Skip to main content

The Vatican has granted Pope Benedict XVI, aka Joseph Aloisius Ratzinger, who is to resign on 28th of Feb .. ..

. . . immunity from prosecution by agreement with the Italian government.
Joseph Ratzinger whose Papacy began 19 April 2005 following the death of Pope John Paul II, has been under fire for several years since it became known that he was involved, at several levels, in protecting Catholic priests across the world who were charged with sexually abusing young children.

                                                          *       *       *    

Pope Benedict XVI has faced repeated calls for his arrest in connection with sexual abuse cases within the Catholic Church.  These calls stem from his failure to bring any of the Priests or other Church officials accused of sexual assault of minors to justice in many countries across the globe.
In some cases it appeared that he acted to protect Priests by moving them to other locations, which gave them the opportunity to continue the abuse.

The Pope will remain a citizen of the Vatican City and therefore have immunity from prosecution within Italy, which upholds the Lateran Pacts from 1929 with the Holy See, and which established the Vatican City as a sovereign state.  Pope Benedict XVI will become the first Pope to resign his Papacy since the 1414 resignation of Pope Gregory XII, and he will become the first to voluntarily quit his post as leader of the Catholic Church since Pope Celestine V in 1294.

Leaving the Vatican and Italy could result in the ex-Pope's arrest, since several countries have made plans to charge him with crimes, and possibly turn him over to an International court for prosecution.  He will have no immunity if he leaves the Vatican City and Italy.          

                                                          *       *       *

The International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State (ITCCS - located in Brussels, Belgium) made the announcement to Reuters earlier today.

Originally posted to Brer Kanin on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 07:38 PM PST.

Also republished by Street Prophets .


Should Pope Benedict XVI be prosecuted for the crime of protecting child abusers within the Church ?

80%102 votes
6%8 votes
10%13 votes
2%3 votes

| 126 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  This whole church is in dire need of reform. (10+ / 0-)

    This man, the x pope, is the symbol and substance of an institution above the law in any country and acts the part of degenerate royalty.  Their protection racket for those who were serial abusers of chilldren will haunt them, until there are substantial changes in the way these old guys conduct business and it can't be as usual.  

  •  Republished to Street Prophets. nt (4+ / 0-)
  •  Unbelievably offensive. (4+ / 0-)
    "(If he lived anywhere else) then we might have those crazies who are filing lawsuits, or some magistrate might arrest him like other (former) heads of state have been for alleged acts while he was head of state," one source said.
  •  Seriously you can't even spell Italian ... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ninepatch, WaryLiberal, UnionMade

    the "ITCCS" appears to be a bunch of anti-church nuts, and the Reuters story doesn't say what you claim it does. There is no agreement with the "Italien" government, and "the Vatican" doesn't "grant immunity" to the Pope, the Pope IS the Vatican.

    You can dislike the church all you like, but making up stuff really doesn't help make your story any stronger.

    •  The "Italien" gov't cannot grant immunity to the (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      pope from charges made by the ICC. It is a separate country than the Vatican.

      •  note that the OP is points to "ITCCS" which (0+ / 0-)

        isn't the ICC, it isn't a court it appears to be some anti-church activists with a neat name.

        ITCCS is a court (tribunal) like WBC is a church, people can call themselves what they'd like, that doesn't give them any actual authority or power.

      •  Of course the immunity .. .. (0+ / 0-)

        granted by the Italian state applies only to Italy.  
        The Vatican will grant the former Pope Ratzinger immunity within the Vatican City.
        With immunity in BOTH the Vatican City AND Italy he will be free to leave the Vatican and travel within Italy, without risk of facing prosecution or extradtion.
        It's really not that difficult of a concept.

