KING JESUS IS COMING FOR US ANY TIME NOW. THE RAPTURE. BE PREPARED TO GO.
THIS IS ONE TRIP TO ISRAEL.WE SHOULD NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT PAYING.I COULD CARE LESS IF 500 CANADIAN DELEGATION GOES TO ISRAEL.WE SUPPORT ISRAEL AS A COUNTRY.AND GO LEARN FROM THE ISRAELIS HARPER AND DELEGATION. AND WHEN YOU GO TO GAZA AND JORDAN.TELL THEM TO LAYOFF ISRAELIS LAND.AND QUIT TRYING TO STEAL JERUSALEM FROM ISRAEL.BECAUSE IT WILL BE TROUBLE FOR ANY PERSON OR COUNTRY THAT COMES AGAINST ISRAEL AND JERUSALEM.AND IF YOU GOT GOD AGAINST YOU.YOU ARE IN BIG TROUBLE.SO THANK YOU HARPER FOR STICKING UP FOR ISRAEL.PRAISE JESUS OUR JEWISH GOD KING AND MESSIAH.
I HOPE THE CBC AND CTV CARRY THE LIVE PRESS CONFERENCES FROM ISRAEL.
Q. Could you sum up how the meeting went?
A. It was a very interesting dialogue and the Committee had the opportunity to express its concerns and they are concerns that we share. And so I think it has been a very positive dialogue because the Holy See, as sovereign of Vatican City State and as central organ of government of the Catholic Church around the world, shares the high values of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Committee is very anxious to promote these values and we are on the same page. We had the opportunity, which was I think very important, to express our commitment with the teachings and the guidance of the recent Holy Fathers on the question of the sexual abuse of minors by clergy. And we are also very grateful for the input of the Committee; that input will also help the setting up the working of the Commission for the Protection of Minors announced by the Holy Father at the beginning of December.
Q. The Committee raised many tough questions in today’s session. You were asked: given the ‘zero tolerance’ policy why were there efforts to ‘cover up’ and obscure cases of the abuse of minors by clergy?
A. I think that ‘cover-up’, meaning the obstruction of justice, has to be addressed by the domestic laws of the countries where it happens. It is not the policy of the Holy See. And to the extent that it is a crime in the sovereign territories of the different countries it should be prosecuted, irrespective of whoever is guilty of the crime of the obstruction of justice.
Q. Another question is where responsibility lies in the Catholic Church when priests or those working for the Church abuse minors?
A. The principle that we promote, and which is so very clear even in Canon Law, is the principle of personal liability. Canon 128 of the Code of Canon Law expresses in a very clear way the fact that every person who creates damages is liable to compensate that damage. In the section on penal procedures in the Canon Law there is also an allowance for an action which the third party or the victim brings asking for damages. This is also something that is accepted when it comes to the administrative decisions taken by Church personnel if there are damages, they have to be compensated.
Q. According to media reports, you explained to the Committee that the Vatican, the Holy See, is not responsible for what priests actually do, for example, in Ireland, in America or Australia.
A. I think that is also a very important principle of Holy See policy and it corresponds to structure of the Catholic Church and also to the principle of personal responsibility for crime and delict.
Q. As I understand it, the Committee was trying to understand how such abuse of minors by clergy could happen in the Catholic Church worldwide and to such an extent.
A. I think the abuse done by Catholic clergy and religious for so many reasons does get the headlines, and even one case of abuse is one too many. There is, as Benedict XVI said in his interview book - the Light of the World, the mystery of evil and sin. I also think that deficits in human formation have to be addressed and the good news is that they are being addressed. The John Jay Report about the causes (of abuse) indicates also deficits in the human formation, but this is already something that for a number of years now has been addressed in the training of future priests and religious.
Q. Victims’ organizations and the victims themselves were very happy to see the Holy See brought before the Committee, and felt that this is, at least, a step towards recognizing the sufferings they have been through and the failure of the Church to protect or listen to them in so many instances. How do you see it?
A. I think that moving forward should never imply forgetting deficits in the approach that needed to be changed. So we are looking forward but we should never repeat mistakes that have been done in the past. The Holy See has been called to this meeting with the Committee on the Rights of the Child as a routine meeting. In this session of the Committee other countries have also been called to dialogue with the Committee, and these include Russia, Germany and Yemen. So this is a normal routine meeting. It is obviously the international level in which the Holy See operates, and the moral authority which it has, that attracts so much attention. So I don’t think there was as much press attention to the Yemen dialogue yesterday as we have with the Holy See today, and I wonder if there will be such media attention tomorrow when it is the turn of Germany.
