More documents link Ratzinger to abuse cases

Look into the defenders of the Pope's past and see what skeleton's are uncovered. The Catholic church can heal from this if the Pope truly takes leadership and steps out of his fanatasy bubble of unquestionable power. His generation is done, the new generations of today will NOT tolerate this kind of drunk with power leadership that continues to sweep things under the carpet like the "good old days" of total control of the church. Its a new day for the old boys of the church and this apparent no snitch rule at the vatican. Will Jesus proudly step into leadership of this political church upon his return? We are told he is returning, yet our palace in the Vatican is not in order. Where is the leadership? Why are not the Cardinals standing up for the people, where are the Bishops? Who do they pray to everyday and for what?

I cannot be more upset and outraged in regard to this ridiculous novena!!! There is absolutely no reason for us to be supporting our Pope when our Pope, our leader, should be addressing the needs of those who have been abused!! Where is the novena for the children who were sexually abused by priest!!! A priest is a formative image of God for a child and now that child has been molested! The priest has done irrevocable damage to that child's relationship with God. The mission of the Pope and the mission of the Church is to SHARE THE LOVE OF GOD WITH ALL HUMANITY!!! That is the mission nothing more nothing less.

The entire piece ties the Pope to one story:

Kiesle was removed...

Check the facts, as laid out by the John Jay report: the number of abuse cases and abusers peaked in the early 1980s, and has crashed since then. That is, under JPII and Card Ratzinger, the number of cases per year have fallen by 94%.

It's hard to really make the case that the fellow who cleaned up after the spirit of the times 1960s and 1970s is really implicated in the crisis...

Truth and Trust. Why doesn't the Pope and the bishops tell the truth and trust in the loving God that they claim to follow? Seems like it's a lot of lop service right now. Words, words, words, vs. Logos.

This pope is too heavily invested in the ecclesial status quo to have any credibility in dealing any further with the widespread, rampant episcopal and papal coverups of clerical sexual abuse of children.

My suggestion for His Holiness?

Get on your knees, sir, in the middle of St. Peter's Square and, before a live internationally televised audience, beg God's forgiveness for your role in hiding clerical sexual abuse of children "for the good of Holy Mother Church."

And that's just for starters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In Chile Fr Delfau said, "Among young people, there has been a certain distancing from the church." In Canada the young, the middle aged, and the old have put a substantial distance between themselves and the Church. The distance has increased in the last couple of days since the Bishop of St Catherines resigned, and has now implicated other Ontario bishops in decades of cover-up. We are running short of millstones.

The more evidence that continues to surface that directly links Joe Ratzinger to criminal behavior in the cover-up and recycling of sexual abusers, the stronger the right wingers defend him. They will fight to the death to make sure this reactionary and backward thinking man continues to take the Church down the road to ruin. The College of Cardinals who elected this man as Pope have much to answer for. Granted, John Paul II appointed mostly right wingers as bishops and cardinals, but one would think that at least a few of the moderate thinking bishops might have raised the volume on the dangers of electing a man like Ratzinger to lead the Church. Now we know. The last days of the imperial model of the Roman Catholic Church are at hand.

Too little too late on the part of the hierarchy. Their bureaucracy became more important to them than their mission or the well being of their members - especially the children.

Here is an organization with a male priesthood that shielded pedophiles, while excommunicating women who were ordained.

What is wrong with this picture?

The AP is really reaching here. The situation they report is that a priest was criminally charged with crimes and then petitioned the Holy See to be removed from the clerical state (at the same time thousands of other "spirit of V2ers" were also leaving the priesthood). This man was then, for reasons unknown, allowed by a parish and the diocese to be a volunteer youth minister!! For those keeping count, nothing involves Cardinal Ratzinger at this point. In fact, there was no Cardinal Ratzinger! He wasn't even in Rome at this point! The diocese never asked to have him "defrocked." The petition was for a dispensation from the obligations of the clerical state by the priest himself. The local bishop had removed his faculties...but somehow allowed him to volunteer with children? Keeping in mind that the CDF had no competency in these matter until 2001 (a decision by Ratzinger, always left out of reports), this--much like Weakland's epic fail in WI, was at the hands and fault of the local bishop with absolutely no connection to Joseph Ratzinger.

