Ottaviani Intervention: excommunicate victims of sexual abuse if

  • Thread starter Thread starter nordskoven
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

nordskoven

Guest
Here’s the “Ottaviani Intervention,” a 1962 Vatican document that is the blueprint for covering up clerical sexual abuse, including the directive to excommunicate victims who insist on going to legal authorities.

bishop-accountability.org/downloads/CrimenSollicitationes-Unprotected.pdf

Has this topic been covered on Catholic Answers Forums? I wish there was a search function to find out. So what is the status of the Portland diocese declaring bankruptcy to be able to meet the demands of hundreds of abuse victims? If the Vatican advised this course of action, shouldn’t they be liable for the millions owed to victims in legal judgments?
 
There is a search function ^^^^ right up there ^^^^

The Vatican web site also has a search function, bet you won’t find this document there - I seriously doubt it is authentic.
 
nordskoven said:
Here’s the “Ottaviani Intervention,” a 1962 Vatican document that is the blueprint for covering up clerical sexual abuse, including the directive to excommunicate victims who insist on going to legal authorities.
Click to expand...
The 1962 Vatican document you are referring to has nothing to do with what you suggest. It is a document dealing with solicitation in the confessional. Which is something entirely different. Nor is it an attempt to “cover up” anything. And, furthermore, vicitms who report abuse are not excommunicated.

So, basically, you are entirely wrong about everything you have posted here.
nordskoven said:
Has this topic been covered on Catholic Answers Forums?
Click to expand...
Yes. Ad nauseum.
nordskoven said:
I wish there was a search function to find out.
Click to expand...
I am not sure why you are unable to find what you want with the search function. CAF’s search feature is quite extensive.
nordskoven said:
So what is the status of the Portland diocese declaring bankruptcy to be able to meet the demands of hundreds of abuse victims?
Click to expand...
I believe you should ask this questions of the Portland diocese.
nordskoven said:
If the Vatican advised this course of action, shouldn’t they be liable for the millions owed to victims in legal judgments?
Click to expand...
Advised what course of action?
 
that_name said:
bet you won’t find this document there - I seriously doubt it is authentic.
Click to expand...
The OP is not mistaken as to the existence of a document on the topic of the crime of solicitation in the confessional. He is definitely mistaken about everything else.
 
1ke said:
The OP is not mistaken as to the existence of a document on the topic of the crime of solicitation in the confessional. He is definitely mistaken about everything else.
Click to expand...
Thank you.
 
nordskoven said:
If the Vatican advised this course of action, shouldn’t they be liable for the millions owed to victims in legal judgments?
Click to expand...
No, as the right to the seal of silence in the confessional is a old as the Church. Holding the Church accountable for upholding a centuries-long held religious belief is not moral. Furthermore, if some activists thought the Vatican should be held liable in this matter, they simply would not have to pay. It would be as if Iran sued the U.S. in their courts for damages due to an embargo. The U.S. would not have to recognize the validity of the Irani decision.
 
The problem I have with the huge settlements is that the punishment is not falling on the perpetrators, but on all of us who put our money in the basket.

I’m not saying that the victims do not deserve some kind of compensation. I just do not know how to make the whole situation just. It is not just to “write off” the victims and just tell them to deal with it.

Neither is it just for my money, intended for the Church and her ministries, to go to the victims and their lawyers, when I hate sexual abuse and have not been involved in any abuse or coverups (and would never be).

Out of charity, I’d be happy for my money to go to therapy and healing for the victims. They have experienced a betrayal that can hardly be described, it is so terrible. But I see no reason for my Church to make them (or the lawyers) rich, when it means parishes forced to consolidate so that a church building may be sold to pay the judgments.

There, I’m sure I made myself perfectly clear…:confused:

Ruthie, sleepy
 
Ruthie_again said:
The problem I have with the huge settlements is that the punishment is not falling on the perpetrators, but on all of us who put our money in the basket.

I’m not saying that the victims do not deserve some kind of compensation. I just do not know how to make the whole situation just. It is not just to “write off” the victims and just tell them to deal with it.

Neither is it just for my money, intended for the Church and her ministries, to go to the victims and their lawyers, when I hate sexual abuse and have not been involved in any abuse or coverups (and would never be).
Click to expand...
I guess the issue, though, is that once the money is in the collection basket, it is no longer your money, but the Church’s money, and it is the Church’s responsibility to use her assets to pay for these lawsuits. Once it goes in, you don’t have control over it anymore; the Church does. The earmarked donations for things like missions or maintainence of the building are supposed to go for that purpose, but they are also an asset of the Church that has to be used to pay the damages in a lawsuit.

There really isn’t any way to get around it, unfortunately.
 
1ke said:
The OP is not mistaken as to the existence of a document on the topic of the crime of solicitation in the confessional.
Click to expand...
Is Ottaviani Intervention the name of this document?
 
nordskoven said:
the directive to excommunicate victims who insist on going to legal authorities.
Click to expand...
Which paragraph states this? Paragraph 18 says to me that a penitent who DOESN’T report a solicitation is excommunicated.
 
Perhaps the OP is just hoping this thread will die out. S/he has posted on other threads since this one and has been ‘on’ the forums even very early this morning, without responding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top