The Lead

The BBC reports that the Vatican says Pope Benedict XVI is willing to hold new meetings with victims of child sex abuse by Roman Catholic priests.

If he does, this could signal a new approach in handling the unfolding crisis, especially since reporters are finding more and more documentation that the future Pope's apparent knowledge of many cases around the world.

The BBC says:

In the past, the Pope has met victims of abuse at the Vatican and on trips to the US and Australia.
The Catholic Church has been shaken recently as allegations of abuse have emerged across Europe.

The allegations, many of which date back decades, have put pressure on the Church in countries including the Pope's native Germany, Ireland, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Austria.

"The Pope has written that he is available for new meetings" with victims, Fr Lombardi said on Friday.

"Apart from the attention we must pay to the victims, we must pursue co-operation with the relevant civilian judicial and penal authorities, in line with the legal and other situations in each country," he said.

"Transparency and rigour impose themselves as urgent requirements."

[Here are pictures from the last such meeting.]

Meanwhile, more reports just keep rolling in. This comes from the Ruth Gledhill and the Times of London.

The AP reports that the future Pope Benedict XVI resisted pleas to defrock a California priest with a record of sexually molesting children, citing concerns including "the good of the universal church," according to a 1985 letter bearing his signature.

The correspondence, obtained by The Associated Press, is the strongest challenge yet to the Vatican's insistence that Benedict played no role in blocking the removal of pedophile priests during his years as head of the Catholic Church's doctrinal watchdog office.
The letter, signed by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, was typed in Latin and is part of years of correspondence between the Diocese of Oakland and the Vatican about the proposed defrocking of the Rev. Stephen Kiesle.

The Vatican refused to comment on the contents of the letter Friday, but a spokesman confirmed it bore Ratzinger's signature.

"The press office doesn't believe it is necessary to respond to every single document taken out of context regarding particular legal situations," the Rev. Federico Lombardi said. "It is not strange that there are single documents which have Cardinal Ratzinger's signature."

The diocese recommended removing Kiesle (KEEZ'-lee) from the priesthood in 1981, the year Ratzinger was appointed to head the Vatican office which shared responsibility for disciplining abusive priests.

Here is the AP report in full.

Here is the AP's timeline of events in this case:

— July 1981: Oakland Bishop John Cummins sends Kiesle's file to the Vatican in support of the priest's petition for laicization.

— November 1981: Vatican asks for more information.

— 1982: Kiesle moves to Pinole.

— February 1982: Cummins writes to Ratzinger providing additional information and warning of possible scandal if Kiesle is not defrocked.

— September 1982: Oakland diocese official writes Ratzinger asking for update.

— September 1983: Cummins visits Rome, discusses Kiesle case with Vatican officials.

— December 1983: Vatican official writes Oakland to say Kiesle's file can't be found and they should resubmit materials.

— January 1984: Cummins writes a Vatican official to inquire about status of Kiesle file.

— 1985: Kiesle volunteers as a youth minister at St. Joseph's Church in Pinole.

— September 1985: Cummins writes Ratzinger asking about status of Kiesle case.

— November 1985: Ratzinger writes to Cummins about Kiesle case.

— December 1985: A memo from diocese officials discusses writing to Ratzinger again to stress the risk of scandal if Kiesle's case is delayed.

— 1987: Kiesle is defrocked.

— 2002: Kiesle is arrested and charged with 13 counts of child molestation; all but two are thrown out after U.S. Supreme Court ruling invalidates a California law extending statute of limitations.

— 2004: Kiesle pleads no contest to felony charge of molesting a young girl in 1995 at his Truckee vacation home.

— 2004: He is sentenced to six years in prison for the 1995 molestation.

— 2010: Registered as a sex offender living in Walnut Creek.

Comments (4)

I was born in Walnut Creek (and my brother was born in Oakland): this is getting personal.

This case is nothing less than a smoking gun. Ratzinger's (aka "Benedict XVI") signature is ON the letter. More concerned about "the good of the universal church" and the young age of the abusive priest (!), than the young ages of the children molested!! (The mind literally BOGGLES)

Unequivocally: this Pope should resign . . . and Roman Catholics should refuse to give one PENNY to the RCC, local or global, until he does (or does the phrase "enabling" mean nothing?).

However, should faithful RCs wish to redirect their pledges (and persons): The Episcopal Church Welcomes You".

JC Fisher

Posted by tgflux | April 9, 2010 9:44 PM

Being WILLING to suffer the consequences of ones actions is what people who attempt to make amends do when they let fear fall away and are self-honest...it´s not about ¨taking the best approach to save face and even not about being concerned and soothing the injured when one is a party to the abuse¨...it´s about ADMITTING ONES OWN FAULTS to God and in PUBLIC (maybe at the same time and let the chips fall where they may...confessions in public aren`t a new concept at the Roman Catholic Church).

The Pope can make his amends in front of the GATHERED HARMED, the media, the World and in the company of Bernard Cardinal Law and a few other priests and bishops who used horrible judgment...let the abused of all ages decide Benedicts fate in the face of the dismal REALITY that won´t go away.

Posted by Leonardo Ricardo | April 9, 2010 10:04 PM

We need to be concerned about the damage to the cause of Christ that results from these scandalous and criminal acts.

Men perpetrated these acts but Jesus gets blamed for them.

Atheists are having a field day. They say that these abusive acts prove that all religion is a sham, that we are stupid for believing there's pie in the sky.

We need to be very humble as we continue to report our experience; God not only exists, but "so loves the world."

It doesn't appear right now that God loves the world when there are priests victimizing children and bishops covering up for them. But God is able to redeem even this monstrous situation. God is still faithful, even though sin is real.

We can take no pleasure in Rome's degradation. Indeed, now is a time of mourning. It may be Easter, but what we are seeing is crucifixion.

Our job is to continue to claim resurrection. Jesus loves children, he doesn't harm them.

Let us gather our loved ones around us, mourn for those who have been hurt, confess and repent of our sins - and continue to tell the story of God's redemption, even in the face of massive and corporate evil.

We cannot be surprised that men do wicked things. But we can be tiny instruments of grace, even now when Jesus weeps.

Love still heals the world, so let us be loving as our Savior Christ has taught us.

Posted by Josh Thomas | April 10, 2010 8:21 AM

Being responsible and personally accountable is the start of good moral value building... ill-thought out actions taken in the name of exploitation followed by face saving pride that harms others isn´t the same as ¨loving¨ others or even ¨protecting¨ them or even looking good...I can forgive many things done to me personally but it is irresponsible for me to deny, pretend or ¨act as if¨ real human bad choices and actions directed against others shouldn´t have measured consequences...being tolerant and understanding doesn´t mean I ought not insist on viewing life around me as it actually is. It´s wrong for me to make it ¨appear¨ better than it REALLY is (especially in my own mind).

I can´t be responsible for harm done to Christianity by various self-proclaimed puritans/politicos/bishops and other aspiring saints who lie, thieve and abuse...but it IS good and spiritually wholesome to say NO to the despotism at Church/beyond and the deceiving and the oppression...God expects me to react to wrong and not cower or be intimidated because of appearances. I need not defend the reputation of a God who needs no defense.

Posted by Leonardo Ricardo | April 11, 2010 10:33 AM

Add your comments

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Reminder: At Episcopal Café, we hope to establish an ethic of transparency by requiring all contributors and commentators to make submissions under their real names. For more details see our Feedback Policy.

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

CATEGORIES

Organizations