Q. The media attention is great because of the international nature of the Holy See, and because none of these other states hold themselves up as a moral authority.
A. That also means that the Holy See has a great responsibility to give clear guidance on this issue of the protection of children from abuse.
Q. What were you able to guarantee the Committee in this regard today, and what does it say you still have not done?
A. I think that this commitment of the Holy See has to seep through to the local Churches and on the local level, because every commitment of the Holy See has to be lived at the local level and by the local Catholic community. So I think it is very important that the Holy See - through the leadership of Pope Francis and the Roman Curia, and also through the Apostolic Nuncios and the departments of the Holy See-, helps the local Churches assimilate the values of the Convention of the Rights of the Child and also the determination shown by the teaching of the recent Pontiffs on the question of child protection.
Q. In other words, so that it is clearly seen that the abuse of minors is not only a sin, it is also a crime that has to be prosecuted.
A. Yes, definitely so, and that is the responsibility of the state where the crime occurs. When it comes to Canon Law, there is also a responsibility when it comes to the community (to ensure) that an offender is not in a leadership role if he constitutes a risk to minors.
Q. What about the accountability of bishops? I mean what happens to bishops who fail to protect children, or cover up? Failure here has been one of the problems highlighted by many victims and their organizations.
A. Bishops are accountable to God and to their local churches, and I think it has to be very clear under this policy of the Holy See that child protection is an integral part of pastoral stewardship.
Q. What has this Committee asked you to do, or where has it said that something is not being done and you need to do more?
A. One of the interesting ideas that has emerged from this meeting is that it would be good to create a data base that would help a unified response when it comes to individuals who are mobile from one diocese to the other and from one country to the other, and I think that this is something that could be considered. I think that there are so many points that came up at this meeting that actually reinforce the Holy See’s commitment and are well taken and serve as an encouragement of the policy of the Holy See as expressed in the circular letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on 23 May 2011.
Q. Some of the critics in Geneva say there isn’t really transparency at the Vatican, at the Holy See yet. What would you say to them?
A. I think transparency and accountability – and I would put them together - are a work in progress.
Q. What stands out from today’s meeting?
A. I think that the input of the Committee is very important because I think we are all in agreement that the Holy See could help the local Churches provide an example of best practice in questions of child protection.
Q. News media report from Geneva that the Holy See was grilled by the Committee, and at one stage you responded that “The Holy See gets it”. Do you think the Committee is satisfied with the Holy See’s response?
A. I am very grateful for very frank way that concerns were expressed by the Committee, because this is also a sign of great trust in the capacity of the Holy See to be a leader.
Q. This was your first experience coming before such a Committee. What is your take on it?
A. I think this was a very important moment where the international community engaged the Catholic Church which is a mammoth on the international level and has such an important contribution to make to so many local communities. It was, I think, a very important meeting because it was dealing with concerns that are enshrined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child and that are also the concerns of the Catholic Church, and there is this meeting of commitment and, I would say, of resolve to protect the integrity of minors on the physical, psychological and spiritual level.
Q. Since some 600 cases of abuse are reported to the Vatican every year, were you able to convince the Committee that the Holy See and the Catholic Church has a foolproof situation?
A. I don’t think it will ever be such because sin will always be with us. But I can give the assurance that we are doing all in our power, as far as is humanly possible, to prevent the abuse of minors by clergy and religious now and in the future.
THIS IS ONE TRIP TO ISRAEL.WE SHOULD NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT PAYING.I COULD CARE LESS IF 500 CANADIAN DELEGATION GOES TO ISRAEL.WE SUPPORT ISRAEL AS A COUNTRY.AND GO LEARN FROM THE ISRAELIS HARPER AND DELEGATION. AND WHEN YOU GO TO GAZA AND JORDAN.TELL THEM TO LAYOFF ISRAELIS LAND.AND QUIT TRYING TO STEAL JERUSALEM FROM ISRAEL.BECAUSE IT WILL BE TROUBLE FOR ANY PERSON OR COUNTRY THAT COMES AGAINST ISRAEL AND JERUSALEM.AND IF YOU GOT GOD AGAINST YOU.YOU ARE IN BIG TROUBLE.SO THANK YOU HARPER FOR STICKING UP FOR ISRAEL.PRAISE JESUS OUR JEWISH GOD KING AND MESSIAH.
