E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSCHICAGO -- A U.S. federal judge in Oregon on Monday dismissed a clergy sexual abuse case that was the first to try to hold the Vatican responsible for moving an offending priest into unsuspecting parishes, lawyers in the case said.
U.S. District Court Judge Michael Mosman in Portland, Oregon, ruled the Holy See in Rome could not be shown to be the "employer" of the late Father Andrew Ronan, who abused children in Chicago and later in Portland.
Church officials in Chicago knew that Ronan, who ultimately left the priesthood and died in 1992, had a history of sexual abuse, but he continued to abuse after he was transferred to Oregon, court documents showed.
Mosman had previously ordered the Vatican to provide all the relevant documents in Ronan's case but he ultimately concluded the Holy See did not belong in the case.
Roman Catholic Church official convicted of endangerment in priest-abuse trial
"There is no fact in the record on which to base an employment relationship," Jeffrey Luna, a lawyer for the Vatican in the United States, said in summarizing the judge's ruling.
The Oregonian newspaper quoted Luna as saying the ruling was "quite significant ... because the Holy See has patiently and cooperatively worked with the American judicial process to arrive at this day."
Bowing to public pressure to be more transparent in its policies, the Vatican on Monday posted guidelines regarding the handling of clergy sex abuse cases and for the first time stated that every case of sexual abuse by priests should be reported to the police. NBC's Anne Thompson reports.
Vatican accused of negligence
When confronted about the abuse, Ronan admitted it to his superiors at Our Lady of Benburb, Ireland, according to the documents, but was transferred to a Chicago high school anyway. He abused children there, the documents show, then was transferred to St. Albert's Church in Portland.
Vatican issuing guidelines to combat sex abuse
"It's clearly a disappointment, but we're definitely not discouraged," plaintiffs' attorney Jeff Anderson said according to The Oregonian.
Anderson, who has represented scores of victims of clergy abuse, said he would appeal Mosman's dismissal of the case on behalf of the now 60-year-old victim.
A monsignor who oversaw hundreds of priests in the Philadelphia Archdiocese was found guilty of one count of endangering the welfare of a child. NBC's Anne Thompson reports.
"He is eager to keep this alive, to hold the Vatican accountable for their role in this," Anderson said of the unidentified plaintiff. The Portland diocese and the Servite Order of priests are also defendants in the case.
When it was filed in Portland, the lawsuit was heralded by clergy abuse victims as the first to require the Vatican to produce documents detailing its involvement in an American priest's career path, which Rome did.
Philadelphia priest gets 3-6 years for cover-up in Catholic priest sex-abuse scandal
Numerous other lawsuits alleging clergy abuse have named the Vatican as a defendant, usually accusing the Holy See of negligence in allowing offending clergy to remain in the priesthood.
The clergy abuse crisis exploded in Boston more than a decade ago and spread around the world. The church in the United States has paid out more than $2 billion in settlements to victims.
Reuters contributed to this report.
More world stories from NBC News:
- Wife of disgraced Chinese leader gets death sentence with reprieve
- Russian top clerics forgive Pussy Riot, ask for mercy
- With wife's conviction, what is next for China's Bo Xilai?
- Assange in balcony appeal: Release Bradley Manning
- Czech police accuse man of plotting Norway-like copycat terrorist attack
- Government minister among 32 killed as Sudanese helicopter crashes into mountain
- Video: Chaos follows Syrian airstrikes
- Tropical Storm Helene slams Mexico; Hurricane Gordon heads for Azores
Follow World News from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
In the end this is not about justice for a victim or accountability. The priest
did the crime, and if his immediate superiors can be shown to have had knowledge
of his crime but did nothing, then hold them likewise accountable.
But suing the Vatican??? This is where it goes off the rails. When this is done then it becomes a stunt, all about Jeff Anderson and the money (not for the victim, but for Mr. Anderson and other greedy lawyers). Not to mention a certain Anti-Catholic Hate that permeates our modern society, which is nothing about defending sex-abuse cases but rather all about defending one's own personal sin (abortion, greed, theft, lying, sexual perversion, etc.).
I bet the judge is looking at a VERY nice retirement for dismissing the case.
Gee, never knew that the priests are not employed by the Vatican. I guess they don't have to mind what the Pope says. That's great news!
$2 billion plus in settlements is not "a stunt." There are a lot of reasons for "...certain Anti-Catholic Hate." Your belittling of the scope and scale of this clearly pervasive problem in the Catholic church is but one of the many reasons that people are fleeing the church and why it is "hated." You own it.
