Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

What He Said

Posted by on Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 8:15 AM

Christopher Hitchens on Pope Benedict the Accomplice:

There are two separate but related matters here: First, the individual responsibility of the pope in one instance of this moral nightmare and, second, his more general and institutional responsibility for the wider lawbreaking and for the shame and disgrace that goes with it. The first story is easily told, and it is not denied by anybody. In 1979, an 11-year-old German boy identified as Wilfried F. was taken on a vacation trip to the mountains by a priest. After that, he was administered alcohol, locked in his bedroom, stripped naked, and forced to suck the penis of his confessor. (Why do we limit ourselves to calling this sort of thing "abuse"?) The offending cleric was transferred from Essen to Munich for "therapy" by a decision of then-Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger, and assurances were given that he would no longer have children in his care. But it took no time for Ratzinger's deputy, Vicar General Gerhard Gruber, to return him to "pastoral" work, where he soon enough resumed his career of sexual assault.

It is, of course, claimed, and it will no doubt later be partially un-claimed, that Ratzinger himself knew nothing of this second outrage. I quote, here, from the Rev. Thomas Doyle, a former employee of the Vatican Embassy in Washington and an early critic of the Catholic Church's sloth in responding to child-rape allegations. "Nonsense," he says. "Pope Benedict is a micromanager. He's the old style. Anything like that would necessarily have been brought to his attention. Tell the vicar general to find a better line. What he's trying to do, obviously, is protect the pope."

Very much more serious is the role of Joseph Ratzinger, before the church decided to make him supreme leader, in obstructing justice on a global scale. After his promotion to cardinal, he was put in charge of the so-called "Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith" (formerly known as the Inquisition). In 2001, Pope John Paul II placed this department in charge of the investigation of child rape and torture by Catholic priests. In May of that year, Ratzinger issued a confidential letter to every bishop. In it, he reminded them of the extreme gravity of a certain crime. But that crime was the reporting of the rape and torture. The accusations, intoned Ratzinger, were only treatable within the church's own exclusive jurisdiction. Any sharing of the evidence with legal authorities or the press was utterly forbidden. Charges were to be investigated "in the most secretive way ... restrained by a perpetual silence ... and everyone ... is to observe the strictest secret which is commonly regarded as a secret of the Holy Office … under the penalty of excommunication." (My italics). Nobody has yet been excommunicated for the rape and torture of children, but exposing the offense could get you into serious trouble. And this is the church that warns us against moral relativism!

Read the whole thing here.

 

Comments (31) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Asparagus! 1
For as much intransigence, hatred, ignorance, and bigotry that streams from all the world's religions, it never ceases to astound me the level to which the catholic hierarchy is an organization of pure and organized evil and malice.
Posted by Asparagus! on March 17, 2010 at 8:44 AM
Vince 2
When will the world wake-up? Must humanity always be slave to the lies and hypocrisy of religions that breed a never ending litany of injustice?
Posted by Vince on March 17, 2010 at 8:44 AM
Dingo 3
I fucking love Christopher Hitchins.
Posted by Dingo on March 17, 2010 at 8:46 AM
Joe Szilagyi 4
I didn't see that coming.
Posted by Joe Szilagyi http://www.joeszilagyi.com on March 17, 2010 at 8:59 AM
Afreet 5
Ugh. If this isn't a revolting reminder of how misguided religious authority is, I don't know what is.

I hope some people start to realize that their tithes to the catholic church support institutionalized child rape.
Posted by Afreet http://www.artificialmusicmachine.com/ on March 17, 2010 at 9:00 AM
Fifty-Two-Eighty 6
I can't believe Ratzinger hasn't croaked yet. I mean, wasn't that the whole reason why he got voted in to begin with? They figured he'd be dead in a year or two and then they could move on.
Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty http://www.nra.org on March 17, 2010 at 9:03 AM
7
The Catholic Church may be proof that there is no God, for if there was, He should have burned them down a long time ago.

