Hitchens - The Great Catholic Cover-Up

[laconicsax]

http://www.slate.com/id/2247861/

On March 10, the chief exorcist of the Vatican, the Rev. Gabriele Amorth (who has held this demanding post for 25 years), was quoted as saying that "the Devil is at work inside the Vatican," and that "when one speaks of 'the smoke of Satan' in the holy rooms, it is all true—including these latest stories of violence and pedophilia." This can perhaps be taken as confirmation that something horrible has indeed been going on in the holy precincts, though most inquiries show it to have a perfectly good material explanation.

Concerning the most recent revelations about the steady complicity of the Vatican in the ongoing—indeed endless—scandal of child rape, a few days later a spokesman for the Holy See made a concession in the guise of a denial. It was clear, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/14/world/europe/14pope.html">said the Rev. Federico Lombardi, that an attempt was being made "to find elements to involve the Holy Father personally in issues of abuse." He stupidly went on to say that "those efforts have failed."

...

There are two separate but related matters here: First, the individual responsibility of the pope in one instance of this moral nightmare and, second, his more general and institutional responsibility for the wider lawbreaking and for the shame and disgrace that goes with it. The first story is easily told, and it is not denied by anybody. In 1979, an 11-year-old German boy identified as Wilfried F. was taken on a vacation trip to the mountains by a priest. After that, he was administered alcohol, locked in his bedroom, stripped naked, and forced to suck the penis of his confessor. (Why do we limit ourselves to calling this sort of thing "abuse"?) The offending cleric was transferred from Essen to Munich for "therapy" by a decision of then-Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger, and assurances were given that he would no longer have children in his care. But it took no time for Ratzinger's deputy, Vicar General Gerhard Gruber, to return him to "pastoral" work, where he soon enough resumed his career of sexual assault.

It is, of course, claimed, and it will no doubt later be partially un-claimed, that Ratzinger himself knew nothing of this second outrage. I quote, here, from the Rev. Thomas Doyle, a former employee of the Vatican Embassy in Washington and an early critic of the Catholic Church's sloth in responding to child-rape allegations. "Nonsense," he says. "http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/world/europe/13pope.html">Pope Benedict is a micromanager. He's the old style. Anything like that would necessarily have been brought to his attention. Tell the vicar general to find a better line. What he's trying to do, obviously, is protect the pope."

...

Very much more serious is the role of Joseph Ratzinger, before the church decided to make him supreme leader, in obstructing justice on a global scale. After his promotion to cardinal, he was put in charge of the so-called "Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith" (formerly known as the Inquisition). In 2001, Pope John Paul II placed this department in charge of the investigation of child rape and torture by Catholic priests. In May of that year, Ratzinger issued a confidential letter to every bishop. In it, he reminded them of the extreme gravity of a certain crime. But that crime was the reporting of the rape and torture. The accusations, intoned Ratzinger, were only treatable within the church's own exclusive jurisdiction. Any sharing of the evidence with legal authorities or the press was utterly forbidden. Charges were to be investigated "in the most secretive way ... restrained by a perpetual silence ... and everyone ... is to observe the strictest secret which is commonly regarded as a secret of the Holy Office … under the penalty of excommunication." (My italics). Nobody has yet been excommunicated for the rape and torture of children, but exposing the offense could get you into serious trouble. And this is the church that warns us against moral relativism! (See, for more on this appalling document, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/apr/24/children.childprotection1">two http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/apr/24/children.childprotection">reports in the London Observer of April 24, 2005, by Jamie Doward.)

Not content with shielding its own priests from the law, Ratzinger's office even wrote its own private statute of limitations. The church's jurisdiction, claimed Ratzinger, "begins to run from the day when the minor has completed the 18th year of age" and then lasts for 10 more years. Daniel Shea, the attorney for two victims who sued Ratzinger and a church in Texas, correctly describes that latter stipulation as an obstruction of justice. "You can't investigate a case if you never find out about it. If you can manage to keep it secret for 18 years plus 10, the priest will get away with it."

Full article at link http://www.slate.com/id/2247861/

The word "systemic" comes to mind. It would seem that the Catholic Church is an organization officially dedicated to protecting the perpetrators of child rape.

[aquart]

1. Well, they're dedicated to protecting their image as people who would never hurt a child.

And if that means protecting those who do...oh well, it's all for the greater good.