The Vatican most certainly should be held responsible. "Father" Ronan was transfered BY THE CHURCH from IRELAND, a different country on a different continent for god's sake, to Chicago and then to Portland all in an effort by "The Church" to cover-up his SINS. Or is it because he went to confession (I doubt he ever confessed that he was a sick, disgusting pedophile) and said the right number of Hail Marys, he somehow is magically "forgiven" and granted absolution?
As for "...defending one's own personal sin...sexual perversion, etc." Pedophilia IS A SEXUAL PERVERSION and there are a lot of deniers in the Catholic church that wish this would all go away. What has become public thus far is merely the tip of the iceberg. How is it, by the way, that the Vatican has more than $2 billion dollars in discretionary cash just lying around?
Oh, and by the way, there is no "god." No god would allow this sort of abomination and don't waste your time trying to explain to me how your god works because I've heard it all before. "God" willed it to be. What a crock.
Let's see the Priest takes his directions and receives his compensation from the Church. The Pope is the head of the Church.
No, I don't see an employer/employee situation here. Not at all. Silly to even bring it up.
I wonder what Arch Bishop Bernard Law is doing in Rome these days, since he left Boston following one of the early waves of this sexual abuse tsunami. I guess he was not employed by the church either.
Hoodie - Your observance only proves that there is no Christian God, as in a just, benign and all-knowing being.
That doesn't mean there is not a God, or intelligent entity ruling the cosmos, just that you shouldn't expect too much from him. He is either incompetent, insane, or totally indifferent.
Of course Father Andrew Ronan was not employed by the Vatican. He was working for GOD. The Vatican did not move Ronan from hunting ground to hunting ground. He was moved by GOD.
Pope Bennie really needs to chat a little more frequently with God. It would be good if they were on the same page.
People are exaggerating the scope of this case. They fail to understand that in america the number one group (other than parents and family members) that molests/rape children are teachers NOT priests in both rate and numbers. They hate the catholic church so much they find anything they can do to attack them. Other religions have an even worse record than the catholic church. FYI: In america, churches employ priests not the Vatican.
Everyone who believes the Pope/Vatican should be held personally responsible for the actions of a priest must necessarily believe that the President (Obama, the Commander-in-Chief)/White House should be held personally responsible if a soldier, sailor, marine or airman rapes a civilian.
@HOODIE - Oh, and by the way, there is no "god."
Its ironic that Juliane Asange is being pursued under a phony rape charge and Vatican gets a free pass on child sex abuse which proven over and over.
Assange has been running from country to country in an attempt to not face trial on a charge of rape. If he was willing to go to trial and prove he's not guilty he would go back and face the accuser and jury.
A false rape charge has not been proven. Don't believe everything you read on the Internet. It makes you look foolish and ill-informed.
And by the way, get a life.
Not going to let these excuses get lost in the "is there a god? Yes there is. No there isn't" debates. IMO, suing the vatican is not evidence of anti-catholic sentiment. What it is, is a measure of extreme frustration. For years, hundreds -- yes, hundreds -- of priests sexually abused children in the US. And whether or not they are the number one group of abusers is totally irrelevant. I wouldn't be surprised tho if they were the #1 group that got away with it because of their employer's collusion. In corporate terms, the pope is the chairman of the board/ceo, and the cardinals and bishops are like divisional presidents. Ultimately, everyone eventually rolls up to the pope. Don't kid yourself - in that tight little world, word of this atrocity got back to the vatican long before the rest of us knew about it. And no, their employer is not the parish church in which they are stationed. If that were the case, the parish would have the right to transfer a priest to another "branch," and they don't have that right - the bishop and/or cardinal do. And transfer them they did -- all over the country and globally, too. And the priests usually found new victims where they landed.
Since hundreds of priests abused children and got away with it, aided and abetted by many of their divisional president types, there should be hundreds of priests in jail, along with quite a few bishops and cardinals. But there isn't, is there? No - because of the statute of limitations, many of these men got away with the crime. And it is a crime. Others got away because it had been covered up for so long, they died before being brought to justice or even accused. Others, like cardinal Law, got cushy jobs at headquarters and were taken out of the jurisdiction.
So what you're seeing is not anti-catholicism, it's frustration that an entity and the people it employed could get away with criminal behavior. I'm appalled that they would even try to get away with it once they were found out; I'm sure I'm not the only one that noticed they weren't lining up at the police station to turn themselves in. Just another way that the church doesn't follow Christ's teachings -- when the authorities came for him at gethsemane, he submitted and quietly let them take him away to be tried. If he was like cardinal Law, he would have ascended right there and then and skipped out, one step ahead of the cops.
Since priests, cardinals and bishops ultimately all roll up to the Vatican, then I don't see why the Vatican can't be sued. I hope they get the right to do so. If the pope wants to be the ultimate authority, then let him take the responsibility, too.
I am sorry to say that I totally disagree with you...AND, if this was any other organization, the Vatican WOULD be held accountable...the reason is very simple and clear...all priests are accountable to the Pope and it is the Pope who hands down rules and regulations about how the organization handles these kinds of issues...ergo, they had the ability to stop the abuses from happening AND could have stopped many way before they happened...KNOWING about abuse and then sending them to other parishes, without the knowledge of the parishoners is a CRIME...the Vatican is worse than any crime organization because they allow this AND governments condone it by not pressing charges more often AND by giving them full tax exempt status
Unfortunately yes, Priests work for both parishes AND the Holy See. If you look at it like a corporation the Pope is the CEO.
This Pope has come into question for hiding information regarding pedophile priests while he was a Bishop.
Creepy guy who will NOT bring me back into the church. The more I learn about him the less I like him.
No it's actually not about hate for Catholics or love of a personal sin. "Sin" is personal and none of anyone else's business but the person who is committing it unless it hurts someone else like child molestation. There is proof the pope knew about these child molesting priests but did nothing and, in fact, made it worse by moving them around because the idiots who knew the children were being molested would keep their mouths shut once the offending priests were out of sight and the pope knew this. If there was proof that I knew my neighbor was hurting children and I did nothing, I would be arrested and vilified as should the pope be. Anyone who is still attending the catholic church are now accessories to these crimes because only someone who agrees with what they did in this matter could possibly trust that organization.
Sorry but your logic fails. First all priests are ultimately work for the Vatican. The RCC is an international corporation like any other. Second we invaded a country (Afganistan) because their agents attacked us, so clearly blaming a country for the acts of its employees is acceptable. Third the anti-catholic "hatred" you see is about the churches greed, theft, lying, sexual perversion, etc, not trying to get permission for our own sins. The organization that is the RCC has a 1700+ history of oppression for which it needs to be held accountable.
Regardless of the legal definition of the employer-employee relationship, many of the "alleged" molestation cases are blown way out of proportion. I think we have a lawsuit happy culture that needs to be called into question before we decide to point fingers at the Catholic faith.
Legally, the priest are seperate from the church. An attorney cannot be "fired" the bar association. But the bar association does implement policies that affect the professional status of an attorney.
People are upset because priest do not have the large bank accounts like the Vatician. Just angry that they can't get a cookie from the cookie jar.
Why are not not blaming the Justice System?
Wonder how much the Vatican paid out on this one? He either was threatened with excommunication if he was a devout Catholic, or he gets to buy a very expensive retirement home in the Florida Keys! Either one would not surprise me. The Vatican is capable of either or.
Denver Bill - Logic is not your long suit, it it?
No, nobody can absolutely control the actions of all their employees, all the time. If Obama, or the Federal Government, were responsible for covering up serial rapes of civilians by one or more soldiers, sailors or other military personnel, then yes, I would hold those entities responsible. Or if Obama, or George W., or any other president had intentionally worked to cover up a particular incident of rape by service personnel, I would hold them responsible.
We're not dealing with an isolated incident here, but with a pervasive pattern of behavior, which has persisted for decades, in multiple dioceses in places as diverse as Ireland and Los Angeles. Perpetrators have been systematically shifted to new parishes, victims have been intimidated and lied to, and when news of such scandals have broken, the church has chosen to transfer those responsible for the cover up to safer location, such as the Vatican City.
If you can find such a pattern behavior in the Obama White House, involving serial sexual abuse of children, yes, I will hold Obama equally responsible.
Logic: they just do not teach it in school anymore.
Yeah, no big deal, an adult having sex with a pre-adolessent child. I don't know why people are getting so upset.
Next thing you know they'll want to make homicide a crime too. The justice system is running amok.
BTW: The church is liable because they did not act to report them with law enforcement, they repeatedly transferred these priests to new parishes, allowing abuse to continue, and, in many cases actively pressured the victims and their families to remain silent.