Meanwhile, I refuse to tar all religions with the same brush, especially those who place far more emphasis on actually practicing personal integrity, love, equality, charity and peace than they do on swallowing dogma and worshiping their own hierarchy. Granted, those seem to be in the minority, but still.
Posted by Brooklyn Reader on March 17, 2010 at 9:04 AM
Dingo 8
This ties in so brilliantly with that Intelligence Squared debate on the motion "The Catholic church is a force for good in the world" Hitchens participated in. Of course, the real show-stealer in that debate was Stephen Fry, whose arguments are summarized on the website thusly:

Stephen Fry concedes that his opposition to the motion is a deeply personal and emotional one. He criticises the Catholic Church not only for the horrors it has perpetrated in the past, but also for its ideology, and for its sinister temerity to preach that there is no salvation outside of the Church. With two words he refutes Anne Widdecombe’s suggestion that the Catholic Church does not have the powers of a nation state: “The Vatican”. As a homosexual, Fry reflects how bizarre it is to be accused of being “immoral” and “a pervert” by an institution that has persistently hushed up the rape and abuse of children under its care, and whose leading members, abstentious nuns and priests, all share an attitude towards sex that is utterly unnatural and dysfunctional. He concludes by questioning whether Jesus, as a humble Jewish carpenter, would have approved of all the pomp and excess of the Catholic Church, and whether he would even have been accepted by such an arrogant organisation.
Posted by Dingo on March 17, 2010 at 9:05 AM
Matt from Denver 9
@ 6, it doesn't matter who's in charge because John Paul II spent over 25 years ensuring that the hierarchy was populated almost exclusively with Ratzingers. The next pope will be just the same, and likely the one after, and if they perpetuate the cycle then this is the church for the next 100 years at least.
Posted by Matt from Denver on March 17, 2010 at 9:23 AM
Vince 10
@7 And that's part of the problem. All religions are the same in that they promise to be the only way to believe and anyone who believes differently is the enemy. Religion is the problem, not the solution.
Posted by Vince on March 17, 2010 at 9:39 AM
venomlash 11
@10: Two words: Interfaith Alliances.
Not all religion is evil.
Posted by venomlash on March 17, 2010 at 9:45 AM
rob! 12
If the Catholics must have a pope, I recommend they move the Rev. Thomas Doyle swiftly up the line--he's got a few hops to make before reaching the College of Cardinals. A priest willing to call bullshit on the hierarchy is a rarity and a treasure.

I'm sure they'll listen to me. They used to be all ears in the confessional. Back when I was a gangly-limbed ball of raging hormones.
Posted by rob! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZBdUceCL5U on March 17, 2010 at 9:49 AM
Reverse Polarity 13
Hahahaha.

Hitchens: Even crazy drunk, he sounds like the smartest guy in the room.
Posted by Reverse Polarity on March 17, 2010 at 10:20 AM
Urgutha Forka 14
Organized religion is the mother of "Do as I say, not as I do."
Posted by Urgutha Forka on March 17, 2010 at 10:26 AM
15
#10. as a stalwart antitheist, I don't entirely agree. There are religions in the world (just no dominant ones) that are completely benign. Many even lack a deity.

And sure they make unfounded claims about the nature of the universe, but there comes a certain point where any human value system is going to be arbitrary in some sense.

I'm more than happy to let people have the mystical, if they don't mind abandoning the nasty bits.
Posted by cpt. tim on March 17, 2010 at 10:26 AM
samktg 16
@15, Even let them keep the nasty bits, just so long as they don't insist on pushing any of it on me, or anyone else who doesn't want it.
Posted by samktg on March 17, 2010 at 10:30 AM
Purocuyu 17
I have to say, as an atheist, I hope for more Ratzingers. I hope for more of this stuff coming out. The more it happens, the more difficult it is for reasonable people to continue to support the crazies in their midst, and they will move on.
Here's to more stories of church scandal!
Posted by Purocuyu http://littlevictorygarden.tumblr.com on March 17, 2010 at 10:44 AM
kim in portland 18
It saddens me that I don't find this surprising in the least. But, then I have been long coming to the opinion that the catholic (meaning universal) church is becoming irrelevant, and that is difficult as I am part of the church. This is not to say that there are very real groups, congregations, individuals who are relevant, and who have done and continue to do great work. Just than many have become about themselves, they no longer point towards God and so have become ineffective. I sincerely doubt that there are many churches in the US that Jesus of Nazareth would be found in and would find himself and his radical attitudes of equality, hospitality and nonviolence would be welcome. He'd make his place amongst the strangers at the gate, those unwelcome at the table. I don't think I am alone in thinking this, David T. Olson's 2008 "The American Church in Crisis" (Zondervan Publishing) and evangelical researches have been noting for decades that church attendance, and also in divinity school enrollment, has been falling for decades in all 50 states. Between 2000-2005 no church kept up with the population growth in any state. Polling indicates that amongst those who "believe in God" is that religion isn't "terribly relevant, honest, or healthy". This to me indicates that the catholic church, as a whole (a rather broad brush stroke) not individuals or congregation, has become ineffective and irrelevant. And, I wish I had hope that it would change.
Posted by kim in portland http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/11/fast-paced_video_provides_a_fu.html on March 17, 2010 at 10:44 AM
You Look Like I Need A Drink! 19
And yet Papa Ratzi continues his diatribe against teh gays.

