Frightened of the Pope Francis effect the pro-abort UN raises the Media’s favorite issue ‘clergy child abuse’

The pro-abortion U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) has requested that the Holy See provide “detailed information on all cases of child sexual abuse committed by members of the clergy, brothers or nuns”. It is the first time the UN has asked the Holy See for a wide-ranging appraisal. The question has to be asked, why now? Why didn’t the UN make this high-profile request during the pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI at the height of the clergy child abuse crisis? Why has the UN chosen to make this public demand for information during the first months of Pope Francis pontificate?

The report from Reuters suggests the motive behind this grandstanding from the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child :

‘A United Nations human rights panel has posed a list of tough questions to the Vatican about child abuse by Catholic priests, a potential embarrassment for Pope Francis a few months into his papacy.

The U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) asked for “detailed information on all cases of child sexual abuse committed by members of the clergy, brothers or nuns” since the Holy See last reported to it some 15 years ago, and set November 1 as a deadline for a reply.

The request was included in a “list of issues”, posted on the CRC’s website, to be taken up when the Vatican appears before it next January to report on the Church’s performance under the 1990 U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child.

It will be the first time the Holy See has been publicly questioned by an international panel over the child abuse scandal which severely damaged the standing of the Roman Catholic Church in many countries around the world.

The CRC has no enforcement powers, but a negative report after the hearing would be a blow to the Church whose leader, Pope Francis, is striving to put a number of scandals behind him since succeeding Benedict XVI who resigned in February.

By issuing its questions, the Geneva-based CRC brushed aside a Vatican warning that it might pull out of the Convention on the Rights of the Child if pushed too hard on the issue.

In a report of its own in late 2011, posted on the U.N. website last October, the Holy See reminded the CRC of reservations on legal jurisdiction and other issues it made when it signed the global pact.’

Protect the Pope comment: Unsurprisingly, the MSM have seized on the story that regurgitates the false impression that child sex abuse and its cover-up is something unique to the Catholic Church by contacting well-known anti-Catholic bigots for comments.

Mr Porteous Wood, Executive Director of the Natioal Secular Society, said, ”Child abuse is a major issue, along with corruption, that he needs to sort out. His legacy will be judged, I think, on his ability to deal with these immensely difficult problems.”

Geoffrey Robertson QC said, ‘The committee’s enquiries will inevitably lead it to conclude that the Vatican has broken multiple articles of the convention on a huge scale in many countries. The result in human suffering is incalculable. Francis’s papacy could well be defined by the world’s verdict on his response – more handwringing apologies or calls for a line to be drawn under the past will no longer wash. He will fail unless he initiates bold tangible actions, for example lifting the veil of secrecy that has protected so many clerical rapists, engaging secular authorities and offering rather than resisting appropriate compensation.”

What’s frustrating about Robertson is that he goes on as if the local dioceses have not set up robust safe-guarding polices, have not revealed historical cases of abuse, and  have not engaged with secular authorities.  Local dioceses in Ireland, UK, the USA and Europe have done all these things. About compensation, does Robertson believe that the Catholic Church is the only public institution in the world that shouldn’t have the right to legal scrutiny of claims for damages and compensation? Is he saying that the Catholic Church should just pay out to every claim of sexual abuse, without that claim being tested?

The UN has a problem with Pope Francis, in that unlike Pope Benedict, who had the task as Prefect of the CDF of investigating allegations of sexual abuse against children, Pope  Francis has no such history. The Catholic Church has been a leading member of the international pro-life alliance blocking the UN rolling out unrestricted and universal access to the killing of babies through abortion under the mantra that abortion is a human right. The UN must be worried about the popularity and influence of Pope Francis, so they get one of their committees to issue an unprecedented demand on any international body in an attempt to  make mud stick on him. The Holy See should answer the UN’s questions, and at the same time reject its jurisdiction.

13 comments to Frightened of the Pope Francis effect the pro-abort UN raises the Media’s favorite issue ‘clergy child abuse’

  • Michael Petek

    The other thing that’s frustrating about Robertson is that he goes on as though the civil authorities were not in dereliction of their duty of law enforcement against clerics and religious suspected of abuse. Church personnel have no immunity in what concerns offences against the person, and there is no excuse for well-resourced police forces not to proceed on their own terms.