That makes them liable.
Why couldn't you figure this out yourself?
Logical people do not usually begin their rebuttal with an ad hominem fallacy.
I agree. Similarly, if you can prove that the Pope had personal knowledge of the actions of pedophile priests, and then covered the crime, I would hold him responsible.
Denver Bill, My opening remark was directed at your argument which was logically unsupportable. You ignore my supporting arguments and seize on the question of whether the absolute collusion of the sitting Pope can be proven.
You may ormay not be able to prove the responsibility of the current Pope. But given the long history of widespread sexual abuse, cover-ups, and repeated transfers of offenders to new parishes, where they committed new crimes, the conclusion that this is the result of policy, not of unfortunate chance, is inescapable.
To compare this situation with a singular rape of a civilian by a military person, as you do, is beyond illogical; it is ludicrous.
Thus, my characterization of you is based totally upon your own words and unsupportable arguments, not upon an imaginary flaw in your person.
If your opening remark had been directed at my argument, it would have read "Your argument is illogical" rather than "Logic isn't your stron suit", wouldn't it? Nice try, though.
I seized upon nothing. The comparison between two hierarchies was my original post. Nothing more, nothing less.
I agree. The question is, whose policy?
Straw man fallacy. To compare the situation in the Catholic Church with a singular rape would be ludicrous. To compare the totality of sex crimes in the Church with the totality of sex crimes in the military is not.
I would appeal it too. The judge is probably catholic. The Vatican is directly responsible for keeping these pedos in place. The Vatican is full of molestors too so why would they care. I find it amazing how there are so many child molestors in the catholic organizations. Clearly God isnt backing them. Not to mention how the pope is worshiped, the insane ammount of idols they use, and all the contradictions and fale truths they teach. If you study the bible its pretty easy to see that they are not doing Gods will. Jesus said a rotton tree does not produce fine fruit. These men clearly arent fine fruit. So the tree is bad.
Nonsense, you have no idea of the structure of the catholic church at all. Until you are a bishop you are not even remotely connected to the Vatican. Just so you know, In america, data indicates that the Methodist and baptist churches have a higher incidence rate than the catholic church but don' let facts get in the way. Oh and routinely the whole congregation knows the minister/pastor was sleeping with the 14 year old girl after he comes out and confesses to the entire church only to have everyone of them "forgive" them and not one of them calls the police.
Wow, what a load of misinformation and hatred. If the judge is Catholic he should have recused himself, and if the lawyers in the case let a Catholic judge hear the case they should have their ability to try law removed. The Vatican does not control every single decision made by diocese around the world, most decisions are left up to the local bishop and the country's cardinals. The Vatican/Pope is responsible to ensure the authentic teaching of dogma continues. There are no more/no less a ratio of child molestors in the Catholic Church than in any other institution or religion. It blew up because priests were so trusted and beloved it was like the ultimate betrayal, and it continues to be news because now the Catholic Church is not sweeping it under the rug, but it being transparent and trying to do the right thing. If only they had done that from the start.... The Pope is not worshipped, at least he shouldn't be; it is not part of the faith to worshop him but some people may get carried away in their devotion to him ( just like some Obama supporters ). There are no idols, the statues and crucifixes, etc.. are helps and reminders to aid us in our spiritual growth and journey. We are reminded that no matter how hard we think we have it, someone else had it just as bad or worse and was able to get through it. Please list out what contradictions and false truths you feel they teach? You're judging the tree by some of it's fruit, the 1.5% of the priests; you totally dismiss the other 98.5% of priests, the nuns and monks, the hospitals, food banks, clinics and schools that do more than any government anywhere in the world? You're hatred is blinding you, or you are willingly ignorant.
The sexual abuse that happened was horrible, those who did it and those who allowed it to happen should be punished by legal authorities, and I'm sure they will suffer an eternity in hell for harming God's children. There will be both earthly and heavenly justice served eventually.
I really don't know where to begin, but I'll try. Ensuring the teachings of the Catholic dogma is the responsibility of all priests, from the Pope down. A 1.5% percentage is not insignificat. In fact it's quite large, considering the amount of priests around the world. I wonder how many other abusers there are around the world that are not being called to anything reembling justice since they live in countries that have crappy laws. And two billion in settlements, with more to come, is not an insignificant number.
As for the Pope not being worshipped, why do Catholics follow his every word. That's worship in my book. As for the statues of saints, the supposed christ being depicted as a European in nearly all paintings and so forth, all worshiped. Does that not be idol worship?
