Doing my Vatican rag
I had one of those moments this week, where I quite literally could not believe my ears.
At the end of yet another report of child abuse by Roman Catholic priests, Anton Enus added, in an almost throwaway fashion, 鈥淰ictim advocates estimate that up to half a million children have been abused at the hands of the Catholic Church over the last 50 years.鈥�
Pope Benedict, in his former role as the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (formerly called the Inquisition), banned anyone from speaking about the abuse outside the church. The criminals were protected and the victims silenced in order to safeguard the church鈥檚 image.
In a letter to Irish victims he now says 鈥榮erious mistakes鈥� were made by the local bishops, but still does not confess his own complicity.
The Holy See has 鈥榩ermanent observer鈥� status at the United Nations. It can鈥檛 vote in the General Assembly, but has the same status as a member state at most UN conferences.
It has used that status to obstruct: the provision of emergency contraception; the promotion of condoms as protection against HIV/AIDS; sexuality education in school curricula; and the training and equipping of health care workers to ensure safe and accessible abortion.
The 2004 Jay Report on child sexual abuse in the US Catholic Church found that from 1950 to 2002, 10,667 people made allegations of child sexual abuse. Eighty-one percent of them were male, 78 percent between the ages of 11 and 17.
The Vatican tries to say it鈥檚 a gay issue, not a pedophile one. Monsignor Charles Scicluna, of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said that of the 3000 cases referred to his office over nine years, 60 percent involved adolescents of the same sex, 30 percent involved heterosexual relations, and only the remaining 10 percent were pedophilia 鈥榠n the truest sense鈥�.
Here in Australia, Rome wields massive influence in both major parties.
Every hour of every day for the last 50 years, at least one child has been physically and/or sexually abused by this organisation. And our politicians go to them for moral guidance?
The 2001 text you and others claiming to be a cover up – occurred in 2001 – the cover up was before that. Please explain how this really impacted that? Why are the cases referred after 2001 being dealt with if there was a “ban”? As a social worker in the US – I find all of the sexual abuse that has occurred to be repulsive and criminal. But, state law here requires confidentiality during and after an investigation on the part of the investigating body – are we really going to demand otherwise?