sex crimes and the vatican

The Roman Catholic church never seems to be free of these sex scandals.

Italian TV urged to scrap BBC film accusing Pope of abuse cover-up

John Hooper in Rome
Monday May 21, 2007
The Guardian

Italy's public broadcasting corporation, RAI, was accused yesterday of withholding approval for the screening of a controversial BBC documentary that accuses Pope Benedict of covering up sex crimes by Roman Catholic priests.

In a pre-emptive strike last Saturday, the newspaper of the Italian bishops launched a furious attack on the film, describing it as "fit only for the dustbin". A front page article in the daily Avvenire said the producers "should bow their heads and ask forgiveness".

The head of the parliamentary committee that oversees RAI, Mario Landolfi of the formerly neo-fascist National Alliance, said yesterday that he had written to the director-general urging him not to allow screening of the documentary. To do so would be to turn the public network into an "execution squad ready to open fire on the church and the pope", he said.

The row has blown up at a time when the Catholic church in Italy is bringing its weight to bear in public life more than at any time since the demise of the country's Christian Democrat party. Last weekend, lay groups brought hundreds of thousands of demonstrators on to the streets of Rome to protest at a move by the centre-left government to give legal rights to unmarried couples, including same-sex couples.

Reports in several Italian newspapers said yesterday that the producers of a programme on RAI TV's second channel had agreed a price with the BBC for the purchase of "Sex Crimes and the Vatican", which was screened by Panorama in Britain last October. It caused a storm of controversy and prompted the Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, to complain to the BBC's director-general.

The documentary said that in 2001, Pope Benedict, then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, had issued an updated version of an order that was used to silence the victims of sexual abuse. The film was made by Colm O'Gorman, founder of a charity for abuse victims.

The Roman Catholic church accused Mr O'Gorman of misrepresenting the documentary evidence. It said that the Vatican's directive, first issued in 1962, was intended to avoid the misuse of information gathered in confessional. It imposed an oath of secrecy on the child victim, the priest and any witness.

The BBC documentary said this was meant to protect the priest's reputation during the investigation, but could "offer a blueprint for cover-up".

The document was revised to deal more specifically with sex abuse cases. Both the original and revised versions were kept secret. They came to light in the US in 2003 when their existence was widely reported in the US media.

Panorama's documentary had gone virtually unnoticed in Italy until this month when a subtitled version was put up on a website. It has since found its way to the Italian version of Google video, where it has become far and away the most frequently viewed item.

RAI wanted to give the film a wider audience by screening it on a popular current affairs and discussion programme. The daily La Repubblica said yesterday that the agreed price was within the programme's budget, but "at RAI, no one wants to take the responsibility of signing [the contract]".

Of course, the Church has good reason not to want the screening of that documentary. The ethical question is, should it be screened? It is easy for people to say 'yes' for reasons being that the truth should be unveiled to all. Freedom of speech activists will clamor for the right to view the documentary, and be allowed to decide for themselves if the documentary contains truth. Should the truth be revealed at the cost of the sanctity of a church tradition--the confessional? Showing the documentary would violate the sacredness of the confessional--as the identities of the offending priest, witnesses and victims (possibly) are revealed.

Even if someone were to confess murder, the priest is ethically and spiritually bound not to reveal a single detail of that confession to anyone else. Such a great responsibility is usually only carried by people of great spirituality and integrity. So, if such a person breaks the trust accorded to him by sexually violating a child, should the power of the confessional still be valid for that fallen priest?

I think that it should not. Why should priests hide from legal punishment behind the protective veil of the confessional? Something good should not be used to condone an evil act.