Talk:Crimen sollicitationis

message: Can anyone clarify this paragraph?
:The document calls for such cases to be handled in secret, and extends that secrecy to the document itself. The document imposes secrecy even upon victims of sexual abuse. Extreme penalties for violations of secrecy, including excommunication that can only be dismissed by the Pope himself, are imposed.
It seems to suggest that victims may be excommunicated (which can only be dismissed by the pope) if they don't keep what has happened to them and/or the actions that have been taken against the perpetrators secret. I assume this is not the case but who knows given the way the Catholic church handled things. Nil Einne 16:29, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Secrecy 

message: Art.11 deals with secrecy of judges and has nothing to do with victims. See the new "Scope" paragraph for the real document content. Pinea 23:14, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  secrecy 

message: Most of the above discussions are because the English translation posted by cbsnews is full of errors. Does anyone have a valid translation to be appended? Pinea 23:20, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation errors 

message: Given that Crimen sollicitations is an 'updated' version of an even older Vatican document 'Sacramentum Poenitentiae', perhaps this article should have a link to the Roman Catholic Church page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.27.54.3 (talk) 03:41, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to Roman Catholic Church / Churches 

message: It says:
"The document thus imposed absolute secrecy on the subject matter of the trial, even after the trial had ended and its verdict, favourable or unfavourable, had been put into effect. An oath of secrecy was to be taken not only by the members of the tribunal but also by the person or persons denouncing the priest, by the witnesses, and by the accused priest himself, who was free to discuss the matter only with his defence counsel (13)."
But where is the reference (#13)?  I can't find it anywhere on the page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.160.104.89 (talk) 18:54, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: =Where are the links/references?

message: Can a translation be called reliable when, in the very first paragraph, it gives "by writing whether then or after [the note has been read]" as the equivalent of "per scripturam aut tunc aut post legendam", which means simply "by a note to be read either then or later"?  In fact, the translation is somewhat lacking in both accuracy and clarity.  Lima (talk) 18:27, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Reliable" 

message: Is there any merit in including a section on how the provisions of canon law interfaced with civil law? I believe that in Ireland at least the confidentiality of these proceedings were respected by the secular courts (under the influence of Mr Justice Gavan Duffy). -- Shoneen (talk) 19:56, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interaction with secular law? 

message: Under section: Purpose of the secrecy, the PDF study seems to be missing. It links to:
http://www.richardsipe.com/Doyle/Commentary_on_Crimen_Sollicitationis_11-1-06.pdf
Perhaps it is my internet provide. Please check it out.
Thanks!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anna Frodesiak (talk • contribs) 15:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I independently already repaired this link, thanks Hansmuller (talk) 18:55, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing PDF 

message: In the last paragraph of the general part of the main article, we read:The 24 January 2001 document De delictis gravioribus updated Crimen sollicitationis in line with the 1983 Code of Canon Law, which had replaced the 1917 Code that was in force in 1962.But, in the main article, De delictis gravioribus, as well as in the original  (Latin text) of De delictis gravioribus (@ vatican.va) the date is 18 May 2001.
All this being premised, before I correct the date in this article, I would like to know if the date that appears at present, 24 January 2001, has any relevance at all. For instance, is it perhaps the date of a preliminary draft?Miguel de Servet (talk) 15:23, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right. Well noticed.  The given date is clearly mistaken.  Esoglou (talk) 19:34, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong date of  ''De delictis gravioribus'' 

message: I have corrected the glaring error that the document was issued in 1962. it in fact dates from 1922, and was only re-issued to bishops in 1962, as referenced from the Murphy Report.  Xandar  22:54, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The document normally meant when Crimen sollicitationis is spoken of is the 1962 document approved by John XXIII and signed by Ottaviani, not the almost identical 1922 document approved by Pius XI and signed by Merry del Val. The Doyle study, which mentions both, begins: "The document known as Crimen sollicitationis was issued by the Congregation of the Holy Office on March 16, 1962". The document De delictis gravioribus specifies the 1962 document as what was in force until 2001.  Esoglou (talk) 09:32, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong date of document

message: Here is some content which ended up in the wrong place. There could be a section or link describing the situation after 2001 though?
:"These matters are confidential only to the procedures within the Church, but do not preclude in any way for these matters to be brought to civil authorities for proper legal adjudication. The Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People, revised June 2005, approved by the Vatican, requires that credible allegations of sexual abuse of children be reported to legal authorities."April 2005 statement by Joseph Fiorenza, then Archbishop of Galveston-Houston (apparently a dead link)Article 4 of the charter states: "Dioceses/eparchies are to report allegation of sexual abuse of a person who is a minor to the public authorities. ... In every instance, dioceses/eparchies are to advise victims of their right to make a report to public authorities and to support this right." See text of the charter
Richiez (talk) 21:32, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It is difficult to see the relevance to Crimen sollicitationis of information about the canonical situation after 2001, when Crimen sollicitationis was no longer in force.  And the post-2001 situation is perhaps too vast for an appendix.  Certainly the post-2001 rules that are in force only in a single country are not suitable for insertion here.  Esoglou (talk) 22:08, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post 2001 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Crimen sollicitationis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/624dQBKwd?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vatican.va%2Fresources%2Fresources_guide-CDF-procedures_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/resources/resources_guide-CDF-procedures_en.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100813085221/http://www.vatican.va:80/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_20020110_sacramentorum-sanctitatis-tutela_lt.html to http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_20020110_sacramentorum-sanctitatis-tutela_lt.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:50, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Crimen sollicitationis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101010195518/http://www.sarabite.info/crimen.pdf to http://www.sarabite.info/crimen.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:58, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified