Pope Named in Lawsuit by Clergy Sex Abuse Victim


Well … it was inevitable … it had to happen at some point and now it finally has …

A victim of sexual abuse by a Catholic priest has filed a lawsuit against the Vatican, naming Pope Benedict as a defendant.
According to CNN, this the first legal case in the worldwide clergy abuse scandal to target the pontiff.

Terry Kohut says he was sexually molested and assaulted by the headmaster and priest of St. John’s School for the Deaf, in Milwaukee. “Kohut was not alone,” CNN reports. “From 1950 to 1974 the headmaster of St. Johns, Father Lawrence C. Murphy, raped and molested as many as 200 deaf boys, according to court and church documents.”

The suit alleges that the pope, then known as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, was culpable in his role as head of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which investigated charges of sexual abuse by priests. And though church records show the abuse by Father Murphy was brought to the attention of Ratzinger years ago, a church trial against the headmaster was stopped and he was allowed to remain a priest. Murphy died in 1998 as priest in good standing.

The Vatican’s “policy of secrecy” in abuse cases, and its “directives to conceal the sexual abuse of children” by priests, the lawsuit says, helped bring about the abuse of Kohut and others by Father Murphy.


So what do you think will happen, do you think he will appear in the dock to answer the charges? Nope, not a chance, it will be the usual. He will keep his head down and ignore this “petty gossip”. Remember, the Vatican definition for factual disclosures of abuse is “petty gossip”. So what exactly is the story here, is it truly credible that Ratzinger is guilty? In March 2010, an article in the New York Times stated that Vatican officials, including Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, did not respond to credible allegations of serious sexual abuse of boys by defrocking the accused priest. Why? well because they needed to cover it all up. Several U.S. bishops had warned the Vatican that failure to hold a church trial and defrock the priest could embarrass the church .
Article here …

Critics have alleged that former archbishop Rembert Weakland covered up, or at least failed to publicize, some of the abuse, in particular by overseeing an evaluation in 1993 of Murphy. Weakland twice wrote in 1996 about the case to Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, but received no reply. Cardinal Bertone instructed Wisconsin bishops to start a canonical trial that could have resulted in a range of punishments, including defrocking (so if you abuse children, thats the worst they will do!!!). Later, the formal church trial was dropped because a church statute of limitations had been exceeded, and because Murphy was elderly and in poor health. The Congregation (that would be Ratzinger, he ran this) suggested the archbishop instead punish Murphy by imposing penance and restricting his public ministry. Laicization would have released Murphy from nearly all obligations of priesthood, including the obligation to perform any penance ordered by his bishop. Archbishop Weakland said, “The evidence was so complete and so extensive that I thought he should be reduced to the lay state”, and complained that the Vatican tribunals moved too slowly.
And don’t forget, this is not about one instance of abuse, but rather relates to the abuse of over 200 deaf boys that he was supposed to care for.
So lets see if I have this right now …
  • Abuse is OK as long as you don’t get caught, or are too old and it was a long time ago
  • An appropriate Catholic punishment for abuse is penance (basically say a few Hail Mary’s prayers), that was the current Pope’s suggestion when asked what should be done.
  • Secret internal trails for abuse are the best way to address it all, getting the secular authorities involved is not appropriate
  • Covering it all up is also best because it would discredit the Church if it ever became public
In essence, having lots of folks respect you because you have an imaginary friend gives you a get-out-of-jail-free card, normal secular laws don’t appear to apply. But what is truly bizarre is that the general populate appears to accept this.
This cult claims that we are all wicked and evil (or to use their terms, born in sin), and that only goodness can be achieved if you join them and embrace their imaginary friend. So, when faced with such ridiculous claims, consider the evidence of corruption, deceit and cover-up that runs all the way up to the top and … be skeptical.

Leave a Reply