And finally, the bill arrives.

And finally, the bill arrives.

It is difficult to live in Germany without hearing about the pedophilia scandal within the diocese of Munich. And if you live in a place where there is a presence of Lutherans, even more so: everyone talks about it. And they are all talking about it because, quite simply, there is also the evangelical church that gives breath to the trumpets.

But it is not only this, because even in the French scandals it is not that in France they have all these Lutherans to amplify the echo of the scandals. Because the phenomenon of pedophile priests is a phenomenon that is now overflowing everywhere, in every country, at every level.

The first truth that emerged from the details of this investigation is not so much about whether the pope knew or not: the solicitation system was so organized, from what emerges, that in fact it could be considered organic to the church itself.

Being amazed by pedophiles in the church is like walking into a movie theater and marveling at the fact that there are people whose job is to sweep up and remove abandoned popcorn containers. It is physiological.

The truth that emerges is that if you want to find pedophiles in the church, all you have to do is choose a random area and investigate a few days. The pope's defense of "not knowing" is ridiculous, because he readmitted a person who had been sentenced to prison (and had served his sentence) for pedophilia and violence against minors.

The story of the priest in question, who is named Peter H. is crazy. In practice, before he worked in Essen (here near where I write, so there is a lot of talk about this too), and he was tried and convicted of violence against minors. Released from prison, he was transferred to Munich and put back into pastoral service, in charge of children. He raped, it seems, 29. Or rather, there are 29 who have reported.

And finally, the bill arrives.
"His readmission to service was signed in 1980 by the then Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger" (

In particular, Germany is waiting to read the dossier concerning the archdiocese. The first problem is that the pope is accused of misconduct in four cases. There are 42 cases open against people still alive.

What does it mean? It means that Pope Ratzinger could be reached by an arrest warrant. (unless he dies first, that is: personally, I wouldn't be surprised).

But the interesting thing is that this report is NOT that of the police (here the secret of the investigation is a serious matter, if there was an official investigation we would not know so much), but that of a lawyer agency- investigators who have been hired by the church itself, and on whose methodology there are doubts. In short, this already catastrophic vision could be VERY, very sweetened and censored. But if we remove the controversy, the fact remains that this firm of investigative lawyers only investigated by examining… the documentation in the diocese's archives.

How is it possible to think that the diocese did not know anything about things found in its archives?

And finally, the bill arrives.

And it is precisely in the archives of the archdiocese that there is a minute concerning a meeting that Pope Ratzinger had with the aforementioned pedophile, and precisely to talk about his situation with the German criminal justice system.

And finally, the bill arrives.

the systematic nature of the abuses and the existence of a network aimed at covering them is well known.

There was a similar scandal in Cologne a short time ago. Once again, the complainants asked for a thorough investigation, with the only small provision that its publication had to be authorized (not being a police job) even by a victims' association.

The trouble was that the "victims' association" had been created ad hoc, and it was an association of fervent Catholics who, coincidentally , asked Cardinal Rainer Maria Woelki NOT to publish the report.

So if you believe it is "automatic" that this report will be published sooner or later, I fear you will have to change your mind. In practice, the reaction of the church is the following:

  • the church announces a severe investigation, which will result in an in-depth report on abuses and accountability, saying it will be published
  • as soon as the accusations begin, cases of violence emerge. Soon after, other complainants join, who are fake complainants (who are careful not to go to the police).
  • this second wave of fake complainants constitutes a "victims' association", which then legally represents them and speaks to the bishops.
  • in the meantime the report takes shape and there is much talk of the scandal. But the report does not go public.
  • in the end, our "victims' association" does nothing but ask for the investigation report to be filed and kept secret. The relationship disappears.
  • the real victims come out unmotivated, sometimes they commit suicide, and therefore any other victims are discouraged from reporting. ( ).

Obviously this cannot happen in the case of a police investigation, which however receives all the obstructionism possible. In practice, the tactic is to create a rumor-based scandal to avoid an evidence-based scandal.

But this is just news. Because the problem is much more serious, if we stop concentrating on the senior hierarchs and concentrate on the faithful.

When 29 children are raped in a single village, and this continues for months, it's not hard to know. It is difficult to keep the secret. Nobody talks? Anyone behaving strangely at school? Nobody goes to a doctor for injuries.

In all the reported cases, which are now thousands in Munich, Cologne, Aachen and other dioceses involved, only one thing emerges: the few faithful who denounced DID NOT GO TO THE POLICE.

The cases in which it happened (and then the priest was arrested) can be counted on the fingers of one hand.

Now, in a country where the police call you if the trees make too much noise when the wind blows, it is at least suspicious. We are talking about an omerta which by comparison the mafia looks like an amateur club.

Inquiries and "reports" ALWAYS concern hierarchies. But no one NEVER investigates the community that has been silent. The bishop was silent, it is said. The archbishop knew and kept silent, it is said. But you will NEVER hear it said "the faithful of the diocese of San Bartolomeo knew and kept silent". Yet, that's what happens pretty much ALWAYS.

There is a specific reason for this. Here in Germany people don't give eight per thousand to the church, here we are talking about a figure ranging from 8% to 9% of gross income, depending on which community.

If we destroy a community, the church loses a lot of money. If we destroy the bishop, they send him elsewhere, or retire, they change the bishop, and the money keeps flowing.

Therefore, the whole strategy consists in not sticking a stigma on the community where everyone knew but no one called the police, but on the bishop, who is interchangeable and does not produce income.

What they are doing again, that is, is distracting you with this story that perhaps the pope "emeritus" is involved, without ever saying that SURE thousands of families who knew but did not denounce, entire communities, certainly go there. , mountain villages in Bavaria, etc.

Because those pay, and they pay a lot.

But the fact remains that it is better NOT to let your children play with the children of Catholic couples, or attend churches and oratories: even if the faithful knew that something was happening, at most they would write to the bishop, BUT THEY WOULD NOT TELL THE POLICE.

Obviously this works up to a certain point. In the sense that the Lutherans are here, and they are taking advantage of it. And taking advantage means that Catholic churches are emptying out in favor of Lutherans.

The fact of having a "competing" church is certainly a problem, and it is what pushes for this "fake transparency": there are already associations of Catholics who are asking to shed light on these scandals, requests to which the church responds promising investigations and reports, which are punctually published "with conditions", that is, after careful censorship, if ever.

The problem, however, is now clear: we know and understand that the top management may have an interest in concealing, truncating and suppressing it.

But the faithful, they have no justification, no motive, no gain.

The faithful Catholic shows himself, in this story, as an evil being who, being able to choose between calling justice to punish, or advising the bishop to help him cover up, deliberately chooses the second path.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.