[SuziQ]

The Pope doesn’t need to “address” it, he only has to do concrete things to make sure it doesn’t happen in the future, which he’s already done. Actually John Paul II started working on that before his death. Have you heard about any cases of sexual abuse that occurred in the last 10 years? All the cases that made the news were from 15 to 30 years ago, when the American Church was still in thrall of the feminist nuns and psychologists on Seminary boards, passing judgement on the ‘maturity’ of possible candidates for ordination, and weeding out those who showed any inclination toward actually accepting Church teachings, especially on celibacy.

[TChad]

I guess your answer indicates that during his visit, to your knowledge, the pope did not accurately characterize the abuse in his speeches. That seems extremely odd to me. Everyone knows what happened, why would he not describe it accurately? It is as though the CEO of Union Carbide, after the Bhopal disaster, had apologized to the Indian people for the bad smells created by the chemical plant, but failed to mention the fatalities from the gas leak.

Of course he does not "need" to address the homosexual assaults, but there will be consequences for his lack of candor. Some of us who would prefer to maintain a favorable opinion of the pope will now find it harder to do so.

As for the lack of new cases, I wonder if that is not more a consequence of the publicity than of changes instituted by the church. After the public wised up, the source of fresh new boys dried up.