AP EXCLUSIVE: Future pope stalled pedophile case (California priest was eventually defrocked)

AP on Yahoo ^ | 4/9/10 | Gillian Flaccus - ap

[NormsRevenge]

LOS ANGELES – The future Pope Benedict XVI resisted pleas to defrock a California priest with a record of sexually molesting children, citing concerns including "the good of the universal church," according to a 1985 letter bearing his signature.

The correspondence, obtained by The Associated Press, is the strongest challenge yet to the Vatican's insistence that Benedict played no role in blocking the removal of pedophile priests during his years as head of the Catholic Church's doctrinal watchdog office.

The letter, signed by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, was typed in Latin and is part of years of correspondence between the Diocese of Oakland and the Vatican about the proposed defrocking of the Rev. Stephen Kiesle.

The Vatican refused to comment on the contents of the letter Friday, but a spokesman confirmed it bore Ratzinger's signature.

[RobbyS]

I am telling you that the Catholic Church is a complex, international society. And a traditional society, where things are done more in accordance with custom than by law. Where sometimes relationships are the result of thousands of years of development. Something like the Jewish people/ Islam, except these do not have a "head."

[caww]

I just finished reading your posts in forum...(always helpful in understanding a little better the people you’re conversing with.) I must say I found your posts answered some of my questions about this whole nasty business within the catholic church and it’s leadership....much you stated makes sense and I will check some of the historical points you made. You are an interesting read.

[RobbyS]

Thank you. I try.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I don't know how to make it any clearer.

Let me try again. Everybody wants an abusive priest "fired", right?

"Fired" could mean three things:

• Fired from his job: no longer has an assignment, no longer works for the church;
• Fired from any priestly function: can no longer say Mass, hear Confessions, etc.
• Fired in the sense of released from vows.

#1 is local. It is done by a bishop.

#2 is local. It is done by a bishop.

#3 can be done locally, but (before 2001) went to Rome if the was an appeal, or if there was a complication havcing to do with abuse of Confession (a separate, and very serious offense.)

#1 and #2 are necessary to protect children. (The cops should be called too.) #3 is irrelevant to child protection, because it is matter of being released from vows. Releasing an abusive man from vows of obedience and celibacy does not, of itself, protect children.

#1 and #2, plus contacting the cops/civil authorities, is what protects children. And this is 100% local, and 0% Rome.

Is that clear?

[frogjerk]

Is that clear?

It is clear but some don't want to hear and comprehend.

[frogjerk]

As the God of a believer is usually a reflection of himself

Maybe the ancient Greeks or Romans but if any religion was an exception to this it would certainly be Christianity. The Triune God of Christianity is in no way like his creation - Isaiah 55:8-9: "For my thoughts are not your thoughts: nor your ways my ways, says the Lord. For as the heavens are exalted above the earth, so are my ways exalted above your ways, and my thoughts above your thoughts.".

[RedStateRocker]

" So, I don’t understand the doctrine of infallibility! "

When the Pope speaks *AS* the Pope, ‘Ex Cathedra’ his opinion is considered final and absolute WITH REGARDS TO CHURCH DOCTRINE.

Much like the supreme court. The justices are just people, and the Chief Justice, speaking at a meeting or class is just another jurist with an opinion- a learned one but just one person's opinion; but their pronouncements on the specific subject at hand, within the context, the same jurist writing the majority opinion, now their words are final and without further appeal.