Pope Guilty Of Protecting Child Abuser

Have you ever wondered why the current Pope has done nothing to punish those church officials who protected child-abusing priests by moving them from church to church instead of reporting them to the proper authorities (thus providing them with a new set of unsuspecting victims)? It may be because he is guilty of doing the same thing himself.

It has now been revealed that back in 1980, the German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung accused a priest identified only as "H" of abusing an 11 year-old boy by forcing him to perform a sex act on him. This happened in the diocese of Archbishop Ratzinger (the current Pope).

Instead of referring the offending priest to the authorities for much-deserved punishment, he was sent to a vicarage in Munich for "therapy". After two years in Munich, the priest was transferred to Grafing where he was allowed to resume his duties as a priest. In 1985, he was accused of again molesting children. He was convicted of this in 1986 (although he only received an 18 month suspended sentence and a fine).

In an effort to protect the Pope, his second-in-command at that time (Gerhard Gruber) is now saying that he made all the decisions without the knowledge or approval of Archbishop Ratzinger. That's extremely hard to believe, but even if it's true he should have known. After all, he was the boss, and the boss is always responsible for knowing what his subordinates are doing and making sure they do the right thing the correct way. It's that way in any business, and the religious business is no different.

First, I don't accept he didn't know of the accusations against the priest. If he couldn't read the newspaper headlines, is this the kind of bad publicity that an underling would keep from his superior? Of course not. He had to know the priest was accused. And once he knew that, does it make sense that he wouldn't make sure he knew what was happening in the case? Of course not.

Whether he knew or not (and I can't believe he didn't know), Archbishop Ratzinger was responsible for everything that happened in that diocese. That means he must accept responsibility for protecting the child-abusing priest, and for allowing him to resume duties in a new church with new victims.

The Pope (pictured) may as well have abused those children himself, because he allowed it to happen. He should be ashamed of his failure to protect the children of his diocese.