Friday, 04.18.08
The Pope and the Scandal
Photo by Mandel Ngan for AFP/Getty Images
The year of two popes
January/February 2006
Paul Elie ponders the significance of Ratzinger's ascension to the See of Peter.
The loyal Catholic
July 24, 2002
It was a small but important step. Pope John Paul II was famous for his public-relations savvy, his ability to turn the media's fascination with the papal office to his advantage, but in the sexual abuse scandal his successor has shown the defter touch. In his waning years, the previous Pope seemed to lack an appreciation for how deep the rot and outrage went, and the Vatican behaved as though the scandal had more to do with American media sensationalism than with the Catholic hierarchy's own sins. Whereas both as Cardinal and now as Pope, the soft-spoken German-born Joseph Ratzinger has been more forthright than his predecessor about the "filth" in the priesthood and more active in response -- and now, in his first trip to the United States since being elevated to the See of Peter, more willing to make the scandal a touchstone for his ministry, both in public and in private.
But a meeting like yesterday's should have happened much, much sooner, and that it did not speaks to a fundamental problem facing the Catholic Church today -- the extent to which the Vatican aspires to remain above the grubby, frenetic fray of modern life, even as its local representatives adopt the worst habits of modern business executives and politicians. At least part of Rome's unresponsive response to the sex-abuse scandal should be understood in the light of the Vatican's desire not to be perceived as a brand-conscious corporation, with a CEO-Pope overseeing regional managers -- or worse, an essentially political entity, obsessed with keeping the Papal approval ratings sky-high and the media narrative in its favor. But in this particular case, Rome's desire to preserve the Church's essentially mystical role in world affairs -- to avoid being sucked into the spin cycle of media sensationalism, and to maintain the Pope's image as shepherd and teacher, rather than chief executive -- left the Vatican blind to the reality that the men running the American Church weren't holding up their end of the bargain. They didn't need direction or wise counsel or even fraternal correction: They needed to be to be taken to the woodshed by an outraged, scandalized and engaged Papacy, and the discipline needed to happen swiftly and above all publicly. And because it didn't -- because in most cases bishops were allowed to get away with sacrificing the Body of Christ's most innocent members to protect, though of course only temporarily, their finances and prerogatives and reputation -- the Roman Catholic Church ended up looking like an institution prone to all of the evils of a modern government or corporation, but with none of the accountability.
Be ye therefore wise as serpents, and innocent as doves, Christ told his followers. But the Church during the sex scandals has often seemed like a company of serpents -- the American bishops, and the perverts they protected -- presided over by a company of otherworldly, out-of-touch doves. The Pope's words and actions this week are an important step toward changing that perception. But only a step.
City of manThomas J. Reese, SJ proposes that "the Vatican should once again adopt practices of the secular political world." |
An encouraging wordGeorge Weigel says that Papal scolding should be tempered by praise for the self-critical, yet successful, American Catholic community. |
Compromised clergySandy Rios says that the church's trouble with abuse "has its roots in homosexuality, not pedophilia." |
Face-to-faceRocco Palmo summarizes the emotional reactions of the "Boston Five" to the Pope's private condolences. |
(7)
Nick, Benedict clearly separated the issues of pedophilia and homosexuality in the priesthood during his comments on the plane.
"Nick, Benedict clearly separated the issues of pedophilia and homosexuality in the priesthood during his comments on the plane."
Therein lies the problem. When honesty is sacrificed for ideology or political sensitivity there is little chance a problem will be diagnosed properly and remedied accordingly. "The worst, the most corrupting of lies, are problems poorly stated," according to George Bernanos. It makes little sense to separate these issues and causes more harm, permitting political correctness to triumph honest discussion. As John Lukacs notes: What matters is not what ideas do to men but what men do to their ideas; how and when they choose them, and how and why they accommodate them to their own wishes, interests, lives,and circumstances.� Choosing to separate these issues is simply a way to accommodate special interests not to solve a problem properly.
Out of curiosity, would you be writing so smugly if we ever dared to force the opening of the Child Welfare records of the USA? What is more sacred than the relationship of a child with the parent, especially a father? If these closed records were ever opened, social workers and child welfare agencies would be running for cover. Maybe we could also be so righteous about the Boy Scouts and all the teachers as well? Or does the Atlantic simply like to go after the Catholic Church? I would propose that the Catholic Church has indeed allowed a very small percentage of its clergy protection in times when even the psychiatric community could not agree on the rehabilitation of pedophiles. Should Bishops be punished? Possibly. And possibly should the directors of social work agencies who knew for years about clients abusing their children but allowed them to remain in the homes because they believed in rehabilitation. No other group has paid out as much money as the Catholic Church. Check yourselves for anti-Catholic bias as you have been known to have this ever since you originated.