But you'd think the amounts they've had to pay out would have caused rethinking. Clearly, they need to pay more.

[laconicsax]

3. Their official policy shows that they thought about it.

They see the problem as one of reporting, not of action. If a priest rapes a child, it's only a problem if the child says something.

45 years ago, the Vatican's wealth was estimated at http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,833509,00.html">$10-15 billion. Even if that were in constant dollars, that's more than enough to cover up and bribe.

[DeSwiss]

6. Chris Hitchens.....

...is fucking brilliant!

He sums it all up quite nicely, I think:

"The Roman Catholic Church is headed by a mediocre Bavarian bureaucrat once tasked with the concealment of the foulest iniquity, whose ineptitude in that job now shows him to us as a man personally and professionally responsible for enabling a filthy wave of crime. Ratzinger himself may be banal, but his whole career has the stench of evil—a clinging and systematic evil that is beyond the power of exorcism to dispel. What is needed is not medieval incantation but the application of justice—and speedily at that."

- This.

[hlthe2b]

9. I'd like to know on what basis Hitchens concludes Ratzinger to be

banal in his actions? Hitchens doesn't normally worry about "overstating" so why the benefit of the doubt on this? Granted the inner workings of the Vatican are not reported much outside the walls, but I really don't know that I am prepared to assume Ratzinger--former Nazi Youth and consiglere to Pope John Paul in charge of pedophilia investigations (coverups)-- is all that banal. :shrug:

[DeSwiss]

11. I disagree.....

...I believe that he is EXACTLY what the word "Banal"was intended to define.

Of mediocre mind and talent. "Devoid of freshness or originality; hackneyed; trite." (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/banal">link)

RatBoy used his ham-handed tactics to try to put a lid on all this. Using the tried and true blunt object of excommunication and abandonment as a threat to invoke silence and complicity. As one would expect of a bully. It is nothing new, fresh nor terribly insightful.

Least of all cerebral.

- In my mind, Mr. Hitchen's describes Benedict PRECISELY! But that's my opinion......

[hlthe2b]

12. Banality of Evil

Banality of evil is a phrase coined by Hannah Arendt and incorporated in the title of her 1963 work Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil.<1> It describes the thesis that the great evils in history generally, and the Holocaust in particular, were not executed by fanatics or sociopaths but rather by ordinary people who accepted the premises of their state and therefore participated with the view that their actions were normal.


To use banal in this context is, to me, to excuse his role.

[DeSwiss]

14. On the contrary.....

...it does not "excuse" it, but illustrates how ordinary evil often is. The better to conceal itself if it is ordinary and unremarkable. Religion suffuses the world in its ordinariness. Exceptionalism is frowned upon and discouraged. The better to maintain control both institutionally, as well as individually. All these priests with their collars of pure white and their plain black suits and other vestiture, obscures their true nature. And it turns then into anonymous entities and dark backgrounds.

- At least in nature the venomous creatures are often brightly patterned and colored, or have rattles or make other noises when we confront them, to give us fair warning of their lethality.....

[hlthe2b]

15. I think he announced himself long ago...

when he traded his brown shirt of youth for the red prada shoes and designer touches. But, I get your point. ;)

[DeSwiss]

17. They knew exactly who and what.....

...they were getting from the beginning:




;) - The only question now is, what are we as a people, going to do? Continue to look the other way? Or face reality?

[rug]

24. Nice cropping.

[darkstar3]

25. That's NOT the normal gesture for a blessing.

He may not be hailing Hitler, but he sure ain't blessin' his flock.

[rug]

27. I'll assume he and his brother knew the protocol at their ordination better than you.

[darkstar3]

28. Ah, blind faith, we meet again. n/t

[rug]

29. Too bad you've never met accuracy.

[darkstar3]

30. Au contraire.

I grew up in the rural south, my dear knave, and so if there is one skill I have, it is accuracy.

Now tell me again how reinterpreting your Catechism to deny Hell is in any way accurate. :)

[rug]

31. Tell me how cropping a photo advances an argument.

[darkstar3]

33. Ask the man who posted it.

I simply pointed out that your full version still looks strange. I've seen almost every rote blessing givable by Catholics, Lutherans, and Methodists, and I've even seen many given by Jews, and I've never seen one blessing given where the hands and arms are held like that.

