http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1311781/How-decent-Catholics-Pope-hid-child-abuse-calls-gays-evil.html
"How can decent Catholics back the Pope - a man who hid child abuse and calls gays evil?
By JOHANN HARI
Last updated at 11:18 AM on 14th September 2010
Comments (131)
Add to My Stories
Let me appeal to Britain's Roman Catholics now, in the final days before Joseph Ratzinger's state visit begins.
I know that you are overwhelmingly decent people. You are opposed to 
covering up the rape of children. You are opposed to telling Africans 
that condoms 'increase the problem' of HIV/Aids. You are opposed to 
labelling gay people 'evil'. The vast majority of you, if you witnessed 
any of these acts, would be disgusted and speak out.
Yet over the next fortnight, many of you will, nonetheless, turn out to 
cheer for a Pope who has unrepentantly done all these things.
I believe you are much better people than this man. It is my conviction 
that if you impartially review the evidence of the suffering he has 
inflicted on your fellow Catholics, you will stand in solidarity with 
them - and join the protesters.
Pope Benedict XVI: Joseph Ratzinger was personally in charge of the part
 of the Vatican responsible for enforcing Catholic canonical law across 
the world, including on sexual abuse, for 25 years
Some think Ratzinger's critics are holding him responsible for acts that
 were carried out before he became Pope, simply because he is the head 
of the institution involved.
This is an error. For more than 25 years, Ratzinger was personally in 
charge of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the part of 
the Vatican responsible for enforcing Catholic canonical law across the 
world, including on sexual abuse. He is a notorious micro-manager who, 
it is said, insisted every salient document crossed his desk.
LEO McKINSTRY: The Left are using the Pope's visit to attack a Church which gives me strength
PETER HITCHENS: Question - who said: 'Not all sex involving children is 
unwanted and abusive'? Answer - the Pope's biggest British critic
STEPHEN GLOVER: I disagree with many of his teachings. But it's those who oppose Pope Benedict XVI's visit who are the real bigots
Hans Küng, a former friend of Ratzinger's, says: 'No one in the whole of
 the Catholic Church knew as much about abuse cases as this Pope.'
We know what the methods of the Church were during this time. When it 
was discovered that a child had been raped by a priest, the Church swore
 everyone involved to secrecy and moved the priest on to another parish.
 When he raped more children, they, too, were sworn to secrecy and he 
was moved on to another parish. And on, and on.
More than 10,000 people have come forward to say they were raped as part of this misery-go-round.
He let priests go free to rape again and again
The Church insisted all cases be kept from the police and dealt 
with by their own 'canon' law - which can 'punish' child rapists only to
 prayer, penitence or, on rare occasions, defrocking.
Ratzinger was at the heart of this. He refuses to let any police officer see the Vatican's documentation, even now. But honourable Catholics have leaked some of them anyway. We know what he did. Here are three examples.
In Germany in the early Eighties, Father Peter 
Hullermann was moved to a diocese run by Ratzinger. Hullermann had 
already been accused of raping three boys. Ratzinger didn't go to the 
police. Instead, Hullermann was referred for 'counselling'.
The psychiatrist who saw him, Werner Huth, told the Church unequivocally
 that he was 'untreatable [and] must never be allowed to work with 
children again'. Yet he kept being moved from parish to parish, even 
after a sex crime conviction in 1986. He was last accused of sexual 
abuse in 1998.
In the U.S. in 1985, a group of American bishops wrote to 
Ratzinger begging him to defrock a priest called Father Stephen Kiesle, 
who had tied up and molested two young boys in a rectory.
Ratzinger refused for years, explaining 
that he was thinking of the 'good of the universal Church' and of the 
'detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke among the 
community of Christ's faithful, particularly considering the young age' 
of the priest involved. He was 38.
Kiesle went on to rape many more children.
Think about what Ratzinger's statement reveals. Ratzinger thinks the 'good of the universal Church' - your Church - lies not in protecting your children from being raped, but in protecting the rapists from punishment.
In 1996, the Archbishop of Milwaukee appealed to Ratzinger to 
defrock Father Lawrence C. Murphy, who had raped and tortured up to 200 
deaf and mute children at a Catholic boarding school. His rapes often 
began in the confessional. Ratzinger never replied.
Eight months later, there was a secret canonical 'trial'. But Murphy 
wrote to Ratzinger saying he was ill, so it was cancelled. Ratzinger 
advised him to take a 'spiritual retreat'. Murphy died years later, 
unpunished.
These are only the cases that have leaked out. Who knows what remains in the closed files?
In 2001, Ratzinger wrote to every bishop in the 
world, telling them allegations of abuse must be dealt with 'in absolute
 secrecy ... completely suppressed by perpetual silence'.
That year, the Vatican lauded Bishop Pierre Pican for refusing to inform
 the local French police about a paedophile priest, telling him: 'I 
congratulate you for not denouncing a priest to the civil 
administration.' The commendation was copied to all bishops.
It would be anti-Catholic to cheer him
Once the evidence of an international-conspiracy to cover up abuse 
became incontrovertible to any reasonable observer, Ratzinger's 
defenders shifted tack and said he was sorry and would change his 
behaviour.
But this June, the Belgian police told the Catholic Church it could no 
longer 'investigate' child rape on Belgian soil internally, and seized 
the documents relating to child abuse from the offices of a Church 
commission.
If Ratzinger was repentant, he would surely have congratulated them. He 
did the opposite. He called them 'deplorable' and his spokesman said: 
'There is no precedent for this, not even under communist regimes.'
He still thinks the law doesn't apply to his institution. When Ratzinger
 issued supposedly ground-breaking new rules against paedophilia earlier
 this year, he put it on a par with . . . ordaining women as priests.
There are people who will tell you that these criticisms of Ratzinger 
are 'anti-Catholic'. What could be more anti-Catholic than to cheer the 
man who facilitated the rape of your children? What could be more 
pro-Catholic than to try to bring him to justice?
This is only one of Ratzinger's crimes. When he visited Africa in March 
2009, he said that condoms 'increase the problem' of HIV/Aids.
His defenders say he is simply preaching abstinence outside marriage and
 monogamy within it, so if people are following his advice they can't 
contract HIV.
But in order to reinforce the first part of his message, he spreads overt lies, claiming condoms don't work.
In the Congo, I watched as a Catholic priest said condoms contain 'tiny holes' that 'help' the HIV virus - not an unusual event.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
   
                                 
No comments:
Post a Comment