Skip to main content

In a ruling cheered by pedophiles every where, the Vatican today offered its approval of adult-child sex as long as it's not against civil laws.

Snark or not?  You be the judge.  The Chicago Tribune published an article this morning that near as I can understand, says pretty much this same thing.

To summarize:  a priest in the Joliet Diocese was accused of'dating' a 14 year old in the swinging 70s.  Note to self: this seems to be euphemism for S-E-X.  A local review board found it credible enough to forward to the Vatican. So to recap, an adult male was having sex with a 14 year old boy.  Years go by and said 14 year old grows up, lodges a complaint with the Diocese and whoa...the Vatican steps in and says this isn't technically a crime.

This is about as far from "Mea Culpa" as the Vatican can go, said Church observers, characterizing it as a "Mea F*cka You."  (OK, this part is snark.)

Follow me below the orange squiggly of unbridled lust for more.

So I'm a mom and I have a 17 year old son who used to be an altar boy.  Just want to lay that out there since we had to have the talk about er...'dating' a priest when he was about 10.  Lucky for us, there was no 'dating' and the Vatican didn't have to step in and let me know it was OK.  Huge sigh of relief.

I feel much better, as a mom, knowing the Vatican has my back on this.  So I just wanted to share my 'relief' knowing that the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which until the 1950s was called the Office of the Inquisition, has spoken (apparently bad press from the Middle Ages forced the name change).

So again, to break it down in small words and short sentences so a Fallen Away Roman Catholic (FARC) like me can understand:  A priest had sex with a boy and the Office of the Inquisition stepped in to OK it.  

Yes, there are some caveats.  The Vatican cited a little known Canon law from 1917 (again, let me just shiver with happiness that the Vatican is quoting laws from nearly 100 years ago in an attempt to maintain law and order...kudos for the cutting edge thinking!) that said the priest wasn't found guilty of sex since the person was under 16 and that wasn't a crime in Illinois in 1970...maybe.  

Clearly, I'm no canon lawyer and as a FARC, my brain locked up while reading the article.  I think there is a secret Vatican handshake/wink/nod that I missed in the subtext. I guess that returning the accused priest to 'limited ministry' means hands off the boys or else the Vatican will have to say it's OK again.  

This ruling by the smart guys who brought you no birth control and predatory sex with children does raise some interesting questions.  Is it a crime at all, in some minds, to lay hands on 14 year old boys?  What happens to the lucky parish that gets the reinstated priest?  Apparently the Joliet Diocese has a 'Safe Environment' Coordinator who makes sure everyone feels great about this decision.

I think the Vatican just got real tired of American Catholics what with all their suggestions to join the 21st century and decided they needed to take a stand, like a firm parent does.

Since the Bishop in Joliet is the head of the U.S. Bishops Committee for the Protection of Children and Young People, I am convinced they are signaling the laity (or former laity like me) that they are so done with the whole pedophilia thing and hey, even find it OK on a technicality from 1917.  

So, get over it, anti-pedophile whiners.  The Vatican has spoken.

Originally posted to JAM11 on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:54 AM PDT.

Also republished by House of LIGHTS.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site