Africa:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6372E620100408

Australia:

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2010/s2902098.htm

Brazil:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i6T2FZuW588xFahgyr8KUJFK1TJAD9FM55TO0

Canada:

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/800312--church-scandal-s-next-wave-abused-girls?bn=1

Ireland:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8688557.stm

England:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/6224134/Panel-to-investigate-Catholic-Church-abuse-allegations.html

United States:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14brfs-SETTLEMENTIN_BRF.html

Church’s New Legal Strategy:

- For Pope to say the bishops are are not employees of the Vatican and are acting autonomously.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/vaticancityandholysee/7733921/Vatican-claims-bishops-arent-employees.html

- Why then does the Vatican receive these bishops helping them to avoid summons or move abuse related documents to other clerics with diplomatic protection? Perhaps, it is not only about protecting the bishops, but protecting the Church from what the bishops know and might say to avoid real jail time. We might be looking at only the tip of the iceberg.

Mary,

Seems you don't think the issue is as important, as when you wrote the article. You haven't replied for some time.

This is not a dead issue.

.

Dear Oliver,

.

Thank you for that interesting comment. Also, as you suggest to the much regretted Mary, it may not be a dead issue but it may well be a dead end.

I don't know about those iceblocks, I tend to associate popes with smoke, and where there is smoke ... perhaps a little of each: smoke and fire under the iceberg, belching volcanic ash, derailing aircraft and all that. You are right. Benedict is a crafty old devil. He certainly seems to have more than one trick up his sleeve.

That was a good one about not having any employees. I wonder what he is going to come up with next. Mind you he has not done too much hiring and firing during the five years since he appeared through the smoke. You can be sure he won't be doing any at all for the rest of his tenure, at least not until the ash settles.

That, of course, lets the bishops off the hook. They must be dancing with glee or singing psalms with the altar boys or something.

I don't know why, I can't help thinking Benedict reminds me of Ahmadinejad. They don't look alike but they both seem to think and act the same way. The two are becoming quite confused in my mind. Whenever I hear one I could swear I was listening to the other one.

Strange, isn't it ?

Must have been watching too much television.

.

Dear Banjo,

"You are right. Benedict is a crafty old devil. He certainly seems to have more than one trick up his sleeve."

Yes, it reminds me a little of Bullwinkle, "Hey, Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit out my hat". Well, for Benedict, "that trick always works", so long as the community and the Church's own parishioners don't apply pressure.

Anyone who achieves the high Office of Pope, would need to have been an excellent politician throughout his career.

Just think, folowing Benedict's lawyer's reasoning, if BP and Exxon paid their crews from the Cocos Islands, their head offices would not be responsible for oil spills.

Actually, I feel that the Church does not enjoin the criminality until such time it starts to cover-up. The same goes for a Bank or a Police Force in a parallel situation. The catch is, that the Church wont cut the guilty senior clergy loose into the hands of secular authorities. Perhaps, the odd priest, but not the cover-up cardinals and bishops.

Reform is needed, even if the Cathoic Church looses half of its hierarchy. Apologies don't address systemic problems.

"Physcian heal thy self."

.

Dear Oliver,

.

Thank you for warning me that Benedict is a world class politician in pope's clothing. I appreciate that.

I nevertheless dare step in the ring with him with no other arms than as much common sense as I can muster as an ordinary person.

As I am neither a human resources specialist, nor a lawyer, nor even a law student at Sydney university like Mary, the odds with the bookies can only be humiliating.

Benedict did not indicate which jurisdiction he had in mind when he declared that the bishops are not his employees. Perhaps he was alluding to the fact that bishops, wherever they are located in the world and whatever their nationality, do not have a signed employment contract, which seems plausible.

I understand that in most countries, cvil servants do not have a signed employment contract either. Though they are "employed by", or should I say, "work for" the government, they do not have a contract. It seems they are "appointed" and are governed by a "statute".

Religious personnel would appear to be in a similar type of situation. The profession of a bishop, I imagine, is that of "cleric" whereas the term "bishop" would appear to be the title of a particular rank in the hierarchy of that profession.

Despite the specificities of those professions which employ civil servants and clerics, it should not be too dificult to establish the existence of relationships of subordination within the hierarchy of both of these professions.

It should also be possible to demonstrate that bishops are remunerated for their services either in cash or in kind or both. I would not be surprised if they also had some form of "employee" or, shall we say, "social" benefits as well as retirement benefits.

If, by his statement, Benedict appears to wish to "disown" the bishops as his subordinates, it is possibly because he is responsible for their acts, unless, of course, he is able to prove that they deliberately disobeyed his precise instructions. That may well be a problem.

.

Banjo,

If priests are collecting monies their diocese and not "The Church", that should be made very clear, given parishioners are making donations. Presumely, parishes give some support the Vatican. Maybe, the vatican-Diocese connection could be established bottom-up, rather than top-down. In theory, a prosecutor could apply for an Examination Summons, which would require the Diocese to furnish all account records to a Court.

I wonder if the seven priests allegedly wanted by US authorities and living in the Vatican ever visit Rome? Surely, the US has extradiction treaties with Italy.

If the Pope, when a cardinal or bishop, did know of a genuine paedophile case and didn't go to the the police, he could still be tried in absentia as was Martin Borman (as mentioned by me, to George). Who knows a Court might find him innocent. That would be good news. However, I don't believe "all" these bishops are innocent any more than I believe than "no" police officer has ever covered-up for a partner. Yet, that is up to a jury not you, me or the Pope to decide.

The Church must put its house in order.