Green Room

Vatican to UN: Did you have this report written years ago, or what?

posted at 9:39 am on February 6, 2014 by

The Vatican issued a statement today in response to the report from the UN Committee for the Rights of the Child on the child-abuse scandal that plagued the Catholic Church for decades, a report which I covered in this post. The Vatican’s response is worth noting, because its envoy to the committee, Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, attacks the integrity of the entire process while still pledging to remain committed to working with the panel:

“My first impression: we need to wait, read attentively and analyse in detail what the members of this Commission have written”, commented the nuncio. “But my first reaction is of surprise, because of the negative aspects of the document they have produced and that it looks almost as if it were already prepared before the meeting of the Committee with the delegation of the Holy See, which had given in detail precise responses on various points, which have not been reported in this conclusive document or at least have not seemed to be taken into serious consideration. In fact, the document does not seem to be updated, taking into account what, over the last few years, has been done by the Holy See, with the measures taken directly from the authority of Vatican City State and then in various countries by the individual Episcopal Conferences. It therefore lacks a correct and updated perspective, which in reality has seen a series of changes for the protection of children that, it seems to me, are difficult to find, at the same level of commitment, in other institutions or even in other States. This is simply a question of facts, of evidence, which cannot be distorted!”.

Tomasi also noted the hypocrisy of attacking the Church’s position on abortion, given the panel’s mandate, and accuses the panel of advancing its own political agenda rather than its mandate:

With regard to the Holy See’s reaction to the document, the archbishop affirmed that “the Holy See will respond, because it is a member, a State that is part of the Convention: it has ratified it and intends to observe it in the spirit and letter of this Convention, without added ideologies or impositions that lie outside of the Convention itself. For instance: in its Preamble, the Convention on the Protection of Children talks about the defence of life and the protection of children before and after birth; whereas the recommendation made to the Holy See is that of changing its position on the question of abortion! Of course, when a child is killed it no longer has rights! Hence this seems to me to be a real contradiction of the fundamental objective of the Convention, which is the protection of children. This Committee has not done a good service to the United Nations, seeking to introduce and request the Holy See to change its non-negotiable teaching! So, it is somewhat sad to see that the Committee has not grasped in depth the nature and functions of the Holy See that, however, has expressed clearly to the Committee its decision to carry forward the Convention’s requests on the rights of the child, but defining precisely and protecting first of all those fundamental values that give real and effective protection to the child”.

Tomasi pledges that the Vatican will continue “constructive dialogue” with the panel, but suggests that in the future that becomes a dialogue.

Recently in the Green Room:



Trackback URL


How soon before the UN sends “Peacekeepers” into the Vatican to monitor the election of the Pope?

Nethicus on February 6, 2014 at 10:22 AM

The Convention to Protect Children from Being Conceived and/or Born.

bmmg39 on February 6, 2014 at 10:34 AM

Pace Abp. Tomasi, but his pursuit of “constructive dialogue” evinces belief that there is logos, which is to say reason, operating in both parties. The inconsistencies which Tomasi himself points out with regard to the committee’s stance on the defense of life indicate precisely the lack of reason which will prevent dialogue. What is to be expected going forward is exactly what has been the case to present: a reasoned monologue from the Holy See–indeed the patience of the Vatican in explaining all of this again and again is to be admired–being drowned out by fevered irrational shouting about how oppressive and backward the Church is. Sorry my first comment is so pessimistic.

filiusdonaldi on February 6, 2014 at 11:57 AM

The Catholic Church loves to ‘work’ with secular governments, and then is shocked to discover that they’re secular. When will they learn?

Fenris on February 6, 2014 at 1:03 PM

The Catholic Church loves to ‘work’ with secular governments, and then is shocked to discover that they’re secular. When will they learn?

Fenris on February 6, 2014 at 1:03 PM

Almost as bad as the US Catholic Bishops marching in lockstep with the Democrats for years and years, and helping them push through Obamacare, only to be shocked — shocked! I say — that Obama would do something Catholics don’t like.

Shump on February 6, 2014 at 3:05 PM

They were foolish to think they could be friends with this monster. It only wants to eat them.

Karmashock on February 6, 2014 at 3:17 PM

Did the UN ever admonish the US Dept of Education or NEA or any similar institution for the far greater attack on children by number AND percentage within US public schools? This is the greatest unreported travesty of our time. I do not justify the Catholic Church in this regard, but where is the equivalent fervor to address a far greater incidence of the same crime?

kpguru on February 6, 2014 at 6:15 PM

HotAir — Politics, Culture, Media, 2017, Breaking News from a conservative viewpoint

Trump signs VA reform bill into law

John Sexton Jun 23, 2017 2:41 PM
Top Pick

“What happened was a national disgrace, and yet some of the employees involved in these scandals remained on the payrolls.”

Top Pick

A new era of something.

“…died suddenly in less than a week just after his return to the U.S.”

The shortsightedness of “Denounce and Preserve”

Taylor Millard Jun 23, 2017 12:11 PM

Pragmatism for the sake of pragmatism doesn’t always work.

Perhaps if you threw in a new car?

Gay marriages still growing, but not as fast

Andrew Malcolm Jun 23, 2017 10:31 AM

More, but not as quickly.

Should’ve stuck with the pirate gig. It was working for him

The battle for the rubble of Raqqa is underway

Andrew Malcolm Jun 23, 2017 8:51 AM

Won’t be much left.

Your list of demands is a publicity stunt

“what happened that day was emblematic of a deeply troubling trend among progressives…”

“The jobs are still leaving. Nothing has stopped.”

Bad vendor. Bad! No cookie!

“The Corps is just starting to grapple with the issues the court has identified.”

“So you want me to sing my praises, is that what you’re saying?”

Why would we possibly want that?

“I mean he sold our country to The Russians.”

I could think of someone else you might want to ask about…

“You can ask a hundred people what hate speech is and you get a thousand different answers”

Trump: I never made any recordings of Comey

Allahpundit Jun 22, 2017 2:01 PM


Hackers stole private data from election databases

John Sexton Jun 22, 2017 1:21 PM

“90,000 records stolen by Russian state actors contained drivers license numbers”

Failure to protect the city

Big man on the Middle Eastern campus

Biased Americans see media as biased.

Tough times down on the liberal ranch

Will Nancy Pelosi survive this latest Dem disaster?

Andrew Malcolm Jun 22, 2017 8:41 AM

Eat quick, before it’s gone.

Slow your roll, boss

“I’m bothered by the lack of emerging evidence…”

FIrst look at the Senate health bill

John Sexton Jun 21, 2017 9:21 PM

“the Senate bill would go farther than the House version in its approach to cutting Medicaid spending.”

Divide and conquer?

“If we do nothing, more companies will back out and more people will lose coverage.”

You know, I may have cracked the case for you, guys

“They’re still running against her and still winning races.”