    •  Seriously ? ? Please .. .. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BvueDem, Lujane, Chi, wilderness voice

      Sorry, my Swedish spelling found it's way into the text, as the correct spelling is indeed, Italien, when speaking in Swedish of things related to Italy.
      I'll edit it, since you find it so offensive.
      As to the rest of your gibberish, since the present Pope will no longer be THE Pope after the 28th of Feb., he will therefore find it necessary to be granted immunity by the Vatican, which will also be extended by the Italian government in order to avoid extradition to an International Court.
      This was reported in the "AddictingInfo" site which I also linked to [if you bothered to check more than just one of my links].
      And yes, with stories like this to report [along with thousands of others, equally offensive] I do indeed dislike the Church.
      It has become a symbol of everything wrong with Christianity, a bunch of pasty old men who want to interfere in everbody else's lives, without taking responsibility for their own.

      •  You presume that the Pope (Bishop of Rome, emer.) (0+ / 0-)

        needs immunity from something. There is nothing  in the Reuters piece that states that such immunity is necessary, all it contains is conjecture that his abdication and intention to reside in the Vatican is about avoiding prosecution.

        I'll point out the obvious, the Pope is NOT immune from any charges brought in any jurisdiction (other than the Vatican itself, I presume). If the US government wants to charge the Pope they can, if the Irish or French or Germans want to bring charges, they can. And from the scale of the child abuse scandal it looks like the Italian's are less likely to prosecute than the US or Irish, so an agreement with them may make a good sound bite but would seem to provide little protection.

  •  The Church is stronger (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    UnionMade, commonmass, jabney

    than the current crop of inadequate men who lead it now, and it will endure.  

    Any Medici's in the house?

  •  I find the question invalid. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ruscle, Mayfly

    Unless and until the man would be prosecuted, how can anyone say he acted criminally?

    I had to answer don't know/not sure because the point of charges and possible prosecution would be to determine whether he had acted criminally.

    "Gee, sure looks that way" doesn't cut it.

    by Magenta on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 09:34:54 PM PST

    •  You don't prosecute a "guilty" person .. .. (0+ / 0-)

      . . . you prosecute a person whom you believe is guilty of a crime.
      The result  of prosecution is either aquittal or a guilty verdict.
      And THAT was my question.
      "Should Pope Benedict XVI be prosecuted for the crime of protecting child abusers within the Church ?"
      I didn't say he was guilty, and neither should you suggest he is guilty, or innocent.  

  •  I am completely, (0+ / 0-)

    100% against the death penalty. However, it would be fitting for the head of the Inquisition, if he were to face methods of Inquiry commensurate with the history of his position.  Because justice is justice,  leave no stone unturned (or un-squished) to get to the truth.

    190 milliseconds....

    by Kingsmeg on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 09:43:34 PM PST

  •  Then get Israel to go in... (0+ / 0-)

    ...and just take him, like with Eichmann.

    Boehner Just Wants Wife To Listen, Not Come Up With Alternative Debt-Reduction Ideas

    by dov12348 on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 11:07:46 PM PST

  •  CT diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    your sources are dubious anti-church organizations.

    This "tribunal" with the phony name (ITCCS) you cite is a bunch of self-appointed loons without any official background.

    To quote their own web site: "our Court and tribunal derive their ultimate authority from the self-evident Natural Law". That is the Brussels equivalent of stuff like those "common law court" that pop up in connection with US militias every now and then.

    The rest of your claims is similarily not credible.  I am pretty sure the Vatican sought assurances that the resigning pope is protected from nuisance law suits that every catholic-hating Tom, Dick and Harry might bring up the way the reigning Pope is; and I assume they got them.  Thats nothing unusual.

    •  I don't think they have had the case of a Pope (0+ / 0-)

      resigning before either. He would be a target  of some no matter what, even if it were just for being famous. They have to protect him and as the article says, they cannot afford to do that all over the world. The article also brought up the idea that there would be pilgrimages made to see him if he went back to Bavaria.

  •  I'll wait & see (0+ / 0-)

    how this shakes out in the choice of the new Pope. Those Cardinals will see documents we will not see. The lines will not draw up  in a  liberal/conservative way - they are nearly all conservative, but in a global Church versus a Fortress Vatican way. They will want to protect the Church, but there's probably many who want to sweep the place clean now.  

    "There ain't no sanity clause." Chico Marx

    by DJ Rix on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 02:42:07 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site