Benedict and the Vatican have provided no such indication of “cleaning house” so far on this trip, but for a few comments that he feels the victim’s pain and will delve deeper into the problem and maybe changing a few protocols, one being the statute of limitations. Currently, victims have ten years upon reaching their 18th birthday to surface an incident(s). After that, it’s effectively in-admissible and won’t be entertained by the Church.
How utterly and absurdly ridiculous to put such a constraint given the shame and embarrassment the victims often feel, which thankfully is receding as more and more come forth and help others finally do the same.
This Analyst argues the position of the Church should be that (statute) time is totally irrelevant and that there should be NO time limitation – period. And a comprehensive and painful rooting out approach of ALL (not a handful) abusers past and present must and will be conducted. If the latter is done and becomes an on-going process, there would never be a need for statute anyway because the problem is “finally and functionally” addressed and there theoretically should be no more instances, if the Church maintains a whole new standard of aggressive vigilance and action.
Bottom line Recommendation to Vatican: “Practice what you Preach” - i.e. root out evil.
The Vatican should immediately order and immediately commence a fully comprehensive global top down, bottom up formal investigation on EVERY existing and retired (living) clergyman. Those found linked to sexual abuse regardless of degrees of separation from any particular incident will be formally turned over to local law enforcement authorities with the Vatican’s full cooperation in prosecution.
For those determined to neither be practicioner’s nor complicit in any way (including cover-up) to this behavior, they will be “Certified by Benedict as Pedophilia Free”. That personalized Benedict certification will be placed in their service file/dossier. To put appropriate accountability and ensure all due diligence and attention necessary in the investigations, Benedict will be held accountable for any wrong doing priest who sneaks through the investigation, for whatever reason. His penalty – A condition within the decree to step down as Pontiff for failing future victims. That will surely get and keep his interest and attention on the problem in a due diligence way heretofore not seen or experienced by either he or his predecessors.
In other words, innocent children remain at risk until the problem is truly addressed, which has not been the case to date. If children are at risk under his leadership due to his not taking ALL the requisite preventative actions, which the Church has yet to, then so too should his job and title – be at risk too. I can’t think of any victim, parent of a victim or parent of any child who would disagree. Nor should Benedict.
Let any of these people step forward now and say if they disagree, that the leader of the church should not be held accountable for the vile acts of his “employees”, if ALL prudent prevention measures were not responsibly taken.
If he won’t do that, than it proves he is not sincere in rooting out this evil cancer which still lurks in the clergy’s ranks. His continuation as leader of the Catholic Church should then be contested and a campaign initiated to select a successor who is – sincere and willing to do the right thing – i.e. ACT NOW and ACT DECISIVELY.
Consider this then a progressive referendum on Benedict’s sincerity (and real substance).
Indeed, enough of the talk and total in-action, is the rightful position of the Progressives. The real question - Why is it not Benedict’s?
This is a key part of the “change” process the progressives demand, and justifiably expect. Unfortunately, the lack of true action in this one particular area of change suggests Benedict seems more interested in looking photog sharp for his Yankee Stadium history capturing Kodak moment, then he does the forever damaged victims past, present and future, some of whom may even be in the bleachers watching, praying and hoping for him to hit them a home run and signal during his sermon that the time has finally come for true and real substantive justice.
With that specific illustrative “change” example, back now to the broader and diverse “litany of change platform” the Progressives seek. It’s as if some top secret session then convened in the bowels of St. Peter’s Basilica in the mid to late ‘70’s to address this heretofore unheard of blasphemy, and a conclusion seemingly reached – we either change with our customers or lose the Progressive base.
Analyst Note:
Church hierarchy presents itself as unable to change under the opportunistic guise that change violates “church teachings”. To show that this is more of a smoke screen than reality, consider one example where it is not so. That is the issue of priests marrying, which itself is all balled up in the celibacy issue.
Wikipedia notes “Celibacy for priests is a “discipline” in the Roman Catholic Church, not a “doctrine”: in other words, a church regulation, but not an integral part of Church teaching….Because the rule of clerical celibacy is a law and not a doctrine, exceptions can be made, and it can, in principle, be changed at any time by the Pope. Nonetheless, both the present Pope, Benedict XVI, and his predecessor, spoke clearly of their understanding that the traditional practice is unlikely to change.”