Seems strange that a church saturated in chronic and habitual sex scandals should dictate the moral behavior for the rest of the world...


Posted by You Look Like I Need A Drink! on March 17, 2010 at 11:19 AM
20
So can we start just calling him "Benny the Rat" or what?
Posted by gholtby on March 17, 2010 at 11:27 AM
21
he would even have been accepted by such an arrogant organisation.


He would have been excommunicated by such an organization. In prior centuries, he would've been burned at the stake for heresy. The Catholic hierarchy have been Pharisees for pretty much as long as the church has existed.
Posted by keshmeshi on March 17, 2010 at 11:32 AM
22
I don't understand, isn't threatening witnesses a crime, and doesn't that letter to bishops provide solid evidence for prosecution?
Posted by Erica Tarrant on March 17, 2010 at 12:22 PM
Nofo 23
Remind me again why it's illegal to murder the pope.
Posted by Nofo http://nofo.blogspot.com on March 17, 2010 at 12:38 PM
24
Come now, Nofo, murder is wrong. But extraditing the Pope to a country that carries a death penalty for this kind of criminal conspiracy? That would probably be OK.
Posted by BABH on March 17, 2010 at 1:55 PM
Canadian Nurse 25
Denmark is the only country in the world that I can imagine having the balls to persecute the pope. But, as the head of the Holy See, he'd probably have to be tried by an international tribunal. I don't think one country can just arrest the head of a sovereign political entity.

That, of course, brings up the insanity of having the Holy See exist as a sovereign entity at all. Since religious entities don't have the checks and balances of a democracy, it seems quite dangerous to give them all that power.
Posted by Canadian Nurse on March 17, 2010 at 4:10 PM
Dingo 26
Visiting heads of state can be arrested in certain circumstances (for example, there were lots of efforts to make various countries arrest George Bush; unfortunately they went nowhere).

Sadly, all these ongoing church-related scandals will probably have absolutely no results in terms of really bringing those responsible to justice, preventing new and different types of abuses, giving restitution to the victims, or lessening the evil influence of the church on the world.
Posted by Dingo on March 17, 2010 at 4:34 PM
27
It seems to me that the best way to end the abuses of the Catholic Church would be for Catholics to abandon the church in huge numbers. Really get the attention of the Pope and the hierarchy. The church will have to make major, long-lasting changes to maintain itself or else.
Posted by DavidBowieFan on March 17, 2010 at 5:07 PM
curtisp 28
Well - this is all due to Satin. As long as the boys are able to assume the position of moral agent over the ladies they should be fine. Mr. Hitchens doth protest too much.
Posted by curtisp on March 17, 2010 at 6:16 PM
samktg 29
Really who can resist satin? It's so smooth.
Posted by samktg on March 17, 2010 at 8:14 PM
curtisp 30
Back in the seventies her starred in many fine movies and often resided in tudor style homes.
Posted by curtisp on March 17, 2010 at 9:14 PM
31
Think of it from the point of view of the Catholic church: if they can't continue to make the priesthood a safe haven for child rapists, who are they going to attract to the positions?
Posted by laurelgardner http://www.etsy.com/shop.php?user_id=5877570 on March 19, 2010 at 3:51 AM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy