious area: the offender has a better protection than the victim.
In both case, the offender will be free to go, with a possibility that he will offend again.
Does it mean that a priest life has more value than a kid life in the church system? What did Jesus say about this, about protecting the ones can not defend themself?
Originally posted by JeeThing is that it isn't optimal. You'd nail a few pedophiles now (which is great) but you'd forfeit the future impacts as pedophiles would stop confessing. The purpose of confessional secrecy isn't protecting the priest but encouraging confession...
Yep, agree on all that.
The only problem here is that it's the same situation in civil society or the religious area: the offender has a better protection than the victim.
In both case, the offender will be free to go, with a possibility that he will offend again.
Does it mean that a priest life has more value than a kid life in the church system? What did Jesus say about this, about protecting the ones can not defend themself?
As for what Jesus said, I'm not the best person to discuss it as I'm an atheist.
Edit: Again, this is regarding confessions. The 'jurisdiction' question is another thing altogether for which I can't see any possible reason.
Originally posted by PalynkaWell confession isnt the only way to nail pedos, and they just have to listen to the complain from families and kids. But there seem to be obstruction to the justice even when the case is in civil society. Seems like they are untouchable because of their religious status. I must say I have NEVER heard of a priest going to jail for that.
Thing is that it isn't optimal. You'd nail a few pedophiles now (which is great) but you'd forfeit the future impacts as pedophiles would stop confessing. The purpose of confessional secrecy isn't protecting the priest but encouraging confession...
As for what Jesus said, I'm not the best person to discuss it as I'm an atheist.
Edit: Again, this is reg ...[text shortened]... iction' question is another thing altogether for which I can't see any possible reason.
Couple of months ago, in Ireland they release the FERNS report, showing that for the past 40 years or so, the church knew and did nothing but also the cops knew and did nothing neither. There seem to be something very dodgy here.
"Garda handling of complaints of abuse have been strongly criticised in the Ferns Report.
It says formal complaints of sexual abuse were made against eight priests to the gardaí but the garda authorities' handling of one of these complaints was 'wholly inadequate'. The handling of the other cases was satisfactory.
Evidence given to the inquiry of some complaints made to gardaí before 1988 do not appear to have been recorded in any garda file and were not investigated in an appropriate manner.
The report says that this unsatisfactory approach may have been due to the reluctance of the complainant to pursue their complaint or reluctance on the part of members of the gardaí to investigate allegations against members of the Catholic clergy."
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/ferns/
and more generaly on the subject, this one: http://www.bishop-accountability.org
Originally posted by JeeI couldn't agree more there, mate.
Well confession isnt the only way to nail pedos, and they just have to listen to the complain from families and kids. But there seem to be obstruction to the justice even when the case is in civil society. Seems like they are untouchable because of their religious status. I must say I have NEVER heard of a priest going to jail for that.
Couple of months ago, ...[text shortened]... /ferns/
and more generaly on the subject, this one: http://www.bishop-accountability.org
Originally posted by PalynkaPeople are ready to put a lot of work and research and comments about an arab guy that died 2000 years ago on that idea that maybe he was a pedo.
I couldn't agree more there, mate.
People are ready to throw a lot of comment and discussion about millions of people being killed 60 years ago.
Nobody seems to have anything to say on the fact that millions of people die TODAY or that there's a high level of protections for pedos TODAY.
Seems like people like to debate rethorical questions but don't have a thought about what is happening today, around the corner.
Maybe that's just the nature of a debate.
Instead of answering eight specific questions put by reporters about the church and pedophilia at a Vatican news conference, Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, head of the Vatican Congregation for the Clergy, read a two-page statement.
He said sexual abuse was the product of modern culture, where sexual liberties had influenced priests too.
For Christ sake! 😕
Originally posted by JeeWhat did you expect?
People are ready to put a lot of work and research and comments about an arab guy that died 2000 years ago on that idea that maybe he was a pedo.
People are ready to throw a lot of comment and discussion about millions of people being killed 60 years ago.
Nobody seems to have anything to say on the fact that millions of people die TODAY or that there's a h ...[text shortened]... bout what is happening today, around the corner.
Maybe that's just the nature of a debate.
What is their to debate? Did you expect someone to be pro-pedo and take up the debate?
I guess if you just want to zero in on the Catholic Church and heep some abuse on them .. it's a good thread.
Other than that, you're just jerkin' off .. again.