As for the Obama statement, this is not about politics. You seem like a troll. If so, go to the Faux threads. They gladly accept such statements.
Judge Mosman is a Mormon, which isn't much better than being Catholic on this issue.
Well a mormon is still a christian and both sects have a vested interest in putting the church ahead of the secular authority.
Yes, I think a Mormon would be very much concerned about setting a precedent which could come back and haunt his own church which has had its own share of pedophile leaders and coverups.
Not to mention a huge bank account.
To you anti-Catholic bashing knuckleheads it is so good to see anti-Catholicism being a raging fire in this country which was founded on religious liberty. May God have mercy on all of you.
Jackieboy - not a troll, just an interested observer who is a practicing Catholic.
All priests are charged with doing the teaching and being shepherds to guide the flock to greater spirituality; the pope and cardinals make sure what the priests teach is in line with dogma.
I agree, 1.5 % of any number is not insignificant; and the totality of those priests is significant, not arguing that at all; just responding to statements that there are more pedophiles in the Catholic Church than anywhere else, which is wrong. You are right, two billion plus USD is not a drop in the bucket. The victims deserve that and more.
Follow his every word? How many Catholics do you know? Are you one? I am vaguely aware of what he does and says; I pay attention when he releases an official paper or report, to see how it may impact my spirituality and the mass we celebrate. I realize there are people who unfortunately do see the Pope as Jesus Jr, and probably do worship him, but in my experiences, and they are not insignificant, those people are the very small minority. That is why I made the crack about Obama followers: they seem to hang on his every word far more than the amount most Catholics I know follow the Pope.
I'm beginning to wonder if you are European, or African, because what you describe as Catholic worship is nothing like what I experience several times a week. I'll give you the point on Jesus being depicted as European instead of Middle Eastern/Jewish, always been wrong in my book. But no one I know worships those statues. Again, they are reminders to us of His ultimate sacrifice for us, how much He loved and loves us. We reverence the crucifix, but definitely do not worshop them.
Not a troll, just trying to make an analogy that perhaps you would understand. Your statements sound as though they are coming from someone who has never known a Catholic nor set foot inside a Catholic church. That, or you're one of the victims of this abuse, and the anger and frustration are showing through.
I will never defend any of those priests/bishops or anyone who committed or covered up these atrocious crimes; but I will defend my faith to misstatements when I see them.
The Judge is a Mormon, setting a precedent.
Something is very wrong here.
The Holy See must have had a better spin doctor on staff than the plaintiff . If the church can transfer a priest from one parish to another ( in this case to hide the dirt bag ) . Shouldn't that act alone prove that the church is the boss and the priest works for them ???? In my mind there has been and continues to be to much maneuvering and face saving going on behind the scenes . If the church would stop giving each other total absolution for their sins , than maybe the truth would come out. But once again the little guy gets burned because he doesn't have the resources to fight city hall .
the Vatican does nothing of the sort the diocese may (separated from the vatican) but typically priests just leave one parish and apply to another. Ofcourse you wouldn't bother to investigate it because you just hate the catholic church and assume the pope in italy himself moves priests around. For two seconds think about how impossible that is. There are far too many priest and churches around the world for the vatican to run any except within italy and even in italy there is some autonomy. Your ignorance is clear.
Funny how the church has been paying $20,000 bonuses to priests who rape children.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/31/us/cardinal-authorized-payments-to-abusers.html
At least the Catholic church has its priorities straight, eh?
@ TED
Guess again my friend !!!!!
My wife is a practicing Catholic . We were married in the Catholic church at Mass. All I am saying is that the catholic church is guilty as charged. Do you care to remember the Arch Bishop of Boston mess ??? Our youngest son was attending Boston college at that time. The Arch Bishop of Boston had to sell his complex to cover his legal expenses. $95,000,000 dollars if I remember correctly. Boston College ( a Jesuit school ) bought it for $91,000,000 dollars. Now you tell me where did the money come from .
bob
Ted
I forgot to mention. That Boston College was going to use the complex for freshman housing and their law school. Before that those functions were done in Newton Mass. The complex was diagonally across Commonwealth Ave from B.C. Kinda nice the way that worked out for the school don't you think ????
bob
The Catholic Church has done hand springs and cart wheels to distance itself legally from its diocese and parishes. When the court awards damages to a victim none of that money comes from the Vatican. Each diocese is constructed to financially and legally separate itself as an employer from the Vatican. Except of course when some church affiliated hospital is required to provided full health services to women, or some nun spends too much time working with the poor - then its the Vatican in charge.
