On the contrary, it is unjust --- it is rash judgment --- to interpret texts by imputing the worst possible motivation, and to stick to that despite a sound and knowledgeable refutation.
Both Crimen S and the Ratzinger/CDF letter of 2001 deal with laicization. No canon law requires silence in criminal proceedings; no canon law forbids, or could forbid, legal prosecution in a civil or criminal court. That is is distinction which seems to elude you.
Even the "good of the Universal Church"--- the phrase used in the 2001 Ratzinger letter --- has to do with whether a symbolic canonical trial for a dying man is the only option, in view of the fact that a canonical trial is such a cumbersome and time-consuming procedure. In fact, one of Ratzinger's most significant reforms, once he got these matters re-directed into the CDF,was to try to find speedier ways to act on them decisively by lessening the "procedural due process" required by canonical trials.
I'm not going to pursue this here because I can grasp that you are not interested in canon law per se. About the vile wickedness of sexual assault, and the moral obligation to prosecute those who are guilty of it, we both agree. Strongly. Let's leave it at that.
I'll hold my work on Veritatis until I can post it on some other thread.
Back to watering the tomatoes. See tagline.
No, Mrs. D. You are incorrect.
The phrase "for the good of the universal church" was written by Ratzinger in his 1985 letter to the bishop who was asking for guidance regarding a pederast priest and who received nothing other than stonewalling and delay.
A letter written in 1985, when the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was the head of the Vatican's doctrinal unit, resists a request for the defrocking of an American priest with a record of molesting children, for the "good of the universal Church". The letter, published by Associated Press, also notes the "detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke within the community of Christ's faithful, particularly considering the young age". The priest, Father Stephen Kiesle, was 38 at the time......Pope Benedict XVI was hit by fresh allegations yesterday that he failed to crack down on sexually abusive Catholic priests before becoming pontiff.
I'm not going to pursue this here because I can grasp that you are not interested in canon law per se.
Not true. RC canon law that skirts and even contradicts the moral and legal jurisdiction of American jurisprudence is very important to me.
About the vile wickedness of sexual assault, and the moral obligation to prosecute those who are guilty of it, we both agree. Strongly.
Amen. I would hope that desire leads us both to a clearer intent to see justice done.
BTW, how are you feeling? IIRC you had quite a time awhile back. All recovered, hale and hearty? 8~)