Vatican Offers Guide for Sex Abuse Reports (guide is not a new document)

http://www.zenit.org/article-28880?l=english ^

[Salvation]

Vatican Offers Guide for Sex Abuse Reports

Procedures Explained for Laity, Non-Canonists

VATICAN CITY, APRIL 12, 2010 (Zenit.org).- With a 14-paragraph guideline, the Vatican is seeking to clarify the procedures it follows when a priest is accused of sexual abuse.

The guideline was posted on the Vatican’s (Web site) today.

A report from Vatican Radio explained that the guide is not a new document, but simply a summary of procedures that have already been defined. “It can be an aid for laypeople and those who are not canon lawyers,” Vatican Radio noted.

In the midst of allegations from the media that the Church has sought to cover up these scandals, the document affirms clearly: “Civil law concerning reporting of crimes to the appropriate authorities should always be followed.”

It also clarifies: “Should the cleric be judged guilty, both judicial and administrative penal processes can condemn a cleric to a number of canonical penalties, the most serious of which is dismissal from the clerical state.”

The document further notes when cases are referred to the Holy Father: “In very grave cases where a civil criminal trial has found the cleric guilty of sexual abuse of minors or where the evidence is overwhelming, the [Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith] may choose to take the case directly to the Holy Father with the request that the Pope issue a decree of "ex officio" dismissal from the clerical state. There is no canonical remedy against such a papal decree.

“The CDF also brings to the Holy Father requests by accused priests who, cognizant of their crimes, ask to be dispensed from the obligation of the priesthood and want to return to the lay state.”

--- --- ---

On the Net:

Guidelines: http://www.vatican.va/resources/resources_guide-CDF-procedures_en.html

[Salvation]

**A report from Vatican Radio explained that the guide is not a new document, but simply a summary of procedures that have already been defined. “It can be an aid for laypeople and those who are not canon lawyers,” Vatican Radio noted.**

In other words, this HAS been in effect and HAS been used according to the guidelines set forth!

[Salvation]

Catholic Discussion Ping!

Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Catholic Discussion Ping List.

[vladimir998]

But watch! An anti-Catholic will be here any minute to falsely claim that people have to take an oath that prevents them from reporting abuse to secular authorities and even falsely claim that there is a statute of limitations attached to that oath.

False, unsupported claims posted by that anti-Catholic in 3.....2....

[Natural Law]

PING

[Salvation]

LOl!

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Since I was pinged to this thread, not once but twice, I will add that this is just a very weak attempt to deflect the heat from long-standing, documented Vatican policy, outlined in Crimen Sollicitationis and Ratzinger's accompanying 2001 letter to all the bishops, which clearly, under threat of excommunication, muzzles the victim, his family, his church and anyone else with knowledge of this sexual abuse crime by priests upon children.

Repent Rome, if God grants you the ability.

[vladimir998]

But this is what you claimed:

“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.”

Prove it. Post the text that says exactly that from Crime Sollicitationis.

Can you? Will you?

You keep making the same claim over and over again (although now you seem to be slightly altering it; gee, I wonder why?!). Time to post some evidence.

[steadfastconservative]

. . . this is just a very weak attempt to deflect the heat from long-standing, documented Vatican policy, outlined in Crimen Sollicitationis and Ratzinger's accompanying 2001 letter to all the bishops, which clearly, under threat of excommunication, muzzles the victim, his family, his church and anyone else with knowledge of this sexual abuse crime by priests upon children.

This is completely false. The Vatican has never had a policy that imposes excommunication on Catholics who report cases of sex abuse by priests to the civil authorities. This is just another rabid, slanderous attack on the Church by a bigot.

[steadfastconservative]

Well, there is no way that Dr. Eckleburg can provide any documentation or evidence for what he is claiming because there isn’t any. This is one of the most outrageous lies about the Church that I have ever heard but I guess Satan and his fellow anti-Catholics will stoop to anything to try to discredit the Church.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

The Vatican has never had a policy that imposes excommunication on Catholics who report cases of sex abuse by priests to the civil authorities. This is just another rabid, slanderous attack on the Church by a bigot.

lol. Good grief. Do Roman Catholic apologists ever read any of these links to their own church's documents?

Read CRIMEN SOLLICITATIONIS, paying particular attention to paragraphs 11, 13 and 42a.

And try to ease up on the name-calling.

[mckenzie7]

It's a sin to tell a lie!

[Dr. Eckleburg]

It's a sin to tell a lie!

It certainly is. And the RCC has a lot of repenting to do.

If you want to understand the issues accurately, read the two RC documents and newspaper article I linked to in POST 28.

Read Ratzinger's 2001 letter to all the bishops and the RCC's Crimen Sollicitationis for yourself (paying close attention to paragraphs 11,13 and 42a) so you can more clearly see who is "lying."

[mckenzie7]

A priest breaking the seal of Confession can be excommunicated. As a grateful Catholic, I can speak of anything that I or the priest says in MY Confession.

HE CAN'T!

[big'ol_freeper]

I find it funny when the serpent tells Christ’s Church to repent LOL

[A.A. Cunningham]

ZENIT

[A.A. Cunningham]

Do some penance, Doc.

[A.A. Cunningham]

she

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Scripture does not tell us to "do penance." That's a Roman Catholic invention which enslaves men to a hierarchy that keeps the magick under wraps and dispenses it according to its own construct.

All men are commanded by God to repent of their sins which means they are to feel remorse for disobeying the Triune God and thus resolve not to continue in their errors. If God enables them to do so, they will repent, by the grace of God.

"For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death." -- 2 Corinthians 7:10

When you find the word "penance" in Scripture, you let us know.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

That is NOT what Ratzinger wrote in his 2001 letter to all the bishops nor does it say that in Crimen Sollicitationis. The victim and his family and witnesses are all sworn to secrecy upon threat of excommunication. Read the documents and educate yourself.

[steadfastconservative]

Here is what Wikipedia says about Crimen Sollicitationis:

"An oath of secrecy was to be taken by all members of the tribunal; violation incurred a penalty of automatic excommunication. The ecclesiastical penalty for violation of secrecy by the accused priest was automatic suspension a divinis, although he was free to discuss with his defence counsel (Section 13). Unless violation of secrecy occurred after an explicit procedural warning given in the course of their examination (Section 13; and cf. Section 23 concerning the person denouncing solicitation: '… before the person is dismissed, there should be presented to the person, as above, an oath of observing the secret, threatening the person, if there is a need, with an excommunication reserved to the Ordinary or to the Holy See"), no ecclesiastical penalties were to be imposed on the accuser(s) and witnesses. 'These matters are confidential only to the procedures within the Church, but do not preclude in any way for these matters to be brought to civil authorities for proper legal adjudication. The charter for the Protection of Children and Young People of June, 2002, approved by the Vatican, requires that credible allegations of sexual abuse of children be reported to legal authorities.'[7]" [emphasis mine]

In other words, only the members of the tribunal who adjudicated the case of priest accused of sexual misconduct were sworn to secrecy because the proceedings of the canonical trial were supposed to be secret to protect the all of the parties involved. However, witnesses and victims were not bound by any seal of secrecy and had every right to bring these matters to the attention of civil authorities. Moreover, this document was issued in 1962, not 2001 as you claimed. It looks like you got all of your facts wrong.