The Knights of Columbus needs to remove a statement by Judicial Vicar Rev. Thomas Brundage about the Murphy case that has since been disavowed as in error by the author himself. http://www.kofc.org/un/eb/en/papalnovena/brundage.html

Brundage was flat wrong that a canonical trial was not stopped by the CDF's then archbishop Bertone, and his charges against the NYTimes were also retracted for misquoting him. He was never quoted at all, which is fortunate because his information was wrong.

See the full story of his problems with memory: http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/09/priest-who-oversaw-church-tr...

Also, one final interesting twist on the Murphy case is Bertone’s statement in Chile a few days ago, when asked about halting the trial: “Let’s not talk about this topic now, because otherwise we’ll be here all day verifying precisely the action taken by me and by his eminence.”

Wait a minute! So: “action” was in fact “taken” by “his eminence.” But “his eminence” would have to be Ratzinger, right? So while they’ve been telling us, again and again, that Ratzinger was out of the loop, this makes it clear that he was very much in that loop, in it and “taking action.”

Catholic News Service today runs a version of the quote that leaves out the last section about his eminence and just refers to the action “of the congregation in those days.”

Unless Ratzinger engaged a novel management theory that a director’s policies should have no impact on a department’s operations, then supervision is reflective of those policies. Does the buck stop at the top or one rung down or both? Plausible deniability only goes so far.

We need the truth, not spin. Only then is it possible to go forward.

"A 1985 letter signed by Ratzinger cited concerns about the effect that removing the priest would have on 'the good of the universal church.' "

15 YEARS LATER...
The time has come for Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, to be concerned about the effects that NOT removing people AT ALL LEVELS is having on "the good of the universal church!!"

Memo to the current incumbents at the Vatican:
The time for EMPTY WORDS is over.
The people of God DEMAND ACTION!

REVERSE THE REVERSAL!
PAPAL et al. RESIGNATIONS or REMOVALS NOW!
July 14, 2010.

Memo to the Cardinal-electors of the next CONCLAVE:
Benedict XVI's SUCCESSOR must be someone without the BAGGAGE of the clergy sex abuse scandal. Intense scrutiny of the PAPABILE among you is required. Start planning now!

Bishop Felipe Arizmendi Esquivel of San Cristobal de las Casas, Mexico must be in a dream world... I wonder if he knows of any sexual abuses in his diocese and if he is doing anything about it. Mexican people will eventually realize priests are not Jesus. Unfortunately in Mexico people are without support from the clergy or the government when it comes to children sexually abused by priests or anybody. I know of two cases where a 12 and a 10 year old girl were molested by a priest and even thought it was reported to the bishop in several times and by different people, he ignored the report and did nothing about. The father of one of the girls went to the police and reported the abuse but the police turned a blind eye to the case also. Many, if not most priests in Mexico promote the silent oath when it comes to denounce abuses from priests....and, unfortunately, they are protected by the government. Many people are made believe that if any one speaks ill of a priest he/she is speaking ill of Jesus himself so, even when some know of an abusive priest, they will not denounced him for fear of eternal condemnation. Those who denounce the abuses are ignored and often reprimanded.

Bishop Felipe Arizmendi Esquivel of San Cristobal de las Casas, Mexico must be in a dream world... I wonder if he knows of any sexual abuses in his diocese and if he is doing anything about it. Mexican people will eventually realize priests are not Jesus. Unfortunately in Mexico people are without support from the clergy or the government when it comes to children sexually abused by priests or anybody. I know of two cases where a 12 and a 10 year old girl were molested by a priest and even thought it was reported to the bishop in several times and by different people, he ignored the report and did nothing about. The father of one of the girls went to the police and reported the abuse but the police turned a blind eye to the case also. Many, if not most priests in Mexico promote the silent oath when it comes to denounce abuses from priests....and, unfortunately, they are protected by the government. Many people are made believe that if any one speaks ill of a priest he/she is speaking ill of Jesus himself so, even if when some know of an abusive priest, they will not denounced him for fear of eternal condemnation. Those who do denounce the abuses are ignored and then reprimanded.