I HOPE THE CBC AND CTV CARRY THE LIVE PRESS CONFERENCES FROM ISRAEL.
Stephen Harper heads to Israel with taxpayer-funded delegation
Canadians foot bill for about 30 business, cultural leaders joining Harper in Middle East
The Canadian Press
Posted: Jan 17, 2014 1:27 PM ET
Last Updated: Jan 17, 2014 7:46 PM ET
Taxpayers will pay airefare and some accommodation costs for an
entourage of business people and community leaders to accompany Prime
Minister Stephen Harper, seen here with Israeli President Shimon Peres,
on his Middle East visit starting this weekend, his spokesman says.
(Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)
Taxpayers will pay for an entourage of business people and
community leaders to accompany Prime Minister Stephen Harper on his
Middle East visit starting this weekend, his spokesman says.Air travel and some accommodation costs will be paid out of
government coffers, although full details of the bill are not yet
available, Jason MacDonald told a media briefing Friday.There is also as yet no complete list of all of those who will be accompanying Harper on the trip, MacDonald said."It's still in flux. It is a significant delegation," he said."As far as who pays, typically when people are invited to fly with
the prime minister on a trip like this, as part of the delegation, the
Government of Canada will cover the costs for the travel."The delegation will be somewhere between 150 and 200 people, though
despite the unusually large group going, no opposition MPs have been
invited on the trip, CBC News has learned.About 30 people in the delegation will travel on government aircraft
and have their costs covered. The other delegates are flying
commercially and covering their own costs.The delegation will include business leaders, and leaders from
various communities, including cultural communities, MacDonald said.They were invited because they will be taking part in business meetings and cultural events on the trip, he added.
Jason Kenney, John Baird travelling too
Harper will also bring a sizable entourage of his cabinet for portions of the trip, including Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird, Employment Minister Jason Kenney, Industry Minister James Moore and Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver.Development Minister Christian Paradis and Trade Minister Ed Fast are also part of the delegation, MacDonald said.Other "caucus colleagues" will be on the plane, but MacDonald was unable to name which other Conservative MPs or senators might be making the trip.Harper is to spend a week in Israel, the West Bank and Jordan. He will meet Israeli and Palestinian leaders, as well as the king of Jordan.Harper is also to address the Israeli parliament, known as the Knesset — the first Canadian prime minister to do so. He will also receive an honorary degree from Tel Aviv University.Harper will promote commercial relations, as well as peace and security in the region, said MacDonald.The ongoing Syrian civil war, the Iran nuclear crisis and the Middle East peace process will be on the agenda.With files from CBC News- The Canadian Press, 2014 -United Church ministers unionize under Unifor banner
Clergy now part of Unifor, Canada's largest private-sector union
A group of United Church ministers in Ontario has joined Canada's largest private sector union. (Canadian
A group of United Church ministers in Ontario has joined Canada's largest private-sector union.
Clergy have launched Unifaith, a community chapter of Unifor, which has more than 300,000 members.
The Unifaith movement is a national initiative with members across Canada."To be in solidarity with our clergy brothers and sisters is an opportunity for us to do something that is going to change those realities," Evans said of the problems clergy face in the church.
Clergy have launched Unifaith, a community chapter of Unifor, which has more than 300,000 members.
'The institutional church was not able to do much for us.'- Rev. Jim Evans"A large number of colleagues are aware of issues of workplace bullying, isolation and desolation for those serving in their vocation. This has been an ongoing concern for us for many years now," said Rev. Jim Evans, Unifaith's interim president. "We’ve looked at various ways to address what could happen in terms of advocacy and professional development for those who are indeed in desperate circumstances."According to Evans, he and volunteers from the United Church have spent a decade educating colleagues in self-care and social unionism, communicating with church people across the country, and researching concerns regarding benefits, pensions, church closures and other issues."The institutional church was not able to do much for us," Evans said. "They could pray for us, but in terms of providing effective, approved accountability to uphold the values and policies of safety and job security and protecting [us] … from workplace violence and harassment, it was very limited."Nora Sanders, the general secretary of the United Church of Canada, said church membership has declined by about 20 per cent since 2004 and that between 50 and 60 churches are closing every year. All of that is affecting job security for the clergy."So I suspect the issues this group has raised are part of a bigger picture that's under review in our church right now, of our structures and how we do our work to make sure our resources are focused on the work of faith," she said.
