Maltese priest defends Pope in child abuse scandal

Raymond Cachia

Mar 16th 2010, 18:51

@Lydia Pullicino

The Psalms are part of the Old Testament and belong to all Christians and Jews and they are not the exclusive domain of the Catholic Church.

To be under the protection of the Lord as per Psalm 23, does not necessarily mean that you have to belong to the RC Church. Do not use the Bible to close your eyes to evil.

Let us not forget that this Pope, as Cardinal Ratzinger, is the author of a May 2001 letter to bishops stating that the “Crimine solicitationies” (regarding strict secrecy in abuse cases) law, and which is still in effect.

The 69-page Latin document bearing the seal of Pope John XXIII was sent to every bishop in the world. The instructions outline a policy of ’strictest’ secrecy in dealing with allegations of abuse and threatens those who speak out with excommunication.

Charles Grixti

Mar 16th 2010, 18:34

The pedophile Priest is suspended by the Pope and the Church has its own 10 year statute of limitations? Sounds like more protections for child molesters.

And what is this 'profuse apologizing’ by the Church all about anyways?

When such heinous crimes against children are committed, worldwide and for such a long time by persons claiming their moral authority directly from God, it is time for the State, the Police and the Law Courts to step in. These people should be in prison for a long, long time and not still out there demanding our respect! But where are the criminal investigations and how many priests and their enabling superiors have been put in prison to date?

Or are Churches not accountable to anyone and are in effect above the Law?

J Grech

Mar 15th 2010, 17:18

It boggles the mind how people continue to defend an institution that has systematically covered up abuse for centuries - never mind recent decades.(Australia, Canada, UK, etc) How many generations of victims need to come forward for there to be full disclosure and admission of guilt on the part of the Catholic Church? It is all fine and good to weed out the "bad" ones and provide token "apologies" for specific people's actions but it is absolutely clear that covering has gone on and on for the dark deeds of sinful men and women by the Church as an institution. There is a "top" man in charge and he can make proper disclosures and admissions but it seems that too much is at stake for the Church. "Be sure your sins will find you out" Numbers 32:23 God will not be mocked. These things will be brought to light over and over until the Catholic Church as an institution repents fully.

G.Muscat

Mar 15th 2010, 16:07

Here is a link to the BBC documentary which gave rise to these allegations: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3335354490744010763 I admit it does make you think twice if we should go cheer him on when he comes to visit.

Marton Saliba

Mar 15th 2010, 10:43

"...I call it the one Immortal blemish upon the human race..."

John Seguna

Mar 15th 2010, 07:39

First of all Christianity isn't only about the Church. Christianity first and foremost is what Christ did and what He told us to do. Second, if some of the members of the Church are acting the wrong way, that does not mean that we may thrash what Jesus taught us. He Himself said for those who preached well but lived the opposite "Listen to them, but do not live like them". Also if some are acting wrong that does not mean that all the Church is wrong. I know many and many priests who are sacrifising their lives every day in Malta and Missionaries. So let us divide first what is good and what is bad!!!!!!!

C.R. Taliana

Mar 15th 2010, 07:06

Double standards. La legge non è mai uguale per tutti!

Lydia Pullicino

Mar 14th 2010, 20:08

Inspite of all the church's mistakes, I am still happy to be like sheep under the protection of the Lord as in Psalm 23.

M. Cassar

Mar 14th 2010, 19:22

Here we read four big vocabularies that constitute big check-mate and rich media magnet:
-The media.
-The Pope.
-The Vatican.
-Sex scandal.

I believe when big accidents (such as Lockerbie or the twin towers) or big events (for instance sainthood of Pius) happens there always must be a beneficiary behind the tactic used by the media. Obviously who controls the media makes sure his agenda items get a huge feedback. Will this dirty agenda of the dirty media work against the Vatican and manage to tarnish the Pope? Time will tell!

D stellini

Mar 14th 2010, 19:21

In my earlier comment, The Times chose to edit out part of it : " Mons Scicluna states that 60%of cases chiefly involved sexual attraction to adoloscents of the same sex......the remaining 10% were cases of paedophilia in the true sense of the term , ie based on sexual attraction to prepubescent children" Why did he give this statistic? Is he trying to infer that there is nothing wrong with abuse on adolescents ?
Mons Scicluna s should clarify his statement in no uncertain terms , or resign from from the task he is responsible for.

Raymond Sammut

Mar 14th 2010, 16:13

There are numerous flaws in what Monsignor Scicluna is claiming here. Suffice to give one example on my part, as others have already been given in earlier comments.

"He [Monsignor Scicluna] said that 60% of the cases had not come to trial, largely because of the advanced age of the accused...] This is not a valid excuse, and shows clearly that the Vatican is not serious when it claims that it respects the law of the land of where the affected diocese is located. A case is brought to trial regardless of age of the accused. We see this happening, for example, to those accused of war crimes who are often extradited from one part of the world to another regardless of their medical condition or age. One should also not speak in terms of percentages, as these do not reflect the true extent of the problem.

The RC Church has a long way to go before it can earn credibility on this issue. Monsignor Scicluna is nowhere near to reversing the deterioration in public trust. For him to simply say, they are too old, so there's nothing we can do, in no way exonerates the church.

G. Fenech

Mar 14th 2010, 15:09

This just shows the true nature of an organisation run by human beings in the name of something noone can prove. Just like any other large organisation, there is corruption, there are secrets, and there is always an agenda.

The teachings of Christianity, and what actually happens in real life are two opposites of the spectrum. It is truly sickening to know that those we were meant to trust, are doing so much damage to so many people, and then they hide it.

It still baffles me how people choose to follow the church after all this surfaces. I guess sheep will always be sheep.

J Farrugia

Mar 14th 2010, 15:02

How many times will I have to say this: The Church is not the state and therefore cannot flout irregularities to the four winds. Even the state has its state secrets. The church being a forgiver of sins cannot do like the courts do...flout the names just like that. The Catholic Church obeys God not man, so it has to obey the fifth Commandment Thous shalt not kill. One can kill the good name of a priest by slandering him like Spanish Communists used to do to kill them, until the time when General Franco put a spot to this once and for all. Even today some communists and even atheists are trying to defame HH the Pope by a sexual scandal but this attemp failed miserably. The Church takes its time to investigate such allegations because like the state, everyone is presumed innocent until proved guilty. So enough of this catholic church bashering from these maltese and foreign idiots. Before bashing the church take a look at yourselves before your own mirrors.

James Brincat

Mar 14th 2010, 14:17

‘Mgr Scicluna admitted that since 2001, about 3,000 accusations of abuse by priests of minors had been received by Vatican officials.’

And how many thousands of other cases that are not reported or were committed behind closed secret doors Mgr Scicluna?

Imagine if the Vatican was a Bank or for instance the VAT department and there are 10 % of the employees are accused with corruption, what should be done? I guess a fair trial is a must, then the culprits will be disqualified or jailed if found guilty. In case fair trial is excluded probably the bank, slowly but surely would get out of business and lose clients trust. This is more or less what’s happening with the Vatican and this explains why the crowds are turning their back to the Church and no longer interested what the Church says.

Could it the Vatican has the prerogative or got sort of ‘divine immune’ to carry out and to justify such filthy cases which we lay men don’t know about? Insomma, the Vatican has been cloaked in too many secrets here and there!

Joe Xuereb

Mar 14th 2010, 13:19

I could pull apart and fairly demolish all phrases in this sad and disturbing piece but I will limit myself to just three this time around.

1)'we can say that about 60% of the cases chiefly involved sexual attraction towards adolescents of the same sex, another 30% involved heterosexual relations', Scicluna said (well, spouted would be more accurate). Is it not interesting and telling that abuse against boys was markedly top heavy. I mean, considering that in the general population, statistically, homosexuality'paedophilia is a very small minority. Quite a phenomon this (the priestly misbaheviour one, id est) worthy of much study and revelation to the public as a matter of urgency. I say this because people need to learn the difference between homosexuality and paedophilia.

2)' there had been about 1,000 priests in the diocese at the time and that the archbishop "could not deal with everything'. Oh well, what's to fret about the screwing up for life of a few hundred youngsters, give or take a few score here and there.

3)'between February 1980 and August 1982, no wrongdoing was reported'. So, innocent until proven guilty. U hallina mon seigneur! (come off it, monsignor, pull the other one).

