The self-proclaimed world leader of morality resigns in disgrace and reportedly seeks a quiet retirement, with immunity from prosecution for his crimes.
How moral is that?
When I learned on Facebook late on 11th February that Mr. Ratzinger had announced he will retire at the end of this month, my first kneejerk response was to comment:
"He's about to be arrested for the cover up....."
I was suspicious that something had prompted his unprecedented resignation. Popes do not normally retire and Mr. Ratzinger has been involved with protecting the Catholic Church's involvement in the cover up since long before he became Pope.
Since then it has been reported that Mr. Ratzinger sought immunity from prosecution for his leading role in the child sex offences cover up and that he will reside permanently in the Vatican to avoid arrest. A Vatican official reportedly said:
“His continued presence in the Vatican is necessary; otherwise, he might be defenseless. He wouldn’t have his immunity, his prerogatives, his security, if he is anywhere else.”
The obstruction of justice by the Catholic Church continues unabated.
It has also been announced by the Vatican that:
"On Saturday the 16th at 6:00pm, the Pope will meet with the Italian Prime Minister, Mario Monti, and the following Saturday, the 23rd in the late morning, with the Italian President, Giorgio Napolitano."
It is strongly speculated that these meetings are being held to consider a disgusting plea for Mr. Ratzinger's immunity from prosecution in Italy, the country within which the Vatican is embedded.
There has been further speculation that the Vatican received a diplomatic note on 4th February, from a European nation, according to the International Tribunal Into Crimes of Church and State, giving them ten days notice that a warrant for Ratzinger's arrest would be sent to the Vatican, by this unnamed European nation, on 15th February. A week after the letter was received and four days before the alleged warrant was to be delivered, Mr. Ratzinger resigned. Coincidence?
Whether these reports are true or not, Mr. Ratzinger was a power-broker in the Vatican for a quarter of a century and not only did he fail to authorise all sex offenders within the organisation be reported to the police; but he did the opposite by protecting and harbouring them.
Now he is expecting to call in a few favours and be granted protection himself after he retires in disgrace. How moral is that?
The heart of the matter is that this man (and this church) preach constantly that only they have high moral values. He is a grubby man living in a mega-rich authoritarian church, in a phony nation with ruthless cardinals and operating with the lowest moral standards.
If the Italian Government grant his demand for immunity from prosecution, then they too will become part of the scandal.