Child rape apologia. A brutal accusation to make.

[Major Nikon]

105. Glad you asked

Had Gil bothered to check the source of the article, he might have realized this was coming from a RCC priest that has a vested interest in not holding the RCC responsible for child rape. So right away a red flag should have gone up. Then you realize the argument is that the venerated rituals of the RCC should be able to trump the interests of children in not being raped. In other words, child rape apologia. A bit of further investigation on Gil's source reveals another article he regurgitated where the same priest claims the RCC is really doing a great job in addressing its child rape problem, but their real problem is they just haven't gotten that information to the public. So yeah, as you would expect from seeking the opinion from the RCC about how they are doing with their child molestation problem, the answer is we are doing fine, just leave us alone.

Once Gil was told what the actual apologia was and he was pressed multiple times on whether or not he agreed with an opinion that he obviously felt strongly enough about to regurgitate. His answer is he just doesn't know, which allows him to ride the fence between agreeing with an obvious child rape apologist and agreeing with the Pennsylvania grand jury, child welfare experts, numerous state legislatures, and a pissed off public opinion all of which are convinced that the RCC has utterly failed its responsibility to protect children from being molested and it's well past the time to take action.

So perhaps like pope Frank, Gil is evolving on this issue. Given another decade or so he'll probably be on-board with the idea that the RCC should be legally required to tell someone when they know about a child being raped. I won't hold my breath on that.