Priest at Wis. trial calls news reports inaccurate

Of course Ratzinger had nothing to do with it. Both canonically and pastorally, this was all under the responsibility of one REMBERT WEAKLAND.

This might carry credibility if, as Pope, Ratzinger had begun to dismantle the secrecy mechanism that is still in place that covers up the crimes of priestly/bishop sexual abuse. Withstanding such action, this account carries about as much weight as an affidavit from Joseph Goebles that Hitler did no harm whatsoever and is just misunderstood.

Don't confuse us with the truth Father. All that matters is that it made a nice splashy headline for the Times.

It is unreal how much folks in this world hate the Catholic church.
You will not see this story reported anywhere. As Catholics, we can debate the church's proper response to this problem but what I think is beyond debate is how intensely we are hated by the forces of modernity and darkness such as the Times.

I, for one, am delighted that NCR ran this article.

Thank you.

Had I been asked to abate this trial, I most certainly would have insisted that an appeal be made to the supreme court of the church, or Pope John Paul II if necessary.

.....

NB, what Fr Brundage actually reminds is that the infamous Bp Weakland was the person who asked that the trial be abated.

It should be noted that when Fr. Brundage was editor of the Milwaukee Archdiocese's newspaper The Catholic Herald, he ran an editorial condemning the Boston Globe for its reporting on the abuse crisis in Boston.

Steve

Let's all ask ourselves for the sake of truth, not convenience: If the local bishops - who singularly control who is ordained and who receives faculties in their dioceses - had adopted a policy of not allowing known homosexuals to become candidates for the priesthood, would we be having this discussion? Would the NY Times have fodder for its hate-dripping articles, lame and unconvincing though the facts on which they rely might be? Yes? Or no?

There is little doubt in most people minds that the Pope was personally responsible for directing any cover-up surrounding the sexual abuse cases. His efforts and directives to control the situation beginning in 2001 are well documented. This however does not remove the silence that took place for decades prior but the pain and shame these innocent children have suffered continues to this very day. Each new revelation of sexual abuse adds to their suffering. Unfortunate Pope Benedict XVI must now reap what was sown by Cardinal Ratzinger. If the Church and the Pope are unable to handle their own embarrassment above the pain of those children who have suffered for years than perhaps they should resign.

In his defence of the Church Brundage never even once sympathizes with the plight of the real victims. Instead , he attempts to make it seem as if the Church is now the victim. What a clear example of where our church stands today. The problem has been clearly identified by leading experts as systemic. When will the Vatican announce that they are prepared to look inwardly? Only then will true reform take place.

When will homophobic and pedophile priest protector Levada apologize and resign?

http://www.theinquiry.ca/wordpress/rc-scandal/pope/levadas-secret/

Can the United Nations Charter of Human Rights and/or other international agency like Interpol ensure that Ratzinger/Benedict XVI is charged and prosecuted for crimes against humnanity:

for ignoring victims of priests and bishops pedophile predations, for cover-ing up the crimes, for silencing victims, for instructing keeping all secret and stalling victims, for moving the guilty offenders to other parishes so these criminals could re-offend with new victims. (The pope issued a 2001 written directive that all must be kept secret or the clergy faces excommunication and other punishments. Blocking the crimes from being reported to the police, instruction from Ratzinger and JPII.)

Can statehood which is secular be taken away from the Vatican? Is not the Vatican a religious organization, why be a state?

Vatican statehood and diplomatic immunity is being used by the pope for criminal purposes to prevent guilty sex crimes offenders who are in the Vatican from being brought to justice.

The Vatican and RCC criminals feel empowered to continue abusing new victims, including crimes like theft of parish funds as well as sex crimes against children, the deaf, the disabled, the poor, youths, seminarians, the less powerful under the control of other clergy. How can this secular Vatican statehood be rescinded? Can world governments make this needed change?

The Vatican is supposed to be religious. It is wrong to have it as a state. It is not the only church either. There are also the Greek Orthodox, the Coptic Church and many other churches . Then why are not those churches, or Presbyterian a state, or Methodist, or Anglican or any other denomination a state too? The churches of Egypt, Syria, Greece, Lebanon are even older than the Roman one of the Vatican.

This statehood of the Vatican is wrong and gives diplomatic immunity for the pope and his clergy to be outside and above the law with devastating and terrible consequences for the children and the vulnerable of the world.

How can the secular statehood, a mistake, be removed from the Vatican? Is it true this grants the pope and the clergy the ability to be outside of the law, so they can be sheltered from anwering to the crimes they commit? If so this must be changed! The pope must not be beyond the law and allowed to commit and re-commit these heinous crimes against humanity and the vulnerable of the world.

BRUNDAGE: YOU LIE?
http://www.snapnetwork.org/snap_statements/2010_statements/040310_canon_...
http://www.jsonline.com/features/religion/89802007.html

And while we're on the topic, what's the REAL reason behind your own PROMOVERE AD REMOVERE from Milwaukee to ALASKA?

The point is not how commendable the conduct of Benedict XVI HAS been. That is not the point. What was the initial action of the Church to address this crime? Did the Church, its shepherds, the bishops, intiate action to expose this scourge and root it out? Was it the first agency in society to admit and deal with the problem or was it in every case, merely reactive, reacting after the problem was exposed as a wide spread phenonmenon, after the victims and their advocate came forward. The Church, as an instituion as an institution that claims moral authority failed miserable and for that it has lost tremendous credibility. This was not only sinful behaviour but criminal but with the Church's tradition of silence and secrecy, they addressed the problem by carrying out a shell game of shift here and reassign there. It is not a problem of the media or press or homosexual priests (some of the finest priests in the Church are homosexual). It is a problem of the Church iself and it has shown it was more interested in its investments and image than it was the victims.

Catholic or not, but especially all of those who consider themselves to be Christians, ought to be outraged, that even one of the Lord's little ones has undergone the ultimate betrayal by one who is supposed to represent His Divine Love. Then, to have the Church's bishops, cardinals, be complicit in covering up the guilty parties crimes and/or moving them elsewhere, only inflicts further damage to the victims.

I am sorely disappointed at the Church's handling the scandals as a media issue, rather than what it should be--one of ACCOUNTABILITY.

NCR--Thank you for superior reporting,Bert--Thank you for your insightful commentary.