NO MORE EMPTY WORDS!
ONLY ACTIONS WILL DO!
PAPAL RESIGNATION NOW!
We can't wait until July 14, 2010:
http://news.yahoo.com/video/us-15749625/19061685

Memo to Bertone, Sodano, Lombardi et al.
For "the good of the universal church,"
STOP LYING TO US!
END THE COVERUP!
THE WORLD now KNOWS
WHAT your current BOSS knew and WHEN he knew it!
NON CREDO!
We don't believe HIM!
We don't believe YOU!

New liturgical CHANT:
HEY, HEY,
HO, HO,
This Pope in Rome has got to go!
HEY, HEY!
(working on LATIN translation...)
http://cbs2.com/national/pope.benedict.defrock.2.1622625.html#popeletter

This priest wouldn't be the only one lanquishing for years while the Vatican argues the grave significance and detriment granting them a dispensation taking in to account the "good of the Universal Church".
Never mind the age factor.
This is a shocking mentality and undermines the intelligence of mature adults.
Consequently the abuse continued and lives destroyed.
Not to mention Priests waiting to claim their child/children ligitimately with their dignity intact.
Some for years holding the same "official correspondence" from Rome in their hand.
A cause for scandal to the Church.

Benedict has been an ardent supporter of pedophiles since leaving the Hitler Youth. We can expect more and more revelations about his support as time passes. This scandal is in the very earliest stage.

Is this the complaint: "Kiesle was removed"

Plus, a careful reading reveals: "any decision to defrock Kiesle". This is meaningless; what exactly does AP think 'defrock' means?

Especially as the article implies that Kiesle had long left the Church and there was discussion as to how to deal with his leaving: 'granting the dispensation"

The phrase 'dispensation' likely means dispensing him from clerical responsibilities. It implies that he had aleady left.

Whoops, what's this? From AP: "Kiesle had been sentenced in 1978 to three years’ probation after pleading no contest to misdemeanor charges of lewd conduct for tying up and molesting two young boys in a San Francisco Bay area church rectory.
As his probation ended in 1981, Kiesle asked to leave the priesthood..."
....

So the singular documents here show that: a) Kiesle left the church in 1981; b) he was looking for dispensation from his priesthood and c) after careful consideration, while he was out of ministry, the dispensation was granted.

It would appear that the problem lies squarely a) in the 1970s church and b) with the then Bishop of Oakland, Cummins. Nota bene: Cummins was a notorious liberal.

So once more, we have an uber liberal whose misrule finally lands in Rome. By that time, Kiesle has gone through a civil case and is no longer in active ministry, as Bp Cummins' letter to Ratz in 1982 shows: "if Father Kiesle were allowed to return to the active ministry"

Now, the AP notes that, while the canonical procedures progressed, Kiesle volunteered at a church. Isn't it the liberal Bp Cummins' responsibility, rather than Rome's, to police the local church? Indeed, the diocesan youth minister is quoted as saying she wrote to the chancery and got no response.

She understands better than NCR who is responsible: "A simple phone call to the pastor from the bishop is all it would take" Naw, NCR wants Rome to handle it.

The church will be cleaning up from the madness of the 1970s for decades. But it's imperative to get the facts straight.

I happened to catch some of the World Over on EWTN yesterday (04/09) in which George Weigel and Raymond Arroyo used every dishonest rhetorical trick in the apologist's handbook to try to paint Pope Ratzinger and the Holy See as the victim in this rash of recent revelations. It was thoroughly disgusting.

Am I not understanding this?

--This sentence sounds like Ratzinger didn't want to defrock the priest because of the possible scandal of it:

"A 1985 letter signed by Ratzinger cited concerns about the effect that removing the priest would have on 'the good of the universal church.' "

--But in this sentence isn't clear. Does "dispensation" refer to defrocking the priest? Or does it refer to the decision NOT to defrock the priest out of a sense of mercy? And does the phrase "the young age" refer to the priests age or the age of his victims? Was Cardinal Ratzinger saying that the victims and their families would be hurt if he refused to defrock the priest?

"But the future pope also noted that any decision to defrock Kiesle must take into account the "good of the universal church" and the "detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke within the community of Christ's faithful, particularly considering the young age." Kiesle was 38 at the time."

