"Double Standard" Update
Vatican Insists on Full Rights for
Pedophiles
by Christopher A. Ferrara
In an earlier
column I pointed out that in the year 2001 the ever-vigilant Congregation for
the Clergy published exactly one announcement regarding the discipline of a
priest - the announcement of September 12, 2001 concerning the absurd
"suspension" of Father Nicholas Gruner. The announcement of the "suspension"
gives no grounds for the great emergency in notifying the whole Catholic world
about Father Gruner, even as the world was reeling from the events of 9/11.
What dastardly deed
did Father Gruner commit to warrant such extraordinary special attention in the
midst of a world crisis? Oh yes, I forgot: He "failed" to "return" to the
Diocese of Avellino after the Vatican apparatus had systematically prevented
him from accepting the invitations of several benevolent bishops to be
incardinated in their dioceses. But why should the ever-vigilant Congregation
for the Clergy be so concerned about which diocese receives Father Gruner when,
throughout the world, the Churchs credibility is being destroyed by
sexual predators and heretics who call themselves priests?
Of course we know
the answer: sexual scandal and heresy are of far less concern to the
ever-vigilant Congregation for the Clergy than defending Cardinal Sodanos
Party Line on Fatima. Fatima belongs to the past, belongs to the past,
belongs to the past - repeat after me - belongs to the past. This is
one "dogma" the Vatican is willing to defend with unprecedented public
announcements condemning a faithful priest who has done nothing wrong.
Meanwhile, as
diocese after diocese, fearing legal liability, is finally turning over lists
of suspected child molester priests to the police - and who knows what lies
beneath the tip of this belatedly revealed iceberg of immorality? - we find
this interesting little tidbit in a New York Times article (March 3,
2002). Quoting a Roman canon lawyer, the article notes that "The Holy See
has thwarted American bishops who want to make it easier under canon law to
dismiss predatory priests. American bishops want to be able to decide
this on their own, administratively, rather than going through the judicial
process
The judicial process can take years, whereas the
administrative decision can be immediate."
Mark this well: the
Vatican apparatus will not allow bishops to remove priestly sexual
predators administratively. No, they must have a full trial - now under the
Vaticans new secret procedures and rules - during which their "rights"
will be respected.
Now, how do you
suppose Father Gruner was "suspended"? You guessed it: administratively.
No judicial process, no right to present evidence or cross-examine witnesses,
nothing. Just an order to "return" to Avellino after an approved absence of 20
years - an order dictated to the Bishop of Avellino by the executors of the
Sodano Party Line.
This is the state
of the Catholic Church today: priests who sexually abuse children cannot be
removed from office administratively to protect the flock, but a priest who
offends Cardinal Sodano is administratively suspended - for nothing -
and an announcement is made to the world the day after 9/11, lest anyone dare
to think that the events of 9/11 might mean that Sodano is wrong about
Fatima.
If the Church were
not a divinely founded institution, the men who control the Vatican apparatus
today would have killed it by now. The Church will, of course, survive their
malfeasance. But how much more suffering will the Church have to endure at
their hands? Only God knows.
Previous Articles
|