  • peter

    As far as i understand the situation, this is just part of a normal process the signatories of the Convention on the Rights of the Child must undergo. The catholic church in the UK now has excellent safe-guarding policies and procedures. We don’t need to hide anything.

  • Bob Hayes

    I wonder if this UN committee will be demanding that the British government supply an unredacted copy of the Jillings Report into abuse of children in North Wales local authority homes – a report that was suppressed for twenty years.

  • BJC

    I think its pretty obvious. This may be a periodic report but the point is to blacken the name of the Church and undermine the authority of the Vatican. The UN is pro-abort, pro-contracept and pro-LGBT rights/gay marriage and the Vatican is getting in the way. It therefore has to be either destroyed, undermined or brought to heel. Here are three recent news stories on the above topics and the UN’s bid to promote them as ‘human rights’. Like so many political organisations these days its riddled with social liberalism.

  • Rifleman819

    Will the Vatican in return ask/demand from the UN a detailed breakdown of the international aid monies/resources frittered away , misspent/squandered or plain stolen while under UN Control?
    And in the places where the severest allegations of clerical/church abuse made….why can’t the RCC in Europe and N.America begin to put some sanity into the PR war with the secularists?
    Whilst admitting the shameful actions of the some …the RC Church does itself no favours by not actively defending the many-it is not difficult to do…eg do a 50yr longitudinal study in Europe and N America…with agrred common legal data…to record…convictions of RC clergy and religious , against other denominations, civil occupations eg social workers themselves and teachers etcetc and to see if the raw data matches perceptions and allegations.
    eg since 1965 how many RC priests in the UK have been convicted or cautioned for these offences …compared to CoE vicars, Nonconformist ministers or Muslim imams?
    Only then can we separate hysteria from fact.

  • peter

    There is a difference – the then Holy Office issued at least one document to all bishops telling them to keep allegations of abuse secret. I am not aware of other organisations who did the same, I’m interested if anyone knows different.

    Fortunately that was in the 1950/60′s and we have moved well past those dreadful times.

  • Rifleman819


    If what you allege is true……then we don’t know about allegations about allegations-10 involved, 100, 1000, 10,000 , 100,000?

    The point I am making is that if everyone stuck to a common baseline-criminal convictions or cautions where culpability is admitted..then we could actually compare like with like.
    I am not for one moment trying to undue factual cases or whatever but anyone can make allegations about anyone or any institution..but until proved …they remain just that-allegations.

    The classic tactic was the claims made in the recent past in Ireland against the Magdalen laundries or similar-a spate of carefully ghost-written “authentic” accounts appeared in print or via the broadcast media.

    Only a little later did a number of these literary efforts become exposed for what they were-episodes of malevolent fiction foisted on a gullible public to make money.

    A number of slandered priests and religious took RTE and others to Court and won substantial damages or out-of-court settlements.
    The quintessential and very dangerous hoax were the allegations of ill-treatment of “Iraqi” detainees in British Army lorries-this went all over the world and enraged the Middle East until someone spotted that the footage of abuse was taken inside vehicles that had never , ever been deployed to Iraq.The hoax was filmed in a remote corner of a military Bks in Preston-yet such vnal behaviour put Service peoples’lives at greater risk in an already volatile situation.
    All too easy to stage…very difficult to deny.

  • peter

    In the 1940/50′s Gerald Fitzgerald started to write letters to his superiors regarding abuse

    Sadly Fr Fitzgerald was ignored, if the church had followed his advice we could have saved so many young people from abuse. Fr Fitzgerald went on to found the Congregation of the Servants of the Paraclete, a truly wonderful organisation that works with priests and religious.

    I think we have excellent safeguarding policies now.

  • Michael B Rooke

    The UK put its house in order after the report by Lord Carlile of Berriew . .

    It might be noted that the same has happened in Australia.

    The Parliament Victoria Australia has had an enquiry into “ Inquiry into the Handling of Child Abuse by Religious and Other Organisations” This enquiry is currently adjourned until September.

    Cardinal Pell issued a statement on The Victorian Parliamentary Inquiry.