Community chapter, not a local
The new national faith workers association was formed under the Unifor banner but is not a local. Instead, it's a community chapter.On its website, Unifor describes community chapters as "a new form of union membership that aims to reach out to groups of workers that are generally excluded from union membership."Potential groups may include those in workplaces where organizing campaigns have not yet succeeded; workers in precarious jobs; unemployed workers; students and any other group of workers hoping to improve their economic and social conditions.Community chapter members still pay dues: a minimum of $5 a month for "non-waged members" and a $10 minimum for waged members.The Unifaith movement is a national initiative with members across Canada."To be in solidarity with our clergy brothers and sisters is an opportunity for us to do something that is going to change those realities," Evans said of the problems clergy face in the church.
No strikes
Community chapters don't negotiate collective bargaining agreements with any employer. Evans said there is no chance of a strike at any time.Evans said "part of the goal" is to get enough members to sign union cards to be certified under labour legislation to negotiate collective agreements with the United Church."Many would joke about clergy marching around churches. That’s not an approach we would take," Evans said. "We work with our congregation. We serve our congregation. Our employment is with the United Church of Canada."Rev. Janet Walker doesn't think a union is necessary, though."If our focus is only on ourselves, we're missing what our ministry is," she said. "I guess that's why, for me, I haven't had an interest in looking at what this union is about. I'm more focused on what we can do for others."
01/16/2014 VATICAN INSIDER
Vatican tells UN it wants to be "an example of best practice" in the fight against paedophilia
The Vatican's aim to stamp out paedophilia
A Vatican delegation appeared before the Committee on the Rights of the Child in Geneva today after its written response to the Committee’s questions last December. The Vatican was also questioned about the Wesolowski case
Iacopo Scaramuzzi vatican city The Catholic Church wants to “be an example” in the fight against paedophilia and for the defence of childhood. Mgr. Silvano Tomasi stressed this today, during the presentation of the Holy See’s report to the UN Committee which has been investigating the Holy See’s compliance with the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child. The questions UN experts addressed to the Vatican, focused on paedophilia cases and abuse of minors which took place in the Churches of Ireland, Spain and Mexico (particularly the abuse committed by the founder of the Legion of Christ, Marcial Maciel Degollado). The questions had been sent to the Vatican in writing a few months ago and asked again in live streaming from Geneva. The Holy See’s session with the UN Committee will last the whole day.The Vatican signed the Convention in 1990 and in 2001 it signed another two “optional protocols”. In accordance with protocol, the Holy See sent a written response to the UN’s questions last November. But these responses were sent on the premise that bishops and religious superiors were not representatives or delegates of the Pope and therefore the questions relating to specific abuse cases reported in Catholic institutions around the world are not related to the Holy See’s respect for the Convention. In December, this sparked criticisms from some associations that support victims of paedophilia. “It’s easy to criticise though sometimes criticisms are based on reality; all crimes are bad but when children are involved they become all the more serious,” Tomasi told Vatican Radio. “But the accusation made against the Holy See of obstructing justice seems rather groundless to me.”During today’s hearing, Tomasi reminded the Committee of the measures the Vatican has taken both internally and internationally in recent years to combat this “sad phenomenon”. The Vatican diplomat stressed John Paul II and Benedict XVI and Francis’ efforts in dealing with this issue and stressed that there is no justification for any kind violence or exploitation directed at children,” either inside or outside the Church. The Catholic Church wishes to be “an example of best practice” in the prevention of abuse, as required by the UN Convention. The Vatican representative recalled that last December Pope Francis decided to set up an “ad hoc” Commission for the prevention of sex abuse by priests against children. Speaking to Vatican Radio, the Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi recalled the frequent images of Pope Francis with children and asked: “Who among the heads of the 193 States that adhere to the Convention on the Rights of the Child is as efficient [as Francis is] in sending out such a powerful message of love for children, not just to his fellow countrymen but to the whole world?”During this morning’s hearing, Tomasi underlined that as of last December, when the Vatican sent its written response to the Committee, “citizen of the Vatican City State has been under investigation for allegedly sexually abusing children outside the Vatican City State.” This was an implicit reference to the case of the Polish former Apostolic Nuncio to the Dominican Republic, Jozef Wesolowski, who is currently under investigation both in the Dominican Republic and in Poland. He was dismissed as Vatican representative and recalled to Rome on 21 August. When asked about the Vatican’s refusal to extradite Wesolowski, Tomasi told the UN Committee that under the new laws introduced by Pope Francis, given his diplomatic role, Wesolowski will be tried in the Vatican (and therefore not extradited). The former Nuncio will not only be tried under Canon Law by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, but also under criminal law by the Vatican Tribunal. The investigation is underway and will be handled “with the severity it deserves.”The Vatican delegation led by Tomasi, is made up of Auxiliary Bishop Charles Scicluna of Malta ho for many years was the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s Promoter of Justice on paedophilia cases during the pontificate of Benedict XVI, Christophe El-Kassis, a Secretariat of State official, Vincenzo Buonomo, Professor of International Law at the Pontifical Lateran University and Jane Adolphe, who teaches law at the Ave Maria School of Law in the United States.
