Stupid. It’s the fault of the damned priest and nobody else. And unless im wrong, isn’t the pope only the head of the American Catholic church in a religious sense? In the corporate structurre, he isn’t technically the “CEO” of every personnel and financial decision made by the American church, is he? Anyone know?
That’s not correct. Bishops might be called the “CEOs” of their dioceses. Archbishops with archdioceses.
This is the fault of (1) the priest; (2) his bishop, the notorious Rembert Weakland, now retired, who FINALLY admitted to being a homosexual after using church funds to pay off a homosexual lover to the tune of $450,000. He didn't want to turn in his fellow fruitcake the priest, so he waited for 20-odd years to notify the Vatican that anything was going on.
The idea that this is somehow the Pope's fault is insane.
If memory serves the Bishops of the Dioceses in America have been held responsible for acts of priests in the USA ... never the Pope or the Vatican. As a sovereign nation, a nation-state, the Vatican can (and I guess will) claim immunity from prosecution as an entity and for the Pope and Cardinals residing in Rome.
They may be guilty of protecting the priests however as a nation-state I think immune from civil and criminal courts. Its diplomatic immunity much like other nations and the UN enjoys.
They are as sovereign as the United States and its President ... unless the World Court/International Criminal Court is given jurisdiction by the US Senate approving the treaty. If that happened, any diplomatic immunity held by the US or other member nations would be swept aside and this court could arrest and try any nations citizens. As they have tries with former President Bush and former SECDEF Rumsfeld for war crimes.
Bad precedent to be setting in my opinion should the Dem/Lib/RINO controlled Senate ratify this Clinton made treaty.