Home
PhotographyA couple of months ago, the Vatican officially stated that “only 1.5 – 5 per cent of Catholic clergy were involved in child sex abuse”.
Read that again: “only 1.5 – 5 per cent”. Right. I wrote an article about it back then, containing some extremely unpleasant facts.
Yesterday, Malte Welding put together a comprehensive overview I want to share here.
In 1962, an official document was sent to all Catholic bishops, signed by the Pope John XXIII. The Guardian brought a story about this document in 2003, also publishing the document online.
The document was confirmed as genuine by the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales. It encourages to “cover up cases of sexual abuse or risk being thrown out of the Church”. The Guardian writes:
“[The document] is called ‘Crimine solicitationies’, which translates as ‘instruction on proceeding in cases of solicitation’. It focuses on sexual abuse initiated as part of the confessional relationship between a priest and a member of his congregation. The instructions outline a policy of ‘strictest’ secrecy in dealing with allegations of sexual abuse and threatens those who speak out with excommunication. They also call for the victim to take an oath of secrecy at the time of making a complaint to Church officials.”
Now comes the interesting part: as dailykos.com pointed out in 2005, Cardinal Ratzinger (also known as Benedict XVI – the current pope) is “the author of a May 2001 letter to bishops stating that the ‘Crimine Solicitationies’ law [...] is still in effect”.
The Catholic Church has been systematically abusing children for decades. They have an official document, encouraging clergy to cover abuse up, and “encourage” victims to swear an oath to keep it secret.
And the current pope Ratzinger officially signed a letter that this practise should continue, in the year 2001.
I feel very, very sick. And I am pretty sure that holy Ratzinger and his devout group of bishops have broken international law here, for a couple of decades. Not necessarily by abusing children – but by covering thousands of cases up.
EDIT:
I also want to share this short speech of Stephen Fry. I naturally don’t agree on everything he says there, but I find the talk very, very interesting.
(Thanks, Benedikt)
EDIT:
The German Minister of Justice, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, gave an interview a couple of hours ago. She is in the wrong party, but has nonetheless always been doing a good job, as far as I am concerned. She criticised the Catholic Church heavily:
“Bisher war nicht der Eindruck da [...] dass [...] hier die Verantwortlichen der katholischen Kirche mit den Strafverfolgungsbehörden konstruktiv zusammenarbeiten.”
“Es ist leider bisher nicht ersichtlich, dass sie ein aktives Interesse an wirklich rückhaltloser und lückenloser Aufklärung gezeigt haben.”
“Kindesmissbrauch ist ein Offizialdelikt, und da können nicht andere darüber entscheiden, ob dieses Delikt verfolgt wird oder nicht.”
February 19th, 2010 at 15:40
View http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xbvr0m_the-intelligence%C2%B2-debate-stephen-fr_shortfilms
I’m not sure, whether there are international laws for that – where would they be written down?
February 21st, 2010 at 03:24
“The Catholic Church has been systematically abusing children [...] holy Ratzinger” don’t make yourself sound stupid.
Neither did “the” church abuse anyone (in a sexual way) but single people connected with that institution that later on tried to cover that abuse up, nor is Ratzinger – not even as pope – holy. I know you know this, but there’s not even good irony or sarcasm found the way you wrote it. It just sounds immature.
Apart from that, i am disgusted by the way the Catholic Curch dealt with the problem of sexual abuse within their ranks.
February 21st, 2010 at 12:46
@ Joe:
I see several points there.
(1) Holy Ratzinger: I did very obviously not quote that. And if you don’t approve with my sarcasm/irony, I prefer to state this differentiation as a matter of taste, not of “stupid[ity]” or “immaturity”.
(2) The Church is an institution and – again very obviously – cannot abuse children. It is people. I thought that was common knowledge already, and it is – both in German and English – common to build sentences in the structure I did, with “The Church” as acting subject (see this Guardian example). You even write yourself that “the Catholic Church dealt with the problem”, and use it in the same way you critisize me for. Not Joe, it was not the Church, “but single people connected with that institution” who were the ones responsible for dealing with it.
(3) You obviously got up on the wrong side of the bed :)
The interesting questions in my opinion really is: when can you start blaming an institution (like the Catholic Church) for what some of its members do – and that is very difficult indeed. As I see it, the Vatican officially stated that “only 1.5 – 5 per cent of the Catholic Clergy were involved in child abuse”. It is very hard to find a good population prevalence of paedophilia, but currently we estimate around 1% of all males having this disposition. Only very few of them actually break laws. Even if the numbers of the Vatican are correct (I naturally expect them to be higher), sexual abuse of children is around 50 times more common within Catholic Clergy than non Catholig Clergy. Those are estimates, but if it’s 30 or 70 times doesn’t really matter.
