One step forward

…two steps back, you’re doing the Ratzi Rhumba!

Just when it looked like they might finally be getting into that “consenting adults” thing, along comes one more in a gathering dung heap of Catholic church child sex abuse scandals — and this one travels a long and perverse road that ends on the doorstep of Pope Sieggy himself:

Pope Benedict XVI was directly implicated in a deepening Catholic Church sex abuse scandal for the first time late yesterday following disclosures that he unwittingly approved the transfer a priest who forced an 11-year-old boy to have oral sex.

Anyone who thinks this has something to do with anything other than child abuse is bullshitting themselves for foul and odious reasons we can only imagine.   Who knows what attracts these creeps to the priesthood, or even if they get weird before or after they take those abnormal and unnatural vows of celibacy.   And how is it that someone with this guy’s record wouldn’t be immediately defrocked:

The priest, who was named by Germany’s Südeutsche Zeitung only as priest “H”, was transferred in 1980 from his parish in the German town of Essen to the Pope’s former diocese in Munich after he was accused of forcing the boy to perform sex acts. The priest was sent to Munich to undergo therapy, but six years later he was convicted of abusing minors. He was given an 18-month suspended prison sentence and fined the equivalent of €2,000 (£1,800). The newspaper said that he continues to work as a priest in Bavaria.

The Pope, then known as Joseph Ratzinger, was a German Catholic cardinal at the time. His Munich diocese insisted yesterday the decision to allow the convicted paedophile priest to continue working had been taken by Gerhard Gruber, 81, its principal vicar.

Gerhard might take the bullet, but it’s hard to fathom how a priest with as many issues as this one could lurk under the radar of the highest levels… and some of the Catholic rank and file are thinking that sounds about right.  It’s common knowledge that in a pre-Pope incarnation, Benedict took it upon himself to advise bishops on how sex abuse cases should be dealt with, or rather,  not dealt with:

Benedict is also under fire for a 2001 church directive he wrote while a Vatican cardinal, instructing bishops to keep abuse cases confidential.

Germany’s justice minister has blamed the directive for what she called a “wall of silence” preventing prosecution.

Well, that’s obviously because the German justice minister hates Catholics.  Expect the spin that this whole thing is a conspiracy to unjustly vilify the Pope and the Catholic church in 3…2…1…BANG!

8 Responses to “One step forward”


  1. 1 brebis noire Sunday, March 14, 2010 at 3:11 pm

    Hmmm, from what I gathered in my most recent foray into the BBW upside-down facts world, this would be totally OK if girls were involved instead of boys, and if the priests were both masculine and doctrinally orthodox.

    Srsly.

  2. 3 J. A. Baker Monday, March 15, 2010 at 9:13 am

    BTW, Professional Outrage Maven and Boy Detective Bill Donohue is on the case. He’s already determined who the guilty party is: The New York Times — for daring to report on the cover-up!

  3. 4 JJ Monday, March 15, 2010 at 5:16 pm

    brebis – You’re a better woman than I — I can’t stand going there any more. The horrible comment system is one thing, but she’s got a new crop of nutcase fetus fetishist commenters that are just intolerably dumb.

    She seriously said it would be okay if it was a girl instead of a boy? 😯 An 11-year-old is a child, either way. (I suppose that’s her way of trying to say it’s about sexual orientation — WRONG.)

  4. 5 JJ Monday, March 15, 2010 at 5:18 pm

    JAB – Why am I not surprised? What ever happened to accountability??

    That article from Donohue is priceless — it’s not the church hierarchy’s fault for covering up the scandal(s), it’s the New York Times’ fault for doing their job and reporting on them. What a pimp.

  5. 6 J. A. Baker Monday, March 15, 2010 at 7:15 pm

    but she’s got a new crop of nutcase fetus fetishist commenters that are just intolerably dumb.

    Even more intolerably dumb than Ken?

  6. 7 brebis noire Tuesday, March 16, 2010 at 4:32 am

    I can easily ignore the new sock puppets at BBW, they’re pretty lame, but can’t ignore the byzantine comment system, or the fact that her site makes my computer crash every so often.

    She did not say it would be OK if it were girls. However, she explicitly and emphatically equates pedophilia with homosexuality, and states that if priests were weeded out on the basis of their (inadequtate) masculinity and lack of conservative orthodoxy, there would be no sex abuse problem.

    She totally does not see the problem with hypocrisy, the power imbalance between victims and perpetrators, the systematic cover-up or, for example, the difference between consensual and non-consensual sex. She only sees “sin”.
    And tries to make a lame equivalence between sex abuse cases that occur in public schools and the ones in the Catholic church. Her protests could all be quite amusing, but her church-lady schtick is very unfunny.

  7. 8 J. A. Baker Tuesday, March 16, 2010 at 7:43 am

    the fact that her site makes my computer crash every so often.

    Maybe your computer is rebelling against all the illogic, hypocrisy and vaguely threatening naked fetus fetishism. 😛


Wait. What?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




Mac Security Portal
Rose's Place
Blogging Change

Incoming!

  • 630,637
[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

Archives


%d bloggers like this: