Crisis at the Vatican II

Pope Benedict XVI is not out of the woods yet on the accusations that he was part of the cover-up of child abuse cases. The Vatican is, probably correctly, trying to show that, although he came late to sufficient awareness, he has since then become a chief proponent of change.

That may not be enough. To be the best of a bad lot is still not so good. The facts that seem to be emerging show, at best, an obliviousness to the seriousness of the situation and, at worst, putting the church and the priests ahead of their victims.

Added to the Munich and Wisconsin cases in which, as Cardinal Ratzinger, he was at least indirectly complicit in inaction, is new evidence emerging today of two more cases from Arizona. As the Vatican Cardinal who headed the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, it was Ratzinger's responsibility to deal at that level with the cases of priests who had been accused of abuse.

As reported by Matt Sedensky on Huffington Post, Ratzinger allowed two cases from Arizona to languish for years without action. The Associated Press has reviewed documents that show that Bishop Manuel Moreno wrote to Ratzinger about one priest that he was "a major risk factor to the children, adolescents and adults that he may have contact with." There is no indication in the case files that Ratzinger responded.

In the other case, of Rev. Michael Teta,

In the 1990s, a church tribunal found that Teta had molested children as far back as the 1970s, and the panel determined "there is almost a satanic quality in his mode of acting toward young men and boys."

The tribunal referred Teta's case, which included allegations that he abused boys in a confessional, to Ratzinger. The church considers cases of abuse in confessionals more serious than other molestations because they also defile the sacrament of penance.

It took 12 years from the time Ratzinger assumed control of the case in a signed letter until Teta was formally removed from ministry, a step only the Vatican can take. . . .

In a signed letter dated June 8, 1992, Ratzinger advised Moreno he was taking control of the case, according to a copy provided to the AP from Cadigan, the victims' attorney. Five years later, no action had been taken.

"This case has already gone on for seven years," Moreno wrote Ratzinger on April 28, 1997, adding, "I make this plea to you to assist me in every way you can to expedite this case."

It would be another seven years before Teta was laicized [removed from the priesthood].

The Vatican has responded to these charges defensively, lashing out at the New York Times especially for its investigative reporting. A Vatican spokesman has called the allegations "absolutely groundless" and said that the facts are being misrepresented. In the case of Father Teta, he said the delay was due to an appeals process and to the Vatican's changing regulations for how it handled abuse cases.

Twelve (12) years?

Richard's comment on my 03-28-10 original "Crisis at the Vatican" blog seems even more pertinent now as the necessary repair for the Church:

If the Church looked at this as what it is, a horrendous moral outrage, the only recourse would be for the Pope to say mea culpa, and step down. That would be an incredible example to give for the Church. The Pope, like Christ, could 'accept' the sins of all the people and sacrifice himself for the good of all. Let himself be crucified. That is the only way I see to salvage this.

Instead, the Church, so far, is trying to portray itself as the victim. And a serious misstep in that direction was the Good Friday sermon delivered in the pope's presence by "the pope's preacher," who likened the "violent criticism" being directed at the Church to the persecution of the Jews. The Vatican quickly distanced itself from this charge, but it may be too late. This may have been the last straw in proving the collective tone-deafness of the current leadership of the Church.

Ralph