I'll believe that the Roman Catholic church intends to address the sex scandals in a meaningful way when Cardinal Law is returned to Boston to face charges for covering up and denying the acts of priests under his authority.
The sex scandal strikes a devastating blow to the heart of the social culture and tradition of the Church. That is not an excuse, but it is an explanation as to why there has been such fear, resistance and denial. The Church has no idea why a chasm is suddenly opening up under its feet or what realistically to do about it. It has done nothing intentionally wrong or different than it has ever done, the reasonable solution simply doesn't resolve the problem anymore, and since Vatican II the problem turned from a trickle to a flood. This is happening because the world is changing, not the Church, but the Church must somehow adapt to it while maintaining its integrity. This fundamental change facing the Church is neither simple nor straightforward.
There are two aspects to cultural development: the cyclic and the progressive. Cyclic means that society rises and falls and rises again over centuries. Progressive means that every time it rises, something is new or better understood than before.
From the cyclic view, the Church is no longer running society as the de facto replacement for the Roman state, as it was in Middle Ages Europe when its authority was not questioned or questionable. Modern "secular" society has taken over the social welfare functions of the Church, which is most of its reason for being. Modern materialist society is now at its peak, though the signs are on the horizon that Western secular government is becoming over-extended and will soon be unable to support universal welfare on the public dime. When secular materialism finally fails, the Church will likely return to its accustomed role of propping up secular government by providing general social welfare for the populace.
From the progressive view, in a world of depth psychology and the natural sciences, is there a new depth or level of insight into human spiritual nature that the Church can plumb? The options are to rebuild the priesthood from a new foundation, hopefully a deeper rather than a shallower one, based on a more profound psycho-sexual awareness. Otherwise, if the Church cannot be sustained in a materialist society, then it must allow itself to shrink to a fraction of its current membership and accept a position of orthodox minority and diaspora. Though disruptive, these would be healthy and appropriate steps back to an inner purity which will allow the birth of a newer and deeper spiritual expression for a new world order. Benedict understands as even John Paul did not that this change is unavoidable and will require letting go of security, openness to risk, and the deepest humility. The promise and power of a "catholic" mentality is that it will always be able to start over and regenerate, or re-incarnate itself in any new situation. But the desire of God as revealed by Christ, and therefore the goal of all Christians, is not an earthly throne but a cross.
It has been often and correctly said that the Church does not exist in a vacuum. Sometimes society leads the Church, and sometimes the Church leads society. While the Church may need to adapt its institutions, it must not do so by abandoning its core beliefs toward life and virtue. It is secular society which has abandoned its responsibility to higher values, not the Church. Secular materialism started as an intellectual and moral progression, but has since devolved into a moral and intellectual regression. All societies are based on religion, and secularism is not necessarily better than religiosity. The real aim of secular government is to encourage more religion. The Church needs to fight the general cultural regression into relativism and materialism as much as ever.
In the final analysis, celibacy is an aspect of the church's accumulated culture and practice, but not its revealed dogma. It is a noble ideal, purer and higher than that held by other traditions, historically recognized by many societies, but not an absolutely necessary practice. We follow it as an imitation of Christ's example. It also bears repeating that the early church (and all societies at some point) had single priests, women priests, married priests and sexually undefined priests. Sexuality may be man's greatest weakness and occasion of sin, but our sexual state is not inherently destructive or salvific to our souls. We should strive to be pious of heart and thought, value and even pursue the integrity of chastity and virginity, but we are lost, fearful and loving beings and there is always mercy and forgiveness for repentance.
By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although The Current does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
-->
Of course, we've already see many bishops use the scandal as a further excuse to crack down on homosexuality, and it's not clear to me whether Ratzinger is toeing that same line.
It is clear to me that he has no intention of bringing the Church anywhere near even the 20th century, let alone the 21st, based on his regurgitation of the worst narrow-minded crap I heard in Sunday School (can't be a true Catholic if you're pro-choice or pro-gay, etc.).
Posted by Nick | April 18, 2008 2:23 PM