Maybe it was some leftover German Catholic thing, maybe Ratty's just weird, but regardless the picture doesn't look right, crop or no.

[rug]

34. I did post to him. Unfortunately, you are not able to resist butting in to my posts.

[darkstar3]

35. He has every right and opportunity to respond to you when he returns.

Meanwhile, you still lack the knowledge of what "discussion forum" means.

[rug]

37. Maybe, but now I know why the worst part of genital warts is its persistent recurrence.

BTW, he hasn't gone anywhere.

[darkstar3]

38. It's always genitals with you lately, isn't it?

Maybe you need to get laid, huh?

[rug]

39. How juvenile.

:eyes:

[darkstar3]

40. Projection will get you nowhere.

Goodnight.

[olegramps]

57. Ratzinger was not operating alone. John Paul II was deeply involved.

Nothing of such importance could be issued by the Congregation without the express approval of Pope John Paul II. He discarded the scandal in America as being over blown by the press. He protected Marcial Maciel, the founder of the Legions of Christ, who had been accused of molesting a number of young seminarians and having fathered several children. Maciel was such a notorious abuser that, following John Paul II]s death, Ratzinger in May 2006 removed him as head of the Legions of Christ and forbid him from performing any form of public ministry. He should have had the bastard excommunicated and turned over to the police. Some of the children that he fathered, the Legion has admitted to at least one, are seeking to inherit the fortune that he had amassed. Much of what is wrong with the today's church can be directly traced to John Paul II who did everything in his power to discredit Vatican II and the memory of John XXIII. What can be thought of a person that beat himself daily. These people are nothing more than a pack of dysfunctional pathetic sickos.

[humblebum]

58. The Catholic Church has much housekeeping to do without question,but

these incidents are most definitely not representative of the entire church. The Catholic Church encompasses a billion or so people and any organization that huge is going to have some "bad" people in its organization.

As far as C. Hitchens goes - the man is a bigot against all religions, a hatemonger, and a blathering bolshevik.

[iris27]

47. Fuck, and here we all thought South Park was exaggerating to make a joke.

"We've gotta stop these boys from goin' to the public!" "They've gotta know to keep their mouths shut!" "We've got to find out why these children are suddenly finding it necessary to report that they're being molested. Stop the problem at its source."

[laconicsax]

49. Ok, I have to see that episode now.

Netflix Instant, here we go.

[closeupready]

2. Many have laughed at Hitchens, despite the fact that he's been calling them out on this for years.

He hits a bullseye again.

[laconicsax]

50. I just wish he was sensible about other stuff.

Iraq for one.

[iris27]

51. Feminists

for another.

[laconicsax]

52. Yeah, he's a regular ass.

An ass who happens to be right about the Vatican. Doesn't change that he's a complete ass.

[darkstar3]

53. Broken clocks and all that.

When a statement is right, or when an argument makes sense, it doesn't matter if the source is an asshole.

[laconicsax]

54. Yep.

He's only usually half-right on religion and wrong on the rest. More like a clock that just runs way too fast/too slow--it's right on the money every once in a while and at unpredictable times.

[madrchsod]

4. the most corrupt/ crimnal institution in the history of mankind

millions of people have suffered and died with the holy roman church`s blessings.

[humblebum]

59. Just a drop in the bucket compared to the crimes of organized atheism.

Not of course meant to minimize the actions of some religions and religious.

[DeSwiss]

5. And the word "CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION" comes to my mind.

Seriously. If this were any, and I mean ANY other organization or individual, they'd have to have police protection from the mobs.

This organization and its pervert priests are despicable and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.


- AND TAXED!!!!

[ChadwickHenryWard]

7. I was just thinking that.

As time goes on, the RCC looks more like a gigantic criminal organization than anything else. Especially upon reading the Philadelphia Grand Jury's Report on the Archdiocese of Philadelphia and their Archbishop, Cardinal Bevilacqua. They operate completely outside of the law - if a member of any other group had raped a child, they would be handed over to the police under penalty of obstruction charges. But the Church itself handles any criminal penalty - they refuse to take part in any secular court. That's really a scary thought when you get down to it. After a while it becomes clear that the hierarchy is actively aiding child rapists not only in eluding criminal punishment but in procuring new victims. That's criminal conspiracy of the most vile imaginable sort.

