Vatican "throws U.S. Bishops under Popemobile" to avoid giving testimony

jellybean99 said:

The "Romans" have crucified the innocent once again and expect to carry on as if nothing has happened.

Click to expand...

Just another example of people helping Satan by shoddy reporting and spreading those stories on line.

Understand that there is nothing wrong with reading these stories but when someone brings harm against a child of God, whether they be a sexually abused child or the Pope, they are sinning and will have to answer for their choices. Accusing a Christian of something that they did not do is sin.

Yarddog said:

Accusing a Christian of something that they did not do is sin.

Click to expand...

Not if it was done is good faith (meaning the accuser had sufficient evidence to convince them, even if the person did not do it).

lawtonfogle said:

Not if it was done is good faith (meaning the accuser had sufficient evidence to convince them, even if the person did not do it).

Click to expand...

To accuse an innocent man is sinful. The Jews crucified Jesus because they believed that he was guilty. They thought that they had sufficient evidence but their faith was too weak to understand, their spirits too weak to know God.

When Satan gives someone an apple and they eat it, the person cannot fall back on excuses. It is, "do you trust Satan" or "do you trust the Spirit of God, which he gives us".

Those who accuse an innocent man, are not listening to God.

jellybean99 said:

The Vatican has moved to block an attempt to force the Pope to appear in court in the United States, after a lawyer filed a motion seeking his sworn testimony on what the Vatican knew about paedophile scandals.

Giuseppe dalla Torre, head of the Vatican City Tribunal, said that Benedict XVI had diplomatic immunity as a head of state.

Click to expand...

Um, yeah. And he's right.

jellybean99 said:

The Vatican lawyers are also expected to argue that US bishops who oversaw priests who committed abuse were not Vatican employees.

Click to expand...

Probably because they aren't.... The bishops are officially employees of their respective diocese.... United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

jellybean99 said:

The Vatican tried to get the case dismissed, but in 2007 a judge approved a process under which both sides can request information and documents, including the questioning of witnesses.
Vatican tries to block attempt to make Pope face US court over abuse -Times Online

Click to expand...

You can't subpoena a foreign head of state.

jellybean99 said:

Is this not reminiscent of Peter's denial of Christ to avoid prosecution, telling the U.S. Bishops, "We didn't employ you"?

Click to expand...

Except this time its actually true. Bishops are employed by their diocese, not the Vatican. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

laconicstudent said:

Bishops are employed by their diocese, not the Vatican. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

Click to expand...

Yes, but you know as well as I do that they are not autocephalous.

Brennin said:

Yes, but you know as well as I do that they are not autocephalous.

Click to expand...

So? That doesn't effect the legal reality that the priests and bishops are all employed by legally independent and separate 501(c)3 organizations.

The courts don't care about little things like autocephaly. They are concerned with the United States Code, not canon law.

Its irrelevant to the United States judiciary whether or not a leader of an independent tax exempt religious group has decided to run his organization in accordance with the directions of a foreign religious organization.

laconicstudent said:

So? That doesn't effect the legal reality that the priests and bishops are all employed by legally independent and separate 501(c)3 organizations.

The courts don't care about little things like autocephaly. They are concerned with the United States Code, not canon law.

Its irrelevant to the United States judiciary whether or not a leader of an independent tax exempt religious group has decided to run his organization in accordance with the directions of a foreign religious organization.

Click to expand...

I guess we are focusing on different things then. I had in mind moral responsibility, not necessarily legal responsibility.

Brennin said:

I guess we are focusing on different things then. I had in mind moral responsibility, not necessarily legal responsibility.

Click to expand...

Ah, that makes more sense then. Obviously it then becomes a different issue, I was just pointing out the obvious flaw in the OP's opinion of the legal argument.

Yarddog said:

To accuse an innocent man is sinful. The Jews crucified Jesus because they believed that he was guilty. They thought that they had sufficient evidence but their faith was too weak to understand, their spirits too weak to know God.

When Satan gives someone an apple and they eat it, the person cannot fall back on excuses. It is, "do you trust Satan" or "do you trust the Spirit of God, which he gives us".

Those who accuse an innocent man, are not listening to God.

Click to expand...

Technically with our justice system all are presumed innocent until proved guilty. Or at least that's how it should work, which we know in many cases it does not. Using this logic all those that are innocent that we accuse, bring to trial and find innocent, or investigate - you are saying this is a sin?

JCFantasy23 said:

Technically with our justice system all are presumed innocent until proved guilty. Or at least that's how it should work, which we know in many cases it does not. Using this logic all those that are innocent that we accuse, bring to trial and find innocent, or investigate - you are saying this is a sin?

Click to expand...

The Newspaper articles are not our justice system. The justice system first examines all the evidence to see if charges should be filed against a person. The newspaper articles do not do that but they even ignore the evidence yet still accuse the Vatican of cover up.

The New York Times has evidence on file which can be accessed. The file is 86 pages long and has correspondence between the Vatican and the Milwaukee Archdiocese among those pages.

There is nothing that hints that a cover up existed by the Vatican or if the present Pope was involved in the correspondence.

Yarddog said:

The Newspaper articles are not our justice system. The justice system first examines all the evidence to see if charges should be filed against a person. The newspaper articles do not do that but they even ignore the evidence yet still accuse the Vatican of cover up.

Click to expand...