The vatican condemns the practice of forcing the church in america to pay (so do I that doesn't make me an employee of the vatican or affiliated with the catholic church down your street) but they are not the ones pursuing the legal remedies. Certain nuns are employees of the vatican, you just won't find any of them in the USA, they might visit but they don't work here.
That's the way I see it. too.
If the "Holy See" is going to hand out SOP to nuns on American soil - it automatically qualifies the Vatican as 'employer'. Same goes for Bishops and the like.
That said, I wonder what would happen if any Catholic church held a gay wedding? I got $10 that says his "Holy See" would be all over it....
They would denounce the catholic church that did so. Period, they can't come in and close them down they have their own money, however the diocese holds the land and would evict them. Nothing would keep the parishners from opening a new church across the street and calling it catholic though they would not be viewed as such because they wouldn't have the qualifications for being a church under the federal government.
When you find a rotten apple in a barrel, you don't stir the barrel. You remove the apple. Who is responsible for stinking up the barrel? The apple? Yes. The barrel stirrer? Yes.
I believe that is too subtle for the judge.
Priest convicted,,,,reports to Vatican through Bishops....therefore, employed by Vatican.....Vatican held not responsible by idiotic judge.....well, then exactly, YOUR HONOR, who the HELL DID he work for, the UNITED NATIONS?? Another example of a judiciary with NO COMMON SENSE!!
He worked for the local diocese, the bishop he reported to. Its not that hard to understand, but like you said NO COMMON SENSE..
Well Ted, who did the local diocese work for? Follow the money!
Ted,
I would buy your argument, were he not moved from one COUNTRY to another. And subsequently between THREE separate dioceses. This becomes comparable to saying you can't GM for a case of willful neglience by the Pontiac division that originally occurred within the Chevrolet division.
Typical behavior for the Vatican. Their organization forgave priests and bishops in the early years for turning in worshipers to the Romans for execution, and burning bibles.
"Bowing to public pressure to be more transparent in its policies, the Vatican on Monday posted guidelines regarding the handling of clergy sex abuse cases and for the first time stated that every case of sexual abuse by priests should be reported to the police. NBC's Anne Thompson reports."
And yet, the judge thinks the priest doesn't work for the Vatican.
i have yet to figure out why this wasn't done in every case to begin with. i don't give a fig who is involved, if your kid is attacked, you call the cops! ridiculous.
You do not understand the role of the Vatican and the Holy See. Even down to property deeds, it is not the Vatican that "owns" the property; it's is the office of the Bishop that is in the Diocese. The Vatican IS responsible, I agree. However, the charge has to be accurate and proper. Calling the Vatican the employer, I never thought made sense.
---------
IMHO-2730490
Gee, never knew that the priests are not employed by the Vatican. I guess they don't have to mind what the Pope says. That's great news!
#1.2 - Tue Aug 21, 2012 6:24 AM EDT
They worship the pope, preists, they listen to him however they are not direct reports. They directly report to the diocese. The diocese calls the shots and are their employers. The pope doesn't even employ bishops. ishops don't get a paycheck from the vatican, they get it from the diocese. The diocese doesn't even have a franchise relationship with the vatican but if you want to consider it one that would be far better than this nonsense we keep hearing people spew
Ted - so let me understand this - The priests report to the Diocese who is technically their employer.. and the Diocese is technically the Bishops employer as well. The Vatican is not directly linked to the priests or the bishops and even the Diocese.
So basically - the Vatican isn't directly linked to any of the churches, but expects the churches to follow its guidance or the churches are kicked out? That doesn't make sense, I'm not sure I understand. The Vatican can have ruling on whether or not a church can be considered Catholic, and be an authority on that church but has no responsibilities to the people of the church (in terms of employment is what i'm referring to) who are working at the church?
is this correct? I want to make sure i understand what you are trying to say. It doesn't make sense to me because it would be like -- my manager and the head of my department are my bosses and i'm employed under them but the CEO of the company is not my employer but can be an authority on me. Is that similar to what you are saying ?
I'm wondering if it's something like -Bob gets in trouble as a teacher- is his district his employer, is his state Department of Education the ultimate employer, or the US Department of Education?
