What causes the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) to hide the problem of pedophile priests?

[guillaumeb]

123. This might help you understand this post:

Whataboutism gives a clue to its meaning in its name. It is not merely the changing of a subject ("What about the economy?" to deflect away from an earlier subject as a political strategy; it’s essentially a reversal of accusation, arguing that an opponent is guilty of an offense just as egregious or worse than what the original party was accused of doing, however unconnected the offenses may be.
The tactic behind whataboutism has been around for a long time.
Rhetoricians generally consider it to be a form of tu quoque, which means "you too" in Latin and involves charging your accuser with whatever it is you've just been accused of rather than refuting the truth of the accusation made against you. Tu quoque is considered to be a logical fallacy, because whether or not the original accuser is likewise guilty of an offense has no bearing on the truth value of the original accusation.


https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/whataboutism-origin-meaning

It is a tactic often used in debate and elsewhere in response to an accusation. And the person using it hopes to distract from the original accusation.

It is this intent to distract that makes it a fallacy.

In my post about the RCC and pedophile priests, I admit to the truth of the accusations, and point out in another post that RCC canon Law is an obstacle to exposing the truth of pedophile priests. There can be no intent to distract because my posts talk about obstacles and predation.

In that post, I also point out that the tendency to cover up wrong doing is present in many other institutions, as well as in the family where most child molestation takes place.

But nowhere do I excuse predation, and nowhere do I deny that it has occurred, thus tu quoque does not apply.