POPE OBSTRUCTED SEX ABUSE INQUIRIES

This link made me very sad: CLICK HERE

How could he have done it? And he's now the Pope. I've obtained a copy of his letter from this site: http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/Criminales.pdf and I've obtained a copy of the Order from Vatican from CBS News website which was referred by an RC website. It's 40 pages long but the beamishboy has soldiered on and what I've read is not good at all. It deals with the procedure when there is sexual abuse by priests of people including children.

A 2001 letter (click here) talks about the need to review the 1962 procedure. But as matters stand there has been no review and this has been like 7 years? So the procedure in 1962 still stands.

All I can say is I'll never be a Roman Catholic even if I agree with its theology which I don't in the first place.

Here's a summary of the beamishboy's summary of the current position in the RC church (until some review has been made) in handling sex abuse cases involving priests and even where it involves minors. I have included paragraph numbers so you can check for yourself.

Paragraph 4 allows for the guilty to be transferred to another assignment.

Paragraph 11 deals with the strictest secrecy in which the entire investigations and proceedings must be sealed under. It must be regarded the secret of the Holy Office. There's a lot of stress on the secrecy in this paragraph. It also states that everyone must observe the strictest secrecy "under the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae". It repeats the secrecy many times and the penalty or censure.

Paragraph 13 requires the oath of keeping the secret from "the accusers or those denouncing the priest and the witnesses". So, even the victim is required to take the oath of secrecy on pain of excommunication.

Paragraph 18 places a duty on the victim to inform his confessor of the act within one month and if he fails to do so, he "falls into an excommunication reserved latae sententiae.."

Paragraph 35 talks about the need of two witnesses who know both the victim and the priest. If they cannot find two such witnesses, they will have to investigate elsewhere "as to whether hatred, enmity or any other human disaffection against the denunciated priest was the case". You see what line the pope is taking?

Paragraph 42 (a) "If it is evident that the denunciation totally lacks a foundation, he (the Ordinary) should order this to be declared in the Acts, and the documents of the accusation should be destroyed."

Paragraph 44 allows the Ordinary to decide whether to proceed with other accusations from other victims against the same priest or just to act on the one accusation. This the Ordinary can do according to his own choice and conscience.

Paragraph 52 deals with the accused priest before a Judge within the church. Note that everything from the investigation to the judgment and sentence is entirely an internal church affair governed by strict rules of secrecy. Paragraph 52 says that "in every way the judge is to remember that it is never right for him to bind the accused by an oath to tell the truth."

Paragraph 70 states that secrecy is vitally important. Not observing it "obliges under serious sin (sub gravi).

Paragraphs 71 and 73 defines "the worst crime" as homosexual abuse by a priest and any sort of sexual abuse involving youths.

Appendix 27 on page 25 gives the format of the Oath to be taken even by the victim to ensure secrecy. Are children exempted from taking this Oath? No, according to the Appendix. They must still take the Oath that includes excommunication latae sententiae ipso facto (whatever that means). Nobody can exempt anyone from taking the Oath except by the Supreme Pontiff.

There is a huge section on how the victim is interrogated on his or her personal lifestyle but the beamishboy is too tired to go on.