RedTracker| Under accusations from the Vatican that it is being unfairly targeted by media, serious journalists have sunk their teeth into the New York Times expose on Pope Benedict’s direct involvement in sex abuse cases in the US.
Sifting through the documents and assertions posted by NYT, The London Times has just published the following statement regarding the German case of Father Hullermann, who continued to work with children, even after the 1986 conviction for sexually abusing boys:
Contrary to statements released by the church in Germany, a memorandum uncovered by the New York Times suggests that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict) was told that a priest had gone back to pastoral duties in Munich a few days after he started psychiatric treatment. The priest went on to commit further offences.
Previously, Monsignor Gerhard Gruber, who was Vicar General of the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising at the time and in effect Cardinal Ratzinger’s deputy, took “full responsibility” for the decision to allow the priest to resume his duties, denying that then Cardinal Ratzinger had any knowledge of the decision.
The latest response from the German archdiocese is that there is no knowledge that then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger ever read the memo informing him that the priest had been returned to working with children, after a few days of therapy.
And now the NYTimes has posted a new story with additional information about the German case: Pope Was Told Pedophile Priest Would Get Transfer.
Just to be clear, no one can remember having an actual conversation with then Cardinal Ratzinger about the transfer. All agree now that he received the memo and the topic was on a meeting schedule that he attended.
In discussing what to do about Father Hullermann’s future, the option of sending his to teach in a girls’s school was mentioned in the meeting notes. That was not the final outcome. Anne