Lawyers eye former pope's blueprint to shield clergy

Boston Herald.com ^ | Wednesday, July 30, 2003 | Robin Washington

[Land of the Irish]

A Latin document bearing the seal of Pope John XXIII outlined a 1962 Vatican procedure for shielding sexually abusive priests, two lawyers for plaintiffs in cases against the church maintain.

The ``Crimine Solicitationis,'' translated as ``Instructions on proceeding in cases of solicitation,'' states abuse cases are subject to the ``papal secret'' and threatens excommunication against victims who do not come forward within 30 days, according to the document given to authorities by Carmen Durso of Boston and Daniel J. Shea of Houston.

On Monday, Durso presented an English translation to U.S. Attorney Michael Sullivan.

``We gave it to the U.S. Attorney because we wanted him to understand what we mean when we say this has been an ongoing conspiracy,'' he said.

Added Shea, ``It's an instruction manual for a rigged trial for a priest accused of sexual crimes, including crimes against children.''

The document, which Shea said he had been trying to uncover for more than a year and recently received from canon lawyer the Rev. Thomas Doyle, allows victims one month to make their claim known to the supervising bishop.

``The penitent must denounce the accused priest . . . within a month to the (bishop) . . . and the confessor must, burdened seriously in conscience, warn the penitent of this duty,'' the document states.

``The confessor is the accused priest,'' Shea said.

``They're giving the priest the responsibility to tell his victim that the victim has to turn the priest in to the bishop within 30 days. If not, the victim is automatically excommunicated,'' he said, citing another passage.

A Boston Archdiocese spokesman could not be reached for comment and the Herald could not verify yesterday if the document was indeed genuine.

But both lawyers said they believed the Latin original to be authentic.

[ultima ratio]

First, the SSPX is not schismatic. But let's save that for another time--I've explained this so often it's tiresome.
Second, the letter from Msgr. Perl of Ecclesia Dei says nothing about attending an SSPX Mass only if no other Roman Catholic Mass is available. It implicitly recognized that Novus Ordo Masses themselves pose doctrinal problems which are unacceptable to traditionalist Catholics. It stated that Catholics who attend SSPX Masses are not committing sins as long as they don't do so with the express desire to separate themselves from Rome. Since SSPX has always denied it wished to be so separated, this last seemed a sop to cover for the Vatican bureaucrat's own embarrassment in having to make his admission in the first place. As for not attending an Indult, in my own case, I loathed the priest who said the Mass and who appeared to me a charlatan. (He did not last long--though he did a lot of damage. He was appointed right after the great turmoil in which FSSP was punished by Rome for its stand against concelebrations, etc.)

[ultima ratio]

Here's an important point you need to consider. It is the existence of the SSPX that has been protecting the Indult all this while. In fact, without the SSPX, there would have been no Indult, no traditional Mass, no traditional Catholicism in most places. SSPX alone held the line from the beginning. It refused to go along with the widespread demolition of Catholic Tradition. If the SSPX were to accept the blandishments of the Novus Ordo Church as Campos did, then it would be pressured to change and conform little by little to the Novus Ordo Church--just as the Indult priests are being pressured, as well as the priests of Campos. It is only because of what Rome calls its "irregular" status that SSPX is able to protect ALL of Catholic tradition--in a way not even the Indult priests can do. In this sense its status as "schismatic", while a false accusation, has the side benefit of protecting Tradition itself from Rome's destructive impulses.

[Thorondir]

The Pope say the NO Mass is a valid Mass (abuses aside). Are you saying he is wrong about that?

[As you well know...]

I don't think you've really thought this through. Rape victims sometimes take YEARS to come forward, because of the shame and the FACT that they feel they will not be believed

Amen, It took me years to get over the idea I was somehow responsible for the homosexual abuse I was subjected to.