01/16/2014 VATICAN INSIDER
Scicluna: Holy See had “very positive dialogue” with UN Committee for Rights of the Child
Charles Scicluna
In this interview, Bishop Charles Scicluna, gives a positive reading of the meeting in Geneva between the UN Committee for the Rights of the Child and the Holy See
gerard o'connell rome The Maltese bishop, Charles Scicluna, former prosecutor at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of clergy who sexually abused minors, was part of the Holy See delegation that appeared before the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child in Geneva on January 16. In this interview by telephone from Geneva, he spoke about the day-long session with the UN body that attracted so much interest internationally. He says it gave the Holy See an opportunity to respond to the Committee’s concerns regarding child abuse, to reaffirm its commitment to protect children and minors throughout the Catholic Church and all its institutions, and explain how it is doing so.Q. Could you sum up how the meeting went?
A. It was a very interesting dialogue and the Committee had the opportunity to express its concerns and they are concerns that we share. And so I think it has been a very positive dialogue because the Holy See, as sovereign of Vatican City State and as central organ of government of the Catholic Church around the world, shares the high values of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Committee is very anxious to promote these values and we are on the same page. We had the opportunity, which was I think very important, to express our commitment with the teachings and the guidance of the recent Holy Fathers on the question of the sexual abuse of minors by clergy. And we are also very grateful for the input of the Committee; that input will also help the setting up the working of the Commission for the Protection of Minors announced by the Holy Father at the beginning of December.
Q. The Committee raised many tough questions in today’s session. You were asked: given the ‘zero tolerance’ policy why were there efforts to ‘cover up’ and obscure cases of the abuse of minors by clergy?
A. I think that ‘cover-up’, meaning the obstruction of justice, has to be addressed by the domestic laws of the countries where it happens. It is not the policy of the Holy See. And to the extent that it is a crime in the sovereign territories of the different countries it should be prosecuted, irrespective of whoever is guilty of the crime of the obstruction of justice.
Q. Another question is where responsibility lies in the Catholic Church when priests or those working for the Church abuse minors?
A. The principle that we promote, and which is so very clear even in Canon Law, is the principle of personal liability. Canon 128 of the Code of Canon Law expresses in a very clear way the fact that every person who creates damages is liable to compensate that damage. In the section on penal procedures in the Canon Law there is also an allowance for an action which the third party or the victim brings asking for damages. This is also something that is accepted when it comes to the administrative decisions taken by Church personnel if there are damages, they have to be compensated.
Q. According to media reports, you explained to the Committee that the Vatican, the Holy See, is not responsible for what priests actually do, for example, in Ireland, in America or Australia.
A. I think that is also a very important principle of Holy See policy and it corresponds to structure of the Catholic Church and also to the principle of personal responsibility for crime and delict.
Q. As I understand it, the Committee was trying to understand how such abuse of minors by clergy could happen in the Catholic Church worldwide and to such an extent.
A. I think the abuse done by Catholic clergy and religious for so many reasons does get the headlines, and even one case of abuse is one too many. There is, as Benedict XVI said in his interview book - the Light of the World, the mystery of evil and sin. I also think that deficits in human formation have to be addressed and the good news is that they are being addressed. The John Jay Report about the causes (of abuse) indicates also deficits in the human formation, but this is already something that for a number of years now has been addressed in the training of future priests and religious.
