Posted on 04/12/2010 8:32:32 PM PDT by JoeProBono
Children were "sadistically tormented and also sexually abused" at a Catholic monastery in Pope Benedict's native Bavaria, according to a new report commissioned by the Roman Catholic Church.
World A lawyer investigating accusations of abuse in a Benedictine monastery school in Ettal presented a final report to the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising Monday, including 173 pages of victims' accounts of abuse. "My investigations quite clearly show that for decades up until around 1990, children and adolescents were brutally abused in the Ettal monastery," Thomas Pfister said in a statement.
"The number of victims' accounts has increased significantly since the intermediary report of March 5," added Pfister, who said last month that hundreds of pupils had been beaten and some sexually abused at the school.
An archdiocese spokesman said he could not comment on the specific number of victims before a news conference Tuesday.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
So the accused decides, all on its own, that there's not enough evidence and destroys the evidence, all without anyone besides the church and the victim seeing that evidence -- no police, no social worker, no school teacher, no civil authority, and often no family members, in fact.
As I said, corporations would be dissolved in an instant if this is how they ran their business and how they hid evidence in criminal accusations.
And you obviously have more faith in archives than I do if you think evidence doesn't get misplaced, lost, stolen, destroyed and/or forgotten.
Also, it's remarkably pitiful that victims have to wait until a priest abuses again before any further action is even contemplated. And still the police are not to be notified.
I can understand RC apologists grasping at any straw to prop up the sagging reputation of the RCC. But some must realize the papacy is losing ground here fast and even its own members are revulsed by what has gone down in the name of "papal secrecy."
Since we are not in the Religion Forum I can freely and honestly call you a bald faced liar.
Shocked.
And you are still a liar.
Get it? That's just more hiding of the crime.
Pitiful.
Dr. E.
I asked for proof of this: “Part of the problem is that according to the Vatican’s Crimen Sollicitationis the victim and his family are sworn to secrecy from the time of the abuse until 10 years after the victim reaches the age of 18 upon threat of excommunication.”
Where is the proof of “sworn to secrecy from the time of the abuse until 10 years after the victim reaches the age of 18 upon threat of excommunication.”
You posted a link to an old PDF English translation of the Crime Sollicitationis. One I saw a while ago. In paragraph 13 it says EXACTLY NOTHING about anyone being “sworn to secrecy from the time of the abuse until 10 years after the victim reaches the age of 18 upon threat of excommunication.”
It mentions EXACTLY NOTHING about ages or excommunication. Now, are you going to post proof of what you claimed or not?
Incredibly, even after failed AGAIN, to post any evidence of what you repeatedly claim to be true you still say this: “Ratzinger’s 2001 letter to all the bishops clearly spelling out that the church’s supposed jurisdiction and oath of secrecy run for 10 years beyond the victim’s 18th birthday, regardless of the age of the victim when he was sexually molested by a priest... “
Again, where’s the evidence for this? Where is it?
You also posted this: “...It must be noted that the criminal action on delicts reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is extinguished by a prescription of 10 years.”
As I already pointed out to you MORE THAN A WEEK AGO, a prescription is not an oath, not an oath of secrecy and has nothing to do with any type of oath of secrecy.
So, once again, we have to ask: Where is your proof for your claim? Since anyone who has EVER studied canon law know that a prescription is NOT an oath of any type and has nothing whatsoever to do with secrecy, it can’t be what you claim and in fact isn’t what you claim.
As I already explain, a prescription, as defined in canon law 197 is: “prescription is a means of acquiring or losing a subjective right as well as of freeing oneself from obligations.” A prescription, therefore, is a method created by law for acquiring or disposing of certain requirements on the fulfilment of fixed conditions. http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__PR.HTM
It was not about keeping anything secret.
Once again you failed utterly. And I already explained to you how you were wrong and provided ample evidence that you were wrong. You just keep posting the same error over and over again even though you have no original evidence to support your false claim.
And the Guardian was either wrong or lying - and apparently the Guardian isn’t the only one.
Again, post evidence FROM CRIMEN SOLLICITATIONIS that proves your claim. Prove your claim.
You wrote:
“I’ve “proved it” about a dozen times.”
No, you have not. You think a “prescription” is an oath of secrecy and it is not. I already pointed out to you that it is not any type of oath of secrecy. If you would think for a minute you would know there was something wrong with your bizarre interpretation when you realize that the paragraph you cite doesn’t even say anything about secrecy or an oath!!!
“It doesn’t seem to get through to certain Roman Catholic apologists. Not my problem.”
Errors or dishonesty, one or the other, is the problem of the person who repeatedly posts something that is untrue and has BEEN DEMONSTRATED TO BE UNTRUE.
I was thnking more of the earlier decades when I mentioned the chaos of Germany after WWII. But I don’t think the non reportage in later years means we have to suspend belief. Especially if you consider how pedophiles manipulate their victims into not telling. And I do think it likely that the monastary was home to children who were already vulnerable. Either because they were orphaned or because their parents could not care for them.
And again why the other brothers did not report it, the kindest thing I can say is maybe they too were manipulated by the guilty to believe the children were lying.
That being said I don’t doubt that some of the abuse is what probably was acceptable punishment at the time, NO I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT ANYTHING SEXUAL, THAT’S FOR THE ANTI CATHOLICS HERE, but of some forms of corporal punishment.
And in the cases that are true pederasty it needs to be remembered that one abuser can have scores of victims over the years, so a high victim count does not always translate to high percentage of abusers amongst the monks.
And the sun rose today.
No, they are interpreted through one of your hack writers. Give actual statements directly from the original document, checked against the original Latin
or shut up.
It is NOT mind reading. You shown in writing repeatedly that you have an axe to grind. This is a documented fact.
They have mustered hard documentary evidence against your false allegations, again and again and again.
And your resort to “Mommy, he called me a name.”
Put up with evidence or shut up.
Your “documentation” is fraudulent.
That would make you a fraud, except that that would be, in your skewed view, “name-calling.”
So I won’t say you are a fraud. I will say you cite frauds.
Well argued. But “serious physical abuse” of any kind, and especially by a monk, for an extended period of time to go unnoticed by fellow monks who keep their vows, families, and friends is still a puzzle not amenable to the usual explanations of psychological causes.
lolol. I cited in POST 28 the Vatican's own document, Crimen Sollicitationis, and the 2001 letter from Ratzinger.
If you say the Vatican and Ratzinger are "frauds," well, we just might agree about something.
Which is sadly more than a lot of RC FReepers evidence here.
The evidence has been posted dozens of times. In black and white. In English. If you cannot understand that evidence, or choose not to read that evidence, then that is not my problem.
It is a problem within the RCC.
A BIG problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.