[DeSwiss]

8. A commenter on the article at Slate put it best:

bloggod
"In 1979, an 11-year-old German boy identified as Wilfried F. was taken on a vacation trip to the mountains by a priest.

After that, he was administered alcohol, locked in his bedroom, stripped naked, and forced to suck the penis of his confessor.

(Why do we limit ourselves to calling this sort of thing "abuse"?)

The offending cleric was transferred from Essen to Munich for "therapy" by a decision of then-Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger"
_________

Kind of says it all.

Guilty.

- It's as plain as that. And when he sent out his letter commanding silence on pain of excommunication, it became a conspiracy to pervert justice. No pun intended.....

[ChadwickHenryWard]

44. Why is the name of the victim given but not the offender?

I didn't notice that last time, but the victim, a minor, was identified while the offending priest was not. While innocent until proven guilty, the rights of the accused do not include anonymity. You have no right to keep criminal accusations against yourself a secret.

That aside, it's startling how these people get away with this stuff. I often wonder what ability our FBI has to prosecute this kind of behavior under racketeering statute. There must be something our government can do to stop massive criminal conspiracy.

[trotsky]

13. And yet people continue to support and defend the corrupt institution.

Even on progressive discussion boards. :shrug:

[DeSwiss]

16. Exactly.

Through their continued financial support, the members of the Catholic Church are aiding and abetting these crimes. It isn't like taxes where their tithes are deducted beforehand and against their will. They write the checks to these perverted bastards. And in total and complete defiance of there supposed religious beliefs!

Matthew 18:5 And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me.
6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
7 Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!
8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.
9 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.
10 Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.
11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

All religionists bear some culpability in my view. Protestants or Catholic. Or even Muslims and Hindus. They're all the same really, evolving from the same seed. People should be screaming from the rooftops for justice here, demanding that these people -- including the Pope -- be brought to justice for raping our children!!! But all we hear from our weak-kneed politicians is silence.

- Because fingers in the wind don't make much noise.....

[StarlightGold]

18. Totally agree

I have to spend Easter with family who actually have the pope's picture up on their mantel. How his face doesn't make them sick, I'll never know. I mean, what does it take to break free from this institution? I know that the catholic church has an enormous stranglehold on many people, but come on!

[DeSwiss]

19. Nothing will break them free, so far as I've been able to determine.

The journey toward truth is an "act of volition." And it must ultimately be trod alone. To travel it, one must to both desire and love the truth. Desire alone isn't enough.

Religionists like to claim how much "in love" they are with their god. How their god's love for them and the world engulfs and infuses their lives and enriches it. For this love enrichment process to work, it apparently requires that one wear blinders and earmuffs so as to avoid the mental images of a priest's penis in a child's mouth. And to avoid hearing the whimpering cries of these children, and yet they can clearly hear when these perverts intone the solemn sounds in prayer, about how they will burn in hell unless they do their bidding. And which we now see includes ignoring the pleas of the innocent.

I'm sorry but they have no excuse. Not only should they deny financial support for these criminals, but they should be walking out of religious services en masse until the guilty are brought to justice.

- Their continued failure to cleanse this evil from their midst, puts the lie to the supposed holiness of their religious beliefs, and the hollowness of their sanctimony.....

"I do understand what love is, and that is one of the reasons I can never again be a Christian. Love is not self denial. Love is not blood and suffering. Love is not murdering your son to appease your own vanity. Love is not hatred or wrath, consigning billions of people to eternal torture because they have offended your ego or disobeyed your rules. Love is not obedience, conformity, or submission. It is a counterfeit love that is contingent upon authority, punishment, or reward. True love is respect and admiration, compassion and kindness, freely given by a healthy, unafraid human being." ~ Dan Barker, Losing Faith in Faith

[StarlightGold]

20. I know...

as a recovering catholic (I refuse to dignify it with capitals) it's very disheartening. When I finally woke up and said "What am I,nuts for putting up with this? I'm done", I felt such relief. Why hadn't I done it years before? What was I so afraid of? I can't be a part of something that has caused so much grief for so many. Not only the rapes, but, for instance, the poor, nine year-old girl in Brazil excommunicated for her mother daring to put her physical/mental well being ahead of church doctrine. I can't help but look upon others who still stay with this institution as enablers. "The church has good things about it" they'll weakly claim. Kind of like an "I got mine" mentality. As long as those things didn't happen to me or mine, I'll still support and make excuses for the institution that ruined so many lives.