    In that statement ( 5 pages plus bar graph) Cardinal Pell wrote ….”I acknowledge again with shame and great sadness the pain caused by the sexual abuse of children and apologise again to all those who suffered abuse from Catholic priests, religious and lay church workers…”

    “..Information provided to the Inquiry by the church in Victoria shows that the Melbourne Response and Towards Healing in Victoria upheld 224 complaints of sexual abuse arising from the 1970s, 82 complaints arising from the 1980s, 12 complaints arising from the 1990s, and 1 complaint arising in the decade from 2000….” ( Bar graph at the end of the document)

    “…I renew my commitment to eradicating this evil from the church by continuing our work with the police and child protection authorities. I will continue my efforts to offer practical help and support, respectfully and compassionately, to those who are suffering because of these crimes. First and foremost I am on the side of people who have been hurt by sexual abuse. I always have been.”

    The transcript of the questioning of Cardinal Pell at the Parliament of Victoria enquiry may be found on this link.

    This runs to 58 pages.

    Cardinal Pell was asked if he would ensure that all of the files relating to individuals in Victoria that are held in the Vatican would be made available. ( Page 22). He said he had permission to supply that information to a Royal Commission and when asked if he would supply the same to the Victoria enquiry he said he would have to ask the question and he thought that permission would be given.

    Cardinal PELL
    — Absolutely.
    Mrs COOTE
    — Absolutely?

    Cardinal PELL
    Absolutely, because I have been assured by a senior official in the Vatican that they will do that. We have said we will cooperate fully with the royal commission, and we mean to.

    Mrs COOTE
    — I do not mean the royal commission. We are not the royal commission. I am talking about
    this committee, and I am asking if all files — not, ‘Oh, this wasn’t my turn’, or, ‘I wasn’t in power now’, or, ‘This is some other order or somebody else’, or some other excuse, but all files, religious orders, anything to do with any archdiocese, any information at all on child sexual abuse by clergy in Victoria, at any time at all, you will guarantee to give to this committee?

    Cardinal PELL
    I cannot guarantee that. What I can guarantee is if the royal commission asks for that, it will be given. That was the only question I asked of them in Rome.

    Mrs COOTE
    — We are not the royal commission. However, can I then ask you: will you go back to the
    same official — in fact is he the authority who can give you that acknowledgement? Is he the highest authority to ask that question of, or is it going to be knocked back by someone else?

    Cardinal PELL
    No, I do not think we will be knocked back, and I am happy to ask that question.

    Mrs COOTE
    — Thank you very much indeed. I will be very pleased to see that….
    It is also relevant to point out that false accusations have been made against Cardinal Pell by an Australian lawyer. The documents relating to that were allowed to be deposited at the Victoria Parliament enquiry.

    “A letter from the Archdiocese of Sydney outlining significant inconsistencies between a submission by Dr Vivian Waller to the Victorian Parliamentary Inquiry into the Handling of Child Abuse by Religious and other Organisations has been placed on the Inquiry website.

    The letter also refers to subsequent media comments.

    The inconsistencies refer to the rape of a young boy and claims Cardinal George Pell refused to speak with the boy but was present when the boy described what happened to him to another priest at St Alipius, Ballarat. Dr Waller claims in the submission that the unnamed priest made threats against the boy. Dr Waller also stated in the submission that these threats were made when the victim was still in grade 3. This necessarily meant the complaint was made during 1969.

    In an ABC interview Dr Waller also specifically alleged the victim had been to see Cardinal Pell in 1969 and she again alleged Cardinal Pell refused to speak to the victim but that he was present when the allegations against the religious brother were made.

    In fact Cardinal Pell was not in Australia during 1969. He did not return to Australia until 1971 and not to Ballarat until 1973.”

    Embedded links are on the document below.

    The then Fr Pell was at Oxford University in England studying for a PhD.
    “On 16 December 1966, Pell was ordained a priest by Cardinal Grégoire-Pierre Agagianian at St. Peter’s Basilica.[2] He received a Licentiate of Sacred Theology from the Urbaniana University in 1967, and continued his studies at the University of Oxford, where he earned a DPhil in church history in 1971.[3] During his studies at Oxford, he also served as a chaplain to Catholic students at Eton College, where he celebrated the first Roman Catholic Mass since the English Reformation.[4]

    In 1971, he returned to Australia…” Wiki

  • Will the UN ask the same question to Australia, the US, Germany and France about child sex abuse and pedophile networks, following the case of gay couple Peter Truong and Mark Newton who abused their adopted son, born of a Russian surrogate mother, and made him available for sex with other partners, when he was between 2 and 6?

    And even from a legal point of view, how can the Vatican State be answerable for crimes committed in other States?

Leave a Reply




You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>