[ultima ratio]

No. I have said this over and over. Nor does SSPX believe the Novus Ordo is invalid--but that's not saying much. It is still dangerous to the faith--because it suppresses Catholic dogmas and sustains a Protestantized theology. Just because a Mass is valid does not mean it is spiritually efficacious. In fact, it's been spiritually a disaster--destroying the faith of millions of unwitting Catholics.

[Thorondir]

...just as the Indult priests are being pressured...

Mine isn't. He is just hated, villified and outcast. He isn't pressured to do anything to the Mass or the traditions of the Church.

It is only because of what Rome calls its "irregular" status that SSPX is able to protect ALL of Catholic tradition--in a way not even the Indult priests can do.

ALL traditions, including humility, obedience and unity with the Pope? Hmmm... I don't see you guys doing anything that my good priest cannot do, and he is fighting the good fight from the (apparent, but apparently debatable) inside.

I'm not convinced, my friend. Nor am I less than calm. Nor do I want to seem like your enemy in any way. I just don't see your point, but then, perhaps, as you say, I am a slow learner.

[As you well know...]

FR. Brian Harrison says he does not consider such individuals as being in schism or heretics.<P.
Cut them some slack...most have had to face atrocious situations and they desire to worship as their Fathers and Grandfathers did

[Bellarmine]

If the Church of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are not the same, what is the meaning of "extra ecclesiam nulla salus"? Does it refer to the Church of Christ or the Roman Catholic Church?

[Thorondir]

OK. Here you and I are in perfect agreement. I couldn't have said it better myself.

Well, maybe I could have. 8o)

[Thorondir]

Enlighten me, my friend. My Latin is not that strong.

[As you well know...]

ha ha ha..as a Neo-Catholic who has filed for an annulment from the spirit of vatican two, I can only say "amen"

[Bellarmine]

"No salvation outside the church"

[ultima ratio]

How long do you think the Indult Masses and their priests would have lasted if there wasn't an SSPX for the fed-up faithful to retreat to? The Amchurch bishops would have crushed them long ago. It is fear of SSPX and its attraction that keeps the Indults alive.

As it is, in some Indult parishes communion in the hands and other Novus Ordo practices are being slowly introduced. As for SSPX priests doing what your priest can't do--they can baptize in the old rite, they can confirm in the old rite, they can confer Holy Orders in the old rite, they can give extreme unction in the old rite, and so on-none of which your priest can do.

[ultima ratio]

I am arguing they are the same. So you need to ask somebody else that question.

[Thorondir]

It is fear of SSPX and its attraction that keeps the Indults alive.

Could be, but you cannot say with absolute certainty that this is the Holy Father's motivation. Regardless, the Holy Spirit is keeping the reverent Mass alive, though tenuously.

As it is, in some Indult parishes communion in the hands and other Novus Ordo practices are being slowly introduced.

This is absolutely forbidden... (laughing) as are most of the wild abuses going on in the Nervous Disorder Messes. (laughing because the Vatican's forbidding them has not done much good, has it? Disobedience to Rome fathers ugly children, as we have seen.)

...none of which your priest can do.

Hmmm... I'll have to ask him. Thanks for the info.

Dominus vobiscum

[ultima ratio]

Et cum spiritu tuo.

[Bellarmine]

This looks to me to express the notion of the Mass as a memorial meal. Do you think that the priest who installed this tabernacle has the proper intent when offering Mass?

[sinkspur]

Do you think that the priest who installed this tabernacle has the proper intent when offering Mass?

Yes. Offering the Mass in the approved manner, according to the GIRM, assumes proper intent.

Canon Law insists that proper intent must be assumed, unless one can offer specific proof to the contrary.

[Bellarmine]

Would not the picnic basket tabernacle suffice for specific proof?

[sockmonkey]

The most awful looking tabernacle I've ever seen is at the Basilica of Divine Mercy near Cracow, Poland. It looks like a big Chinese gong and has a blinking red light on it.
The picture is huge, and I don't know how to reduce it and post it here, but here's a link to the picture:
http://www.sanktuarium.krakow.pl/jpg/Baz0208j.jpg