Heaven save us from Vatican-speak.

What is needed is a novena for the Pope's resignation --- asap. This is not a reparable situation. This is a situation in which the structures that have allowed it to happen (and this pope is one of those structures) need to be taken down and a whole new set of structures need to be set up. The first one is the celibacy issue. I used to think celibacy should be "optional" --- I've come to think that marriage should be a REQUIREMENT for the pastoral clergy and members of the heirarchy (bishops) and only monks can be OPTIONALLY celibate. The celibacy rule is actually attractive to pedophiles --- and is probably why there are so many in the church. Think about it: a pedophile knows he is disordered. So he chooses to be "celibate" and in that way he figures he can spend his life "doing good" within the church while refraining from his disordered sexuality because he's "celibate." That dream, of course, dies when the first altar boy crosses his path. (I think the situation is analogous to fat farms for the very obese --- people choose these farms because they know there will be no tempting foods and they'll be in control of their appetites --- but then they get out of the farm and have to walk by an ice cream shop). The dream dies hard to the reality for these people. The celibacy requirement is actually ATTRACTING these pedophlles to the church. The only way to keep them at bay is to eliminate this requirement and to limit the priesthood to healthy, extremely well-screened MARRIED men. It won't keep all pedophiles at bay, but the numbers will drop significantly.

Come on NCR. You should be able to tell that the AP's reportingon Kiesle on Oakland was false. Cummins wrote asking for a dispensation for Kiesle. He didn't bring forth a trial, he wasn't asking the Vatican to punish him by dismissing Kiesle, he was asking the Vatican to dispense Kiesle from his obligations to the Church.

As for Marciel, Ratzinger/Benedict was just about the only person in Rome who wasn't obsessed with protecting him.

There are enough villains in the Church's sex abuse crisis. Benedict isn't one of them.

Can anyone tell me how many more "smoking guns" are going to have to be found before the Catholic laity finally gets sick to their stomach and takes action to get rid of the criminals? Devoted Russians worshiped Stalin and stood by him and rationalized all his crimes. It seems that the same can be said of Catholics these days and their Pope. At this point it looks like the Catholic laity is as morally bankrupt and spineless as the Vatican.

The Knight of Columbus are making a Novena for the Pope!

I'm not surprised, knowing how they think. Why don't they make a Novena for the people abused and their families, living or dead?

The Knights of Columbus are making a Novena for the Pope! This doesn't surprise me knowing how the Knights think.

Why don't they make a Novena for the abuse victims. living and dead, and their families.

Gee, this anti-Catholic conspiracy must be bigger than we thought. I hear the Christian Science Monitor is about to release some hot-tub party pictures (photo-shopped, of course).

The services I went to over Holy Week and Easter was standing room only.

The collection probably did well too.

This Pope will stay in office until he dies. There is some Cardinal somewhere ready to take over that thinks the same way he does.

If people would only realize that nothing is going to change and stop talking about it.

The services I went to over Holy Week and Easter was standing room only.

The collection probably did well too.

This Pope will stay in office until he dies. There is some Cardinal somewhere ready to take over that thinks the same way he does.

If people would only realize that nothing is going to change and stop talking about it.

We don't need a novena unless it is to ask for an open admission of a cover up! Stop trying to defend the inactions of the Vatican.

This mess for the Roman Catholic Church is only going to
get worse as time drags on. There are too many skeletons
in closets which one by one are falling out for all to see.
It is time for a new Pope, it is time for Married Priest,
it is time for Women Priest - it is time for a new Era at
the Vatican. We want an open, honest, transparent church !

Remove the pope from the papacy and the clergy.

End Vatican statehood.

End the "diplomaric immunity" of the Vatican.

Charge the pope and Curia members with Crimes against Humanity in the World Court.

Fix the church. Ordain married men and married women as well as the single.
St. Peter was married. Apostle Junia was married.

Make the church collegial and have the laity too in governance and decision making and supervision of the clergy.

