Since the story in this thread is so new, I haven’t seen the other side yet, but here’s the other side on a previous story:
“Sunday, April 11, 2010
The attacks leveled against Pope Benedict XVI get curiouser and curiouser.
Just so everyone is on the same page: first Benedict was accused of stopping a Church trial against a priest in Wisconsin. When that fizzled (because the priest died and the trial was apparently still ongoing) there were charges that he didn’t act quickly enough to laicize priests (never mind the fact that the priests were indeed removed from ministry).
This past weekend, the AP thought they had found the smoking gun: a 1985 letter bearing Ratzinger’s signature purportedly stalling the laicization of a priest. The AP got the story all wrong. Turns out the facts of the case exonerate Ratzinger entirely. For the record, Cardinal Ratzinger did not have authority over sex abuse cases until 2001. This case occurred in the late 80’s. The rule of thumb on all these stories is that the local bishop is the first person responsible for punishing priestly offenders and the one charged with protecting his flock from these menaces. To imagine that the Pope has the ability or the manpower to oversee and police the actions of every cleric around the globe is an infantile delusion. He is not Santa Claus. If the Pontiff had such powers, do you actually think there would be so many teaching and liturgical lapses throughout the Church? Phil Lawler does a great job examining the AP story here: http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?ID=632
It should be said that mistakes were most certainly made in dealing with priestly offenders and that the process of laicization was absurdly poky. But why is the media attacking the man in the Vatican principally responsible for streamlining the laicization process? Why go after Ratzinger—one of the few high-ranking Vatican officials who vociferously pursued these sex offenders?
There has been a coordinated push from the media and certain plaintiff attorneys (IE Jeff Anderson) to create a global narrative that implicates the Pope in every case of priestly sexual abuse since the Lord was in swaddling clothes. There are several reasons for this: 1) They want to drag the Vatican into litigation because they have already drained the coffers of many dioceses after years of court battles. 2) It serves the ends of those who despise the Church’s moral voice on issues ranging from marriage to abortion.”
more http://origin.ewtn.com/news/blog.asp?blogposts_ID=949&blog_ID=2
Probably because it's pretty common practice to hold those in charge responsible for the actions of those under them.
It happens in the military, it happens in politics, it happens in the banking industry....
It's a pretty widely recognized practice.