Maria Zammit

Mar 14th 2010, 12:26

I quote "... Ratzinger had let the priest, known only as H, stay at a vicarage in Munich for "therap"... H had been suspected of forcing an 11-year-old boy to perform a sex act upon him in the northern city of Essen...

May I ask why Ratzinger did not take action to have H suspended from his duties immediately? Why did it have to take until 1985 to have him suspended from his duties? to my simple mind Ratzinger is an accomplice to the crimes and the hardship suffered by the victims could have been avoided.

What does Christ teach us about "giving scandal to children"? This pope doesn't deserve to lead the Church!

Christian Sciberras

Mar 14th 2010, 12:17

C Borg - Agreed.
Others - Not to agree with the church or anything, but I'd like to point out, to who are they hiding?

The obvious answer is "the media". Other then that, they have absolutely no right or way of action to stop a person from talking.

Making things short, if these cases have remained secret, it isn't the Church's fault, but rather the people involved which opted to remain anon.

That moves the Church out of the equation.

So who are we accusing of remaining secret? The victims themselves?

What stops the victims from filing an official police report and/or write about their experience to a newspaper?

David Borg

Mar 14th 2010, 11:44

It is an honour for Malta that a Maltese citizen has been entrusted with such a delicate and difficult task.

As often happens, the evil deeds of a few overshadow the holiness and good works of many.

The present pope was often criticized as he was a disciplinarian. Well it seems that the Holy Spirit is still working in the Church, as discipline is needed at present in this difficult time for the Church.

For the beleiver the Church is not only a human institution whose members are sinners but also a divine institution based on faith and whose head is Christ.

Joseph Cauchi

Mar 14th 2010, 11:30

Some say, that because the church only accepts celebant people in its ministry, this could be a “magnet” for people with homosexual tendencies; therefore wouldn’t it be much wiser if the RC church would drop the Celebacy condition, thus reducing the risk and increase its members in its ministry with people of “normal” orientation?

If this “condition” was introduced later in the Church’s history through a Vatican Council decree, thus I believe the same can be said if this “condition” can be reversed, to meet today’s exigencies.

This type of behaviour should not only be condemnable by the Church, because after all, this is NOT FAIR AND JUST for the Church to be tainted with, just because of these “sick” weirdos, but to expel these “people” from its ministry, with IMMEDIATE effect!

J.C.

carmelo aquilina

Mar 14th 2010, 11:12

Mgs Scicluna is quoted as saying that "Church secrecy had "never been understood as a ban on denouncing the crimes to the civil authorities". This may be true in most European countries and the US but in Malta the government is spineless and deferential and lets the church get away with dealing with cases of allegations of sexual abuse in secret to the detrmient of the victims , The Irish investigation into abuse found that the authorities wish not to offend the churhc led to them leavingthe chruch to deal with cases, and in mostof these cases the abvuser was just shuffled off secretly to other parishes where the abuse continued. The current systemin Malta just serves the Church's interests over those of the victims.

His Holiness could demonstrate his intolerance of abusers in the church by announcing during his visit that the Church will automatically report cases of suspected abuse to the police and disband its secretive investigative panel. Is what is good enough for countries like th UK or Ireland not good enough for Malta ?

E. Vassallo

Mar 14th 2010, 10:27

@D. Stellini

Agree.

C Borg

Mar 14th 2010, 10:18

Can we have a Maltese style Murphey report about the local scene in this regard?

Had the state been totally secular and clearly divided from the church this wouldn't be a problem to a modern country as we yearn to be.

D Stellini

Mar 14th 2010, 10:12

It really is shameful how the Church has handled and continues to handle this abuse problem. Monsignor Scicluna's statement further confirms this. He says that secrecy is there to protect the victim. This is completely unfounded. The courts do not reveal the perpetrator only when the victim is a relative , so as to protect the identity of the victim. Finally he still refers to the priest involved in this case as H, even after being found guilty of having performed sex on an 11 year old boy.
It is a fact that the Church has indeed been involved in a cover up for abuse , and Mons Scicluna's actions are still far from coming clean on this problem , and reporting immediately to the police to investigate such abhorrent abuse.