IT IS UNDERSTANDABLE TO DEMAND THE RESIGNATION OF BENEDICT XVI. HOWEVER, WHO WOULD REPLACE HIM? HOW DO WE FIND A CARDINAL, BISHOP OR PRIEST WHO IS NOT IN SOME WAY IMPLICATED IN THIS HISTORY OF THE ABUSE OF CHILDREN WITHIN THE CHURCH? WHO OF THESE WAS NOT IN SOMEWAY AT LEAST AWARE THAT ABUSE WAS GOING ON?? WHO AMONG THEM DID NOT KNOW OF A FELLOW PRIEST BEING AN ABUSER YET DOING NOTHING ABOUT IT?

We need to return to a method of electing popes the way it was in the early Church. Lay people and clergy, including bishops, elect the Bishop of Rome. The College of Cardinals must be abolished. It is the main factor that prevents a fair and democratic election of a pope and leader of the Church. Ratzinger must go! He has too much blood on his hands to continue as the Bishop of Rome. The revelations about his involvement will continue to grow as more and more documents are leaked. This man is guilty of criminal behavior because he recycled abusers and tried his best to cover-up the abuses in order to preserve and promote an image of the Church. This is not acceptable behavior, he must resign and return to Germany. He really should not be above the law. The diplomatic recognition and immunity of the Vatican should end until they obey international laws and codes of common decency. The men in charge at the Vatican have failed us and it is time for radical change and reformation.

Some seem to forget that a person or persons in the church in leadership are human and can err. Abuse is wrong yes, but nothing done by a few can change the fact that the church is God's, always has been and always will be.
The acts of a few do not change the truth of the Church. Sad so many are so ready to jump on the bandwagon to diss the church for faults that have nothing to do with the church but the errs of a human.

Considering the hysterical accusations being made against the Pope in this forum, I wonder how many of you are practicing Catholics and are capable of rational and critical thinking. Regarding the Kiesle matter - the Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith (the role of Cardinal Ratzinger at the time of the Kiesle case) is not responsible for removing a sick, abusive priest from ministry. It is the local bishop! Hello, out there, are you capable of rational discourse? Bishop John Cummins, the Ordinary of Oakland at the time, was primarily responsible for the actions and activities of the priests under his authority. He doesn't need the Pope or the CDF Prefect to remove from ministry a diocesan priest who's committed a crime. It's his responsibility. Sexual abuse of minors is a crime. Law enforcement involvement was imperative. What did Bishop Cummins do about this priest? That's the question. It appears that the bishop and his chancery did nothing after multiple complaints about Kiesle's participation in youth ministry was continuing after reports of his criminal activity was made known to the bishop's office. The question of laicizing the priest, removing him from clerical state completely, is another matter and had no bearing on the local church's responsibility to report this sick criminal to law enforcement and get him off the streets just like any other criminal. So before you join the mob action to string up the present Pope, get the FACTS! Bishop Cummins has some serious explaining to do. The Pope and Vatican authorities cannot be held responsible for policing the whole world. That's why bishops and local ecclesiastical organizations known as dioceses are set up just like any large hierarchical organization.

The real problem is the ordination of homosexual/pedophile men. The John Jay study of clerical abuse in the Catholic Church proved that most cases were committed by priests on young boys and men. The sooner Church leaders from the Vatican down to the diocesan and religious order level take seriously the admonition of Pope John XXIII in his 1961 instruction, Religiosorum Institutio, to ban all homosexually-inclined men from the priesthood, the sooner we'll clean out the Church of the abomination of sexual abuse among the clergy. While over 99% of our priests are good men, it's the rotten few in Satan's grip who need to be rooted out. Any man with psychosexual disorders should be barred from admittance to the seminaries and priesthood. Zero tolerance standards are in order.

The article fails to make clear a few details.
1.) While Ratzinger was head of the CDF, clerical sex abuse cases were only placed under the jurisdiction of the CDF after 2000. The CDF, at the time of the incident. Therefore, it would have been irregular at this time to punish such an offense in this way.
2.) Civil and local ecclesiastical authorities were invoked and he was removed from ministry. Defrocking and removal from ministry are completely different things, and not being defrocked doesn't mean he was allowed to continue ministry.
3.) Ordination, like Baptism or Confirmation, imparts an indelible mark. A grave sin does not make the perpetrator un-ordained, any more than it makes one un-baptized. Seeking to defrock a priest is therefore not just a matter of sinful, or even criminal or evil, actions.
4.) Ratzinger did not support allowing the priest in question to remain in his current position, he said that he doubted whether defrocking would be theologically appropriate as a "punishment." So, if he is accused of anything, it is not enabling, but being "soft on crime."