And this is a proportion where the institution must be held responsible.
@ Benedikt:
Thanks for the link. If I find out my neighbour molests his children, I am quite sure I have to go to the police with it – otherwise I commit a crime myself. Why should anything else be valid for members of the Church?
February 22nd, 2010 at 00:05
As far as I understand, the obstruction of punishment is an offence against German law – and so is the incitement thereof: Demanding that your subordinates cover crimes is a crime in itself (perhaps even organized crime?).
If this ominous document is cited correctly, such an official request by the Catholic Church to its members is a criminal act and this authors and responsibles should be charged.
If we were talking about any other sect, such criminal acts would naturally be prosecuted and the “Verfassungsschutz” would have an eye on that organization.
Well, maybe the law is a bit sloppy or can be bent and the responsibles can’t be charged legally, they still must be charged morally.
February 23rd, 2010 at 01:18
Very interesting interview with the German Minister of Justice, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, in which she criticises the Catholic Church.
February 23rd, 2010 at 09:21
I’m sure, there are national laws against covering up crimes (and like Thomas I’m afraid they can be bent). But I wouldn’t know, what kind of *international* law exists (as far as I know none) that deals with such crimes.
February 24th, 2010 at 11:08
SZ:
“Diese Struktur aus homophober Repression, Geheimniskrämerei und nicht selten Lässlichkeit bricht nun zusammen. Die Kirche kommt an in dem modernisierten System der Sexualmoral der liberalen Gesellschaft, ob sie will oder nicht. Dieses System ist einerseits weitherziger als früher, an anderen Stellen durch die Erkenntnisse von Psychologie und Pädagogik jedoch deutlich strenger geworden. Die Homosexuellen sind längst aus ihren Darkrooms herausgekommen; die Gesellschaft ist parallel dazu nicht mehr bereit, die Dunkelräume der Kirche zu dulden.”
(Danke, Solveig)
February 24th, 2010 at 14:00
Catholic Church reacts and demands from German Minister of Justice to take back her critic of the Catholic Church within 24 hours.
February 26th, 2010 at 18:34
The ultimatum is a blatant insult to this country’s laws and the rule of law in general. All bishops who are complicit in this cover-up have to be arrested, as well as the perpetrators themselves. I just cant believe the lackluster investigations and action of the jurisdiction and the police. These criminals have to be arrested NOW. There is no reason whatsoever to let the Catholic Church do its business. I mean, wtf has happened to this society that we just say “oh they will sort it out by themselves”? What do we have laws for when the Church has its own prosecution and the state does not interfere when its effin obvious that it does not work or even boldly urges to cover up crimes??
I just cant believe it… its so sick to see the media again being very soft. One example: The Benediktiner boarding school of Ettal claims there have been cases from 1950 to 1990. Its always up to 1990, what a great coincidence. But I wanna point out sth else. Their abbot resently resigned because he did not follow the countrywide agreement that abuse cases and assumptions thereof have to be told to the bishops and their clerks. He allegedly did not do that in a case in the year 2005. The obvious conclusion is that there have been cases after 1990. Why in Gods name (literally lol) does nobody investigate that??
I am really losing my faith in this state.
February 26th, 2010 at 18:42
I can’t understand either. But the state has been very lenient regarding the Church anyway – I just read an article that they never ever check the finances, because the Church can be trusted. Second, looking for the article … can’t find it right now, will edit this soon.
February 26th, 2010 at 18:52
Finally, an investigation: http://www.br-online.de/aktuell/katholische-kirche-missbrauch-bayern-ID1266842657103.xml
Maybe now they got the ball rolling…
February 26th, 2010 at 19:01
What a bunch of disgusting creeps.
February 27th, 2010 at 23:29
Here’s what I wanted to link earlier.
“Kirchliche Einrichtungen öffentlichen Rechts – beispielsweise katholische Klöster ohne angeschlossenen Betrieb – sind steuerbefreit und werden deshalb von den Finanzbehörden nicht kontrolliert. Sie gelten per se als vertrauenswürdig.”
March 2nd, 2010 at 13:45
[...] Church Humane [...]