Phoenyx13 - you basically have it right. The Vatican, the first amoung equals ( the pope is just another bishop, as are the cardinals ), has teaching authority only. Jesus put Peter in charge of admin and teaching, the local churches have authority and ownership. The Vatican reviews all things concerning the dogma and teachings of the church, but how it is actually carried out is up to the local bishops. The Vatican can call them out on something, or give advice, and in extreme situations excommunicate them ( kick them out of communion, which means they are not teaching and believing the same thing ). That is why you have diocese that kneel a lot, others only kneel at one point in mass; some have modern music, some have traditional, etc... It is up to the Bishop to decide if men discerning a calling to the priesthood should be ordained, and where they serve; the Cardinals and Vatican have no say in that. In the case of the rotten priest moving from Ireland to the US, it was between the two local bishops; and again when he moved from Chicago to Portland. That was totally between the bishops; those three ( if still alive ) should be help responsible, and anyone else who had knowledge and is complicit.
ok thank, i just wanted to make sure i understood it, i didn't mean to be offensive or anything of that nature. Just trying to understand how the hierarchy works.
And recently the Vatican told the Italian bishops that they have no legal obligation to report sexual abuse to the cops.
Good to see that they theoretically have a better policy in the US, but in general they still haven't figured out how to do the right thing.
I guess the Roman Catholic church considers itself like McDonalds, a product licensor, with the dioceses, globally, being independent licensees bound by the requirements of the license, but independent of fiscal responsibility.
Once again the House of Pedophilia slips through the cracks. Where is all of the outrage from the public who claims they are so worried about their children hearing a cuss word on TV, yet somehow turn their heads the other way on this. Instead of placing your anger at two consenting same sex adults, perhaps you should go after the real perverts...child molesters.
No one is slipping throught the cracks, the people can sure the diocese (the employer) just fine. The reason this stupidity of suing the vatican is going on is because they want to sue those with the deepest pockets, even thought they have no authority to move a priest around and often are not informed.
No, Ted, the victims of pedophile priests and those who covered the abuse up just want some accountability and suing the Vatican makes a point. Usually nothing is done unless they (the Vatican) loses money. Then they sit up and take notice. Hit the Vatican/Catholic Church where it hurts ie.. the bank account. And honestly, do you think getting any amount of money will ever make being molested by a clergyman better? Ask any rape vitim if they would rather have a sizable sum of money or never to have been raped. I think most would pick the second option.
Pedophiles cannot be rehabilitated. We have been informed that they are "hard wired" to their proclivities. So, there is only one solution - and that solution came for the offender (Ronan) in 1992.
Hope the suit against the Portland Diocese and Ireland is more successful. Aiding and abetting is criminal, and felonious as well. Where were the felony charges?
That won't be a problem, if the claims are legit portland and ireland diocese will pay through the nose.
What a joke. If the Vatican wasn't the priest's employer, who was? This is just one more ridiculous example of people in power supporting people in power.
The joke is how little you know. The employer is the diocese, hence why the judge didn't throw out the suit vs. the diocese.
I'll take a chance at speculating that the judge has a Catholic background. The Vatican has made it quite clear that the various Dioceses, parishes, orders, etc., are not franchises. And how is it that the priest in Oregon was not an employee, yet Boston's Bernie was transferred by that same Vatican?
A reversal is in order.
That's right they are less than franchises. The dioceses operate under their own rules and are autonomous. They are catholic so they should be following the popes guidance when they don't the catholic church kicks them out but the church continues to run however they want to.
He's a Mormon....they're not much better on this issue.
Oh man, so he's a man used to assuming that religious authority is higher than secular authority and likely also afraid he might not get his eternity card punched if he slaps down religious leadership.
Time to take away their tax free status.
I wonder what the religious affiliation of U.S. District Court Judge Michael Mosman in Portland, Oregon is? Roman Catholic, perhaps?
"Hominobisco, shredded wheat, all you dagos on your knees." (a joke about their Latin drivel) Any priest: "I was only showing that boy what a man's private parts look like, and where he shouldn't be touched. I didn't do anything wrong!" The Vatican:accomplice in the crime and cover up of acts of pedophilia. Guilty as charged...except in the eyes of this judge.
The Vatican does not employ priests. I never knew that. That means that the Pope has no authority over them. That's good to know. That means that nobody in the church in America has to obey the Pope's orders. What a crock.