[DeSwiss]

21. "Why hadn't I done it years before? What was I so afraid of?"

One word: FEAR.

- It is the stock in-trade of the Abrahamic religion's in particular. No one wants to be ostracized by their own people. It is a form of child abuse that no one wants to recognize as such.

[StarlightGold]

22. Yep.

And I've also come to realize that if even my own family would ostracize me over this (or anything for that matter), then they have no place in my life. Choosing their religion over their own flesh and blood reflects horribly on them, not me. Again, what a relief it was to finally make peace with that concept. Very liberating! :)

[iris27]

48. Welcome to DU. Sorry about your family; mine has made a similar choice.

Sounds like you've already realized that the guilt for that is theirs to bear and not your own - good for you! :)

[StarlightGold]

56. Thank you!

No matter how much you know that you're doing the right thing, it always feels great to get positive reinforcement! :)

[tama]

26. "All religiniosts"?

Including Taoists? ;)

Of course, we are all evolving from the same seed, the mysterious DNA...

BTW does your world view include freedom of will / freedom of choice or is of the materialist-deterministic kind?

[DeSwiss]

32. The Tao symbiology is a longtime friend.

It goes back to the very beginnings of my education into religion and philosophy some 40+ years ago. It is like a comfortable pair of house slippers which I refuse to abandon because of other's preconceived notions about what it all means. ;)

But I profess to neither religion nor any philosophy. The idea of yin-yang conforms to the reality that: ALL IS


- And yes, my worldview includes free will. As it must. Otherwise, what would be the point of being?

[tama]

36. What it all means?

[DeSwiss]

41. All That Is. n/t

[tama]

43. So, what ain't?

Everything is true.

Even false things?

Even false things are true.

How can that be?

I don't know man, I didn't do it.

[DeSwiss]

45. If you do not know of what I speak when I say "All That Is....."

...then it is clear that we aren't speaking in the same language.

(So, what ain't?) Nothing.

(Everything is true.) What is truth?

(Even false things?) What is falsity?

(Even false things are true). All is:

(How can that be?) There is only All That Is.

(I don't know man, I didn't do it.) http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs+4%3A7&version=KJV">Proverbs Four - Seven

[tama]

46. By the rivers of Babylon

"we aren't speaking in the same language"

True dat, Babylon happened so that comparative linguists could do comparative linguistics.

"There is only All That Is."

Where? And why is here this not included in there that if it is and not just that but all?


(In another language the verb 'be', indefinite inclusive person, indefinite pluralistic number, present tense, syntatctically full sentence, not translatable into English: Ollaan. :) )

[ironbark]

42. Is there a distinction between the ‘religion’ and the ‘church’?

The reason I’m asking is because of the Matthew 18:5 quote you provided…which seems to me to reflect the religion and is diametrically opposed to the behaviour of the church and members.

“All religionists bear some culpability in my view. Protestants or Catholic. Or even Muslims and Hindus. They're all the same really, evolving from the same seed.”

Why stop there, why not extend the culpability to all/society/humans?
I work with the victims of abuse, I share your disgust, outrage and demand for justice.
But I also know that the vast majority of abused kids come from dysfunctional or single parent families in which drugs and alcohol are the gods.
Perhaps I’m jaded by experience but sick fucks molesting children comes as no surprise…but what shocks and dismays me most is the cover up often conducted by the ‘sane’n’healthy’- family, friends, church, school, authorities.

Your culpability sweep to Muslims and Hindus is, for me, misplaced. I would invite you to consider that one of the central underpinning factors in the Bali Bombings was the ongoing presence in Bali (and region) of organized paedophile rings from Australia, US and Europe. Trapped between their dependence on the tourist dollar and their desire to protect the children the locals did everything they could and appealed to the West to do something/anything. We in the West did nothing to recognise or curb the problem and subsequently Westerners were targeted in the bombings (portrayed in the West as the acts of religious fanatics acting for exclusively religious reasons).

There is enough ‘culpability’ to go round for all.

[laconicsax]

23. They keep marking the "But my congregation is different" square...

and pretending it means something.

[rhett o rick]

10. Sorry I have but one rec to give. nm

[laconicsax]

55. Kick 'cause it's important.