Teresa, according to a comment on the Commonweal blog this story is old news in Germany.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The mentioned memo is old news here in Germany. An article from two weeks ago:
“Möglicherweise sei Ratzinger die Dienstanweisung Grubers an den pädophilen Priester zugestellt worden, wieder in der Gemeinde zu arbeiten. Man könne aber nicht davon ausgehen, dass Ratzinger sie persönlich geprüft habe, sagte der Sprecher.”
www.spiegel.de/panorama/gesellschaft/0,1518,683332,00.html
Claire has translated it...
Erzbistumssprecher Bernhard Kellner sagte, Gruber habe den Beschluss eigenmächtig gefasst. Möglicherweise sei Ratzinger die Dienstanweisung Grubers an den pädophilen Priester zugestellt worden, wieder in der Gemeinde zu arbeiten. Man könne aber nicht davon ausgehen, dass Ratzinger sie persönlich geprüft habe, sagte der Sprecher.
Bernhard Kellner, spokesman for the archdiocese, said that Gruber had made the decision by himself. Ratzinger may possibly have been responsible for reviewing Gruber’s disposition of the pedophile priest in the parish. However, one cannot conclude from this that Ratzinger personally checked it, according to the spokesman.
Thanks, David. But did that make the news anywhere else at the time? If it didn't even make it to Italy's Benedict-baiting La Repubblica and all its hate-mongering cousins in the business, then it was basically ignored.
Some institution like the New York Times can make even old news seem 'news" again just because of their reputation - and in the way they present it, with a seeming 'wealth' of details. That's another reprehensible but facile trick of journalism: The more seemingly minute details you can add to your story, the more plausible it can appear - never mind that you omit substantial relevant facts that do not contribute to the negative image you wish to project of your target... And even the story you cited left open the possibility that the Archbishop could have known about it, "möglicherweise" (possibly!). What a convenient word for journalists who wish to insinuate anything!
TERESA
Maciel's Legionaries finally accept
he was not what they thought he was
BTW, the real big news this morning - which I still don't see in my usual Anglophone resources online - is:
a statement from the Legionaries of Christ and their lay movement Regnum Christi, saying they have now fully accepted the revelations about the misdeeds of their founder, Father Marcial Maciel, and that they will cooperate in any way with the Vatican to renew their movement.
ZENIT, the Legionaries' news organization, has published the full statement only in Italian so far.
Gee, I wonder who it was who has gotten the Church this far in cleaning up after the sad and sordid annals of Fr. Maciel? What was his name now? Oh yes, Cardinal Ratzinger, was it not? Now Pope Benedict XVI?
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 26/03/2010 14:26]