Q. Victims’ organizations and the victims themselves were very happy to see the Holy See brought before the Committee, and felt that this is, at least, a step towards recognizing the sufferings they have been through and the failure of the Church to protect or listen to them in so many instances. How do you see it?
A. I think that moving forward should never imply forgetting deficits in the approach that needed to be changed. So we are looking forward but we should never repeat mistakes that have been done in the past. The Holy See has been called to this meeting with the Committee on the Rights of the Child as a routine meeting. In this session of the Committee other countries have also been called to dialogue with the Committee, and these include Russia, Germany and Yemen. So this is a normal routine meeting. It is obviously the international level in which the Holy See operates, and the moral authority which it has, that attracts so much attention. So I don’t think there was as much press attention to the Yemen dialogue yesterday as we have with the Holy See today, and I wonder if there will be such media attention tomorrow when it is the turn of Germany.
Q. The media attention is great because of the international nature of the Holy See, and because none of these other states hold themselves up as a moral authority.
A. That also means that the Holy See has a great responsibility to give clear guidance on this issue of the protection of children from abuse.
Q. What were you able to guarantee the Committee in this regard today, and what does it say you still have not done?
A. I think that this commitment of the Holy See has to seep through to the local Churches and on the local level, because every commitment of the Holy See has to be lived at the local level and by the local Catholic community. So I think it is very important that the Holy See - through the leadership of Pope Francis and the Roman Curia, and also through the Apostolic Nuncios and the departments of the Holy See-, helps the local Churches assimilate the values of the Convention of the Rights of the Child and also the determination shown by the teaching of the recent Pontiffs on the question of child protection.
Q. In other words, so that it is clearly seen that the abuse of minors is not only a sin, it is also a crime that has to be prosecuted.
A. Yes, definitely so, and that is the responsibility of the state where the crime occurs. When it comes to Canon Law, there is also a responsibility when it comes to the community (to ensure) that an offender is not in a leadership role if he constitutes a risk to minors.
Q. What about the accountability of bishops? I mean what happens to bishops who fail to protect children, or cover up? Failure here has been one of the problems highlighted by many victims and their organizations.
A. Bishops are accountable to God and to their local churches, and I think it has to be very clear under this policy of the Holy See that child protection is an integral part of pastoral stewardship.
Q. What has this Committee asked you to do, or where has it said that something is not being done and you need to do more?
A. One of the interesting ideas that has emerged from this meeting is that it would be good to create a data base that would help a unified response when it comes to individuals who are mobile from one diocese to the other and from one country to the other, and I think that this is something that could be considered. I think that there are so many points that came up at this meeting that actually reinforce the Holy See’s commitment and are well taken and serve as an encouragement of the policy of the Holy See as expressed in the circular letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on 23 May 2011.
Q. Some of the critics in Geneva say there isn’t really transparency at the Vatican, at the Holy See yet. What would you say to them?
A. I think transparency and accountability – and I would put them together - are a work in progress.
Q. What stands out from today’s meeting?
A. I think that the input of the Committee is very important because I think we are all in agreement that the Holy See could help the local Churches provide an example of best practice in questions of child protection.
Q. News media report from Geneva that the Holy See was grilled by the Committee, and at one stage you responded that “The Holy See gets it”. Do you think the Committee is satisfied with the Holy See’s response?
A. I am very grateful for very frank way that concerns were expressed by the Committee, because this is also a sign of great trust in the capacity of the Holy See to be a leader.
Q. This was your first experience coming before such a Committee. What is your take on it?
A. I think this was a very important moment where the international community engaged the Catholic Church which is a mammoth on the international level and has such an important contribution to make to so many local communities. It was, I think, a very important meeting because it was dealing with concerns that are enshrined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child and that are also the concerns of the Catholic Church, and there is this meeting of commitment and, I would say, of resolve to protect the integrity of minors on the physical, psychological and spiritual level.
Q. Since some 600 cases of abuse are reported to the Vatican every year, were you able to convince the Committee that the Holy See and the Catholic Church has a foolproof situation?
A. I don’t think it will ever be such because sin will always be with us. But I can give the assurance that we are doing all in our power, as far as is humanly possible, to prevent the abuse of minors by clergy and religious now and in the future.
