Yep, that's the Vatican's latest defense in the sex abuse scandal. In essence, it's claiming that abusive priests and bishops are independent contractors, therefore the Holy Mother of WTF Church isn't responsible for their actions. Along with that, it's telling the court system that this is all ultimately based on religious issues going back to apostolic times, and therefore the legal system needs to just take the pope's claims on ... err ... faith!
Of course, given the hugely hierarchical nature of Catholicism, this is a whopper of a lie. Bishops control parish and non-parish assignments for priests. Archbishops control bishops. And, who names the archbishops?
Old Benedicktus XVI, aka Herr Ratzinger of Hitler Youth fame. (The man surely knows a thing or two about authoritarianism, chains of command, unswerving devotion to higher authorities, etc.)
Oh, Ratzy? U.S. courts have waded into this issue in the past, too, you schmuck. I can't remember the name of it, but one case involved altar donations to a parish, donated by laypeople. The parish priest wanted to do something different, and a court ruled the laypeople had no say in the matter. I'm sure there's other issues involving a bishop telling a priest what to do that have gone to court at some time in the past.
That's on top of the claim that a 1962 decree of Catholic canon law allegedly did NOT forbid bishops from reporting suspicions of child sexual abuse to the authorities.
And, this whopper undercuts Herr Ratzinger's claims that the church needs to be penitent.
Well, the church perhaps. The church's money and property? Well, another story. No, no, no penitence needed to go as far as St. Peter's. Or the Vatican's holdings in Italian utilities, etc.
Beyond that, Il Papa is infallible, right? So, HE doesn't need to be penitent. Just those low-down, perverted independent contractors that he never hired nor supervised, right?
A skeptical leftist's, or post-capitalist's, or eco-socialist's blog, including skepticism about leftism (and related things under other labels), but even more about other issues of politics. Free of duopoly and minor party ties. Also, a skeptical look at Gnu Atheism, religion, social sciences, more.
Note: Labels can help describe people but should never be used to pin them to an anthill.
As seen at Washington Babylon and other fine establishments
1 comment:
shouldn't "degree" be "decree"?
Post a Comment