He doesn't employ the church goers either but they are supposed to follow him to. Are you saying the parishioners are employees too? this is just a good show of ignorance
You're the one who is pathetically ignorant. The priests are employed by the Church. I was a Catholic seminarian years ago. One of the reasons that I left was the rampant homosexuality that I saw. While I have nothing against homosexuals today, the Church's teaching on homosexuality meant that the priesthood was infested with hypocrisy. I personally knew one of the most notorious of the pedophile priests, Father Guathe of the Lafayette, LA diosese. I knew at the time that he was creepy, and that he appeared to be homosexual, although I never realized he was a pedophile and predator until the news broke years later. I am willing to bet that I am a hell of a lot better informed on this issue than you are. You show your ignorance. The Church needs to be made to pay for their failure on this issue. They have lost their moral authority. If Christ came back today, He would toss these bastards out of the Vatican like he did the thieves and money changers in the temple. Get a clue.
Silly remark. The church is not responsible for the living expenses of all parishioners, particularly as compensation for administering church ceremonies.
Priests live in housing provided by the Church. Whether they call it "per diem" living expense allowances or salaries, the Priests receive money in return from the Church. When you strip away the mystical bs, this is an employer/employee relationship.
Castigate the guilty and deal with them with the full force of the law!
Leave my (Our) Holy Catholic Faith and God Almighty alone!
It is easy to point the finger and judge or apparently not, if the judgement does not mirror your own interpretation.
Don't get confused by my defense of the Church and the Faith that has nothing to do with these criminals.
There is no hiding place for the perpitrators of these crimes and those who hide their crimes against the weakest and most vulnerable.
May God Bless the afflicted and protect all children.
BTW We all only answer to the One God!
Unfortunately Joe, the leaders of your faith have been covering up (and in a lot of cases, are the perpetrators of) the rape and molestation of little boys for decades and maybe even centuries. At some point you have to accept that this SEEMS to be a way of catholic tradition from those that do not practice.
Nonsense..
i'm sure Ted you think its nonsense, but you are one who practices which means you can't see from the other point of view.
I can tell you -- it CERTAINLY does SEEM that way
The Pope: The NEW Teflon Don!
:-D
The Pope is NOT the employer?
Interesting that when he says jump the priests say 'how high?'
If he isn't the CEO of the church of the imaginary sky fairy cannibals who is he?
Davebny
Fully Agree that it is horendous! Especially in opinion formed from those inside as well as those outside the Church or belief.
There has been way too many incidents and faults identified over the last two thousand years, to just let things go and not take the steps required in prevention.
Do not leave your children with anyone and always be wise before the event.
Take Care All Everywhere and God Bless!
...
Butt why would the judge do that ?
...
First the judge requests documents from the Vatican -- clearly indicating that he regards the Vatican as the employer -- and then he suddenly dismisses the case on the grounds that the Vatican can't be held liable? I ju$t can't gue$$ what it wa$ that changed hi$ mind.
"There is no fact in the record on which to base an employment relationship" JUDGE you missed the most obvious fact, he's a Catholic Priest! That fact is on record and it glares at you like the sun! This judge must have a "special" relationship with the Vatican. To the tune of X $millions.
What a disgrace to the criminal justice system and a slap in the face of the victims of these Catholic perverts that are directed to their assignments by the Vatican. Or maybe the priests us a ouija board.
A federal investigation of Judge Michael Mosman should be initiated immediately!
The Holy See has been covering this up for years. If the Prist isn't employed by the church why does he have to follow its rules. How many more lives will be ruined before we stop the Holy See
as much as i'd like to disagree with the judge i think his judgement is correct. the church i was forced to attend had 3 priests. they received a modest monthly income from the parish but were expected to do outside work such as teaching high school religion classes. they received money for weddings, baptisms and funeral. the holy see (popedom) is a good ole boys club. while church's are affilated with the ''holy romans'', i would't call it employment. think of it as a franchise business. like running a wendy's--you buy your supplies from the corporation and follow corporate procedures but your employee's are not corporate employees and do not receive wages from corporation but from franchise owner. main difference --wendys pays taxes.
True - but if the CEO of any franchised business declared that rodent poop should be hidden in the food...then the CEO is in charge all the way down.
mark440- if there was a directive from the corporation to franchise owners regarding illegal ingredients then you could have a criminal case. as this compares to the situation with the church i believe the vatican was aware of a world wide sex abuse situation and were complicit in the on going molestation. their legal culpability (if proven that they covered up the assaults) is another issue. the affiliation of these churches to rome is not necessarily an employment situation.