I think most of us can agree the media now a' days has a hand in making most legal situations worse, not just with the church. Such a shame

JCFantasy23 said:

I think most of us can agree the media now a' days has a hand in making most legal situations worse, not just with the church. Such a shame

Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. I'm reminded of that security guard at the 96 Olympics in Atlanta. He was branded as the bomber in the media and it ruined his life. He was cleared of all of this but it took its toll on him. He died a few years back at the age of 44, from a heart attack.

jellybean99 said:

Is this not reminiscent of Peter's denial of Christ to avoid prosecution, telling the U.S. Bishops, "We didn't employ you"?

Click to expand...

Bishops aren't employed by the Vatican. People make the Catholic Church into this super organization in which everything in controlled by the Pope. The Pope has a kind of ultimate veto, but your understanding of the hierarchy is inaccurate.

It's called the Catholic Church, not the Papal Church. It's a collection of many churches throughout the world that are in communion with the Pope. The Pope is a bishop himself.

jellybean99 said:

The Vatican was overseeing bishops around the world and Cardinal Ratzinger had possession of all the abuse records.

Click to expand...

Cardinal Ratzinger:
A) Did not have possession of "all abuse records"
B) Was not in charge of abuse issues

The Pope is a material witness regardless of who the U.S. bishops are technically employed by. The longer the Pope dodges his moral responsibility, the less credible he and the RCC become with every new emerging scandal.

Click to expand...

That's the whole media game. They throw out accusations and pull stunts. If the Pope doesn't play in the mud with them, then he is dodging responsibility or playing a PR game. No, he's just not going to be part of the media circus with all their showboating and stunts.

Any person using basic reasoning skills and looking at the facts can plainly see that what is being done is an assault on Pope Benedict. They want him to resign and lose credibility- thus striking the very leadership of the Catholic Church.
I say this because all the attention and lawsuits are focused on a German Cardinal in Rome who was in charge of the CDF. His job was not to research and remove pedophile priests. That is the job of the local bishops. A German Cardinal in the Vatican was in charge of a group that gave answers and such- to tens of thousands of churches and groups are not responsible for contacting authorities. That is the job of the local parish. Yet, no one is trying to put the local people involved on trial.

When they found out that someone was molesting children, the local bishop and those who found out should have contacted the authorities. While the priest is in jail or on trial, the local diocese can decide whether or not to get rid of him and ask the CDF to deflock him.
This was not happening - many of the cases were revealed decades later.

The canon lawyer Fr Tom Doyle says the Vatican could, if it chose to do so, open its archives and allow the world to see what is there. The Pope, he claims, could simply say: 'Here's the policy: full disclosure to the civil authorities, absolute isolation and dismissal of any accused and proven and convicted clerics, complete openness and transparency, complete openness of all financial situations, stop all barriers to the legal process and completely co-operate with the civil authorities everywhere. He could do that.'

Click to expand...

That's a great idea, especially when many civil authorities around the world, including the Middle East, China and other communist nations actively persecute the church. I'm sure a lot of people would love to have documents be revealed that personally involved them as victims.

Instead, a priest of the Vatican asserts that they are are victims of hate similar to Holocaust victims. Former Hitler youth John Ratzinger knows better than anyone that this is callous and cowardly hyperbole and should give a full confession and render unto Caesar what is Caesar's (criminal justice).

Click to expand...

You've resorted to attacking his character by pointing out he was a Hitler Youth, which he was forced into and became a deserter.

Universal jurisdiction — a concept in international law — allows judges to issue warrants for nearly any visitor accused of grievous crimes, no matter where they live.

Click to expand...

Keyword here is "Nearly". I'm sure heads of state are on the exclusion list for a thing like this.

Let's see the Pope visit the U.S. or some other country like Britain so you can point out the "obvious flaw" in my argument. We'll see how far the Pope's diplomatic immunity gets him on his Papal visits.

Click to expand...

Pretty far. Arresting the Pope would likely cause massive riots in every country in Europe and the Americas

Nothing makes me more sick than people in positions of responsibility that use legal arguments to avoid doing their job.

Click to expand...

He is doing his job.

The Pope should turn over every single molester and their accomplices in the RCC to criminal authorities so that they can be tried and convicted.

Click to expand...

The Pope doesn't know every single molester or I'm sure he would.

I would prefer that the Pope do this voluntarily, but if he does not, there are those with as much zeal as I who will not stop rattling the Vatican's cage until they do the right thing, even if that means tearing down every RCC church on Earth brick by brick, stone by stone.

Click to expand...

Until you get arrested for destroying or vandalizing property that is.

The Pope should turn over every single molester and their accomplices in the RCC to criminal authorities so that they can be tried and convicted.

Click to expand...

I'm going to agree with this sentence to a degree. As has been stated, the Pope is the authority of the Church, but still just another bishop. He DOESN"T legally employ and ISN"T legally responsible for every single priest. However, I DO think he should issue a Papal decree or somesuch that all churches in communion with Rome and all bishops appointed by Rome should do what the above sentence states, that is, turn over all evidence, let all claims go to the authorities, and let the legal system sort it out.



Metherion

jellybean99 said:

Universal jurisdiction — a concept in international law — allows judges to issue warrants for nearly any visitor accused of grievous crimes, no matter where they live.

Click to expand...

Fortunately, judges are not as gullible as you are and require some type of credible evidence before they start prosecuting an individual.

Instead of trying to force the Vatican into something, it is much easier to approach them and ask for documents pertaining to the allegations. The NYT obtained these in the Milwaukee case and had all the proof needed to show that there was no cover up in that case.