• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pope failed to defrock U.S. sex abuse priest

Catz Part Deux

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
28,721
Reaction score
6,738
Location
Redneck Riviera
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
NYT: Pope failed to defrock sex abuse priest - The New York Times- msnbc.com

Top Vatican officials — including the future Pope Benedict XVI — did not defrock a priest who molested as many as 200 deaf boys, even though several American bishops repeatedly warned them that failure to act on the matter could embarrass the church, according to church files newly unearthed as part of a lawsuit.

The internal correspondence from bishops in Wisconsin directly to Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the future pope, shows that while church officials tussled over whether the priest should be dismissed, their highest priority was protecting the church from scandal.

The documents emerge as Pope Benedict is facing other accusations that he and direct subordinates often did not alert civilian authorities or discipline priests involved in sexual abuse when he served as an archbishop in Germany and as the Vatican’s chief doctrinal enforcer.

Can Ratzinger save himself, or do you think that he should resign?
 
i'm sure that theres a defrocked joke in there somewhere

but this is disgusting, ratzinger should definetly resign, maybe they should just castrate priests, amd nip this in the bud, so to speak
 
Yes, he should resign. My gosh, he has no morals. How could he sleep at night knowing his priest had committed these acts?

Should I be ashamed of myself for enjoying the bad publicity the Catholic church is receiving? :3oops Their handing of this whole mess has been shameful.
 
Last edited:
Yes, he should resign. My gosh, he has no morals. How could he sleep at night knowing his priest had committed these acts?

Should I be ashamed of myself for enjoying the bad publicity the Catholic church is receiving? :3oops. Their handing of this whole mess has been shameful.

1 priest, 200 victims. AMAZING. How can he look himself in the mirror and not want to shoot himself in the head?
 
1 priest, 200 victims. AMAZING. How can he look himself in the mirror and not want to shoot himself in the head?

I have no idea. I am incredulous.
 
As bad as Cardinal Ratzinger actions were, the fact that this Cardinal Bertone personally wrote to Cardinal Ratzinger and told them not to take any action against Father Murphy.
 
As bad as Cardinal Ratzinger actions were, the fact that this Cardinal Bertone personally wrote to Cardinal Ratzinger and told them not to take any action against Father Murphy.

No.

From the article:

'Kind assistance'
But Cardinal Bertone halted the process after Father Murphy personally wrote to Cardinal Ratzinger protesting that he should not be put on trial because he had already repented and was in poor health and that the case was beyond the church’s own statute of limitations.

“I simply want to live out the time that I have left in the dignity of my priesthood,” Father Murphy wrote near the end of his life to Cardinal Ratzinger. “I ask your kind assistance in this matter.” The files contain no response from Cardinal Ratzinger.

Please don't tell me that Cardinal Ratzinger wasn't aware.
 
No.

From the article:



Please don't tell me that Cardinal Ratzinger wasn't aware.

Oh haha wow I suck at reading today. No I wasn't saying Cardinal Ratzinger wasn't aware and it truly is sickening.
 
i'm sure that theres a defrocked joke in there somewhere

but this is disgusting, ratzinger should definetly resign, maybe they should just castrate priests, amd nip this in the bud, so to speak

You can't resign as Pope and you can't be removed from office as pope. The ordination of a new pope is considered to be divinely inspired and therefore perfect and infallible. The pope has to die to leave office. I hope he rots in hell for staining the throne of Peter.
 
This needs to stop. Repeatably covering up incredible numbers of felonies is simply unacceptable. The Church is lucky that it has such social power to avoid prosecution for its actions.
 
You can't resign as Pope and you can't be removed from office as pope. The ordination of a new pope is considered to be divinely inspired and therefore perfect and infallible. The pope has to die to leave office. I hope he rots in hell for staining the throne of Peter.

Are you sure you can't resign? I know you can't be removed, but isn't there precedent for popes leaving office?
 
Are you sure you can't resign? I know you can't be removed, but isn't there precedent for popes leaving office?

I can't recall any. It's die or be killed, which is a distinct possibility given the past of the church. Let's just hope a more ambitious cardinal comes along and offs Ratzinger. There's definitely precedent for that.
 
yay for google:

Typically when we read about papal resignations, media “experts” tell us that the only pope to ever resign was Celestine V in 1294. This is untrue in many ways: Celestine was not first pope to resign, nor was he the last. Celestine is, however, the pope who created the official procedure by which a pope can resign, so singling him out is somewhat justified.

The ability of a pope to resign was made official by Pope Boniface VIII who placed by decree into canon law:

“Our predecessor, Pope Celestine V, whilst he governed the Church, constituted and decreed that the Roman Pontiff can freely resign. Therefore lest it happen that this statute should in the course of time fall into oblivion, or that doubt upon the subject should lead to further disputes, We have determined with the counsel of our brethren that it be placed among other constitutions for a perpetual memory of the same.”
If a pope wishes to resign today, there are official steps that can be taken. According to the 1963 Code of Canon Law (Canon 332.2), “If it should so happen that the Roman Pontiff resigns his office, it is required for validity that he makes the resignation freely and that it be duly manifested, but not that it be accepted by anyone.”

What this means is that a pope merely needs to make his desire to resign clearly known and that it cannot be due to outside pressure or fraud, but it isn’t necessary that anyone “accept” his resignation. Ideally the resignation is given to the College of Cardinals, since they elected him in the first place and they can determine if the resignation is submitted freely. Regardless of who’s around, though, once he does it, it’s finalized.

Papal Resignations: Can a Pope Resign or Be Removed? History of the Papacy
 
I can't recall any. It's die or be killed, which is a distinct possibility given the past of the church. Let's just hope a more ambitious cardinal comes along and offs Ratzinger. There's definitely precedent for that.

That would be markedly more entertaining, not to mention karmic.
 
I care less about putting the popes head on a pike than I do about preventing more abuse from happening the future. Simply put, the church needs to immediately turn over anyone suspected of abuse to the police. They can defrock him later if they like, but criminal law takes precedence. Concealing his actions and moving him around should result in prosecution for the cover-up. No exceptions for age or repenting allowed.
 
I wonder if this makes the Pope and the entire Catholic church libel for civil damages?
 
I wonder if this makes the Pope and the entire Catholic church libel for civil damages?

It's like a hydra...there's so many heads of beauracracy within the church that you can't hold a single person liable for it all yet you can't hold the entire beast liable for any of it.
 
It's like a hydra...there's so many heads of beauracracy within the church that you can't hold a single person liable for it all yet you can't hold the entire beast liable for any of it.

I can understand that if he didn't know what was going on. BUT if he did know and was covering it up I imagine that would change the situation. Not knowing and doing nothing is completely different from knowing and doing nothing.
 
I don't think that the case can be made that he didn't know, or that he didn't cover it up. So he seems both culpable and liable with me.

In fact, in some instances, based upon the circumstances, he could potentially even be charged as an accessory.
 
I don't think that the case can be made that he didn't know, or that he didn't cover it up. So he seems both culpable and liable with me.

In fact, in some instances, based upon the circumstances, he could potentially even be charged as an accessory.

Yeah for the crap he did know about. Of course, he's still protected by the seal of confession, which is absolute and sacred even under US law. He can always invoke the seal and claim he was unable to report because of that.
 
Back
Top Bottom