Our Pope and hierarchy speak with much pride and conviction against abortion, and often refer to our "culture of death." They advocate strongly about the absolute morality of being "pro-life." They emphasize the sanctity and inherent dignity of all life "from womb to tomb." Am I to understand then that this minimization, rationalization, and deflection from painful truths, perpetrated by the Pope, hierarchy, and others, regarding the horrors experienced by innumerable innocent victims, is what it means to be "pro-life"? Are victims of sexual abuse not considered as part of that continuum of "womb to tomb?" Is the hierarchy only selectively "pro-life?" Only pro-life if it doesn't cost them anything? I believe that's what some in the church would refer to as "salad bar Catholicism." I also believe that the crime of sexual abuse is included within the "culture of death." This incredible lack of integrity regarding the connection of these serious moral issues, along with gross unawareness and denial on the part of the hierarchy, is absolutely mind-boggling. Sexual abuse is horrific, and is rampant in families as well. If denial and minimization is OK for the Pope, then it's OK for families: meanwhile, life-changing abuse continues at the hands of fathers, mothers, brothers, uncles, aunts....and yes, priests, bishops, etc. Sexual abuse revealed in families is a systemic problem, as is sexual abuse revealed within the church. Both of these systems respond in remarkably similar ways to these revelations: denial, minimization, blame the victim, deflection, etc. It's heart-breaking and exceedingly painful. I was sexually abused by my brother and father. One of the hardest, and ongoing, parts of my recovery and healing has been the healing of my concept of God, and my relationship with God. Sexual abuse doesn't require a priest-perpetrator for it to seriously distort a person's relationship with God. If the Pope, hierarchy, and others refuse to take even that seriously, then they are imposters. Yes, I pray for the Pope: I pray for him to wake up and be given the courage he needs to stand and be accountable. But mostly, I pray for the victims -- all victims of sexual abuse. I shudder when I hear/read of people over-simplifying the complexities involved in healing. I speak from experience. My brother and father are still unrepentent. It's a long, hard, painful, and lonely road. But Christ is with us in this sickness: he weeps with us and is outraged with us. He is our Light, and I cling to Him -- not the Pope and certainly not the hierarchy. If I didn't believe this, I wouldn't be alive.

He who covers any criminal conduct up is also a criminal HIMSELF, and Pope Ratzinger has been covering this from the very begining, before he turned pope he knew it all from the horse mouth. Archbishop Norberto Rivera Carrera send Priest Nicolas Aguilar-sex offender- to Los Angeles due to "health problems" just to protect the mexican church's image and did nothing, as he has done nothing in regards the Marcial Maciel affaire, another evil sex predator. They knew it all in Vatican long ago for this info got to the Rotweiller Ratzinger's desk when he was the second most important cardinal just below John Paul II.
Now don't come and try to give us all this HOLLY CRAP!!!! DON'T PRAY FOR RATZINGER, PRAY FOR THOSE HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF MOLESTED CHILDREN and get the guilty ones before the Court, present charges against them all please.

If only the Pope and hierarchy would recognize the opportunity they have before them to live what they preach! What a powerful example could be set for families, who also respond with denial and minimization when sexual abuse is revealed, thereby perpetuating the cycle of abuse. The Popes (past and present) refer to the family as the bedrock of society and the church; they highlight the importance of solid family values and family life; they say the family is where vocations come from. Well, Pope Benedict and hierarchy, if you really believe this, then prove it.

Who needs the AP and NYT to slam the Holy Father when the readers of the NCR are willing to do such a bang-up job for free? You're all so willing to blindly believe the media - no doubts, no suspicions, no concerns that the media is doing their level worst to discredit the Holy Father and the Church.

If Pope Benedict had permitted women priests four years ago, and had changed the discipline for priestly celibacy three years ago, and had said contraception was ok two years ago, you'd all be rushing to his defense today.

Christ wondered if He would find faith on Earth upon His return - He wouldn't have to wonder with comments such as these.

Viva la Papa Benedict!!