Abuse victim from Bavaria sues Pope Emeritus Benedict

Article from June, now updated with Cathcon comment below.

Cathcon: Pope Benedict admitted to knowing about this case in January of this year.   Following Father Gruber's super-rapid resignation in 2010, I researched the statutes of the Archdiocese of Munich which I fortuitously found in the library of the University of Louvain.  It was clearly stated there that the Archbishop was solely responsible for decisions relating to personnel.  If one is looking for a reason for Pope Benedict's abdication, this is clearly the chief candidate, whether it was a pang of conscience or the progressives forcing the issue knowing that such a revelation while he was Pope would have forced him out of office or maybe even both in equal measure.

This is Father Hullermann in his parish  in an article I published at the time of Father Gruber's resignation 

Abuse victim from Bavaria sues Pope Emeritus Benedict

It is a novelty from a legal point of view: for the first time, a court could rule on the guilt of church officials such as the former Archbishop and Pope Benedict XVI in an already statute-barred church abuse case.

A 38-year-old man from Bavaria, who was abused as a child by the Catholic priest, Peter H., now will file a lawsuit in the District Court in Traunstein.  The complaint, which has been made available to Bavarian Radio, the Correctiv Research Centre and the weekly newspaper, DIE ZEIT, is not only directed against the perpetrator but also against the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising and two former archbishops, the retired Pope Benedict XVI and his successor, Cardinal Friedrich Wetter.

Abused by Peter H. at the age of twelve

Julian Schwarz wants justice - for himself and other victims of abuse.  There should be no statute of limitations for such acts, he says.  "That's psychological murder," says Julian Schwarz.  "Children carry that with them all their lives." That is why he has now filed a lawsuit with the district court in Traunstein against the perpetrator, the Archdiocese of Munich and also the former Pope.

Julian Schwarz was between eleven and twelve years old when the priest showed him porn and sexually abused him.  Julian Schwarz is not the real name of the 38-year-old today.  He wants to remain anonymous.  After the abuse, much went wrong in his life.  At the time, Julian did exactly the right thing and confided in his mother after the abuse: But she didn't believe what her son said about the priest.  "The pries pretty much lulled the whole community to sleep and presented himself very well," says Julian.  And after all, a priest works for the church, so he wouldn't do "something like that".  That was the unanimous opinion at the time.

"These are cases that actually could have been prevented."

After the abuse, Julian slips down and gets worse at school and runs away from home.  He uses hard drugs.  In 2010, it became public for the first time that the parish priest of Garching an der Alz and Engelsberg, Peter H. already had a record for paedophile attacks in the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising and was nevertheless repeatedly employed in the pastoral care of children and young people.  Julian Schwarz also hears about it: "There are several cases, not just me, but numerous cases that could actually have been prevented," he is convinced.

He reported to the public prosecutor's office in 2010 and filed a criminal complaint.  But the investigations were stopped - the crimes are covered by the statute of limitations.  But now Julian Schwarz' lawyer, the Berlin criminal lawyer, Andreas Schulz, believes he has found a way through civil law to bring his client's case before a secular court after all.  Specifically, he has filed a so-called declaratory action with the District Court of Traunstein.

The court could retrospectively determine wrongdoing

The court could retrospectively examine whether the perpetrator and those responsible for his work in the Archdiocese are obliged to compensate his client for the damage he suffered as a result of the sexual abuse.  "The plaintiff is not primarily concerned with money, but rather with establishing that what happened was wrong," says Andreas Schulz.  How and to what extent compensation is then paid in the end is a completely different question.

Previously, victims whose cases of abuse were subject to the statute of limitations had to turn to the institution of the perpetrators, the Church, for recognition of their suffering.  In the lawsuit that has been submitted to BR, ZEIT and Correctiv, it is now in the dock.  Victim lawyer, Schulz sees an institutional responsibility for sexual abuse in the Catholic Church: "This is joint and several liability for all those involved in the process."

Abuse report envisages ex-Pope as responsible

In this line of argument, the lawsuit refers to the most recent abuse report by the Munich law firm WSW and also to an ecclesiastical court judgment in the Peter H case.  This decree from 2016 states that the former Archbishops Friedrich Wetter and before that Joseph Ratzinger, who later became Pope Benedict, were informed about the paedophilia of the priest, Peter H.. Benedict XVI denies that to this day.  If the Traunstein District Court accepts the lawsuit, the consideration of the facts could be reopened.

Munich legal scholar, Andreas Spickhoff sees the lawsuit as a legally delicate construct that initially appears to have little prospect of success.  He is a professor of civil law at the LMU Munich.  Nevertheless, he sees an opportunity: "The only possibility that exists would be for the church, as the person responsible, as the person responsible for the organization, to respond by waiving the statute of limitations.  Then it would be possible that the claims for damages of those affected could be fully examined again even in a proper court process," says Andreas Spickhoff.

So far no claim for a ruling on damages

That means: Victims of abuse like Julian Schwarz have a right to have their damages assessed, but only as long as the accused church representatives do not say: The case is statute-barred.  "You can do that, but you don't have to do that.  I know from other contexts that occasionally, for political, ethical, moral reasons, the defence using the statute of limitations is not used so that the victim can then have their claim for damages assessed," according to the law professor.

And that is exactly the possibility that the victim’s lawyer, Andreas Schulz relies on, especially since Canon Law even allows the statute of limitations for cases of abuse to be lifted.  "This lawsuit has a strategic goal: the Church must position itself, whether it is defending itself formally, in a civil process, for example by raising the plea of ​​the statute of limitations, or whether it is facing up to its historical and moral responsibility and guilt."

At least the former Archbishop of Munich and Freising, Cardinal Friedrich Wetter seem willing to do so.  In a first reaction to the lawsuit, he announced to Correctiv, ZEIT and BR that he did not want to apply for a statute of limitations.  A spokesman for the Archbishop's office in Munich asked for understanding "that the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising is not commenting on ongoing legal proceedings".  The Pope Emeritus left an inquiry unanswered by the time of going to press, as did former priest, Peter H.

Source