Revelations

Scott Hardie | April 11, 2010
This may be an insensitive question, but I ask out of mere curiosity, and I do feel sympathetic. Catholics, for you, what is it like to see Pope Benedict caught up in the current sex abuse scandal? Does it challenge your commitment to the church? What does it make you feel?

Since the news broke, I've been trying to put myself in your shoes. I don't have any valid metaphor, because no institution is quite like the Catholic Church. This isn't like Barack Obama getting caught pardoning a child rapist; I would think he was a monster, but it wouldn't change my feelings about America or the presidency. But the Pope embodies the church in a wholly different way, and is the absolute moral authority for a billion people. That he participated in covering up abuse makes him at best a criminal, at worst equivalent to the abusers. This may not reflect on the papacy overall, but it certainly reflects on the morality of this pope. I'd appreciate knowing what you think and feel about this scandal, if you'd care to comment.

Jackie Mason | April 11, 2010
[hidden by request]

Lori Lancaster | April 13, 2010
[hidden by request]

Steve Dunn | April 13, 2010
I think if you're inclined to dislike the Catholic church, the current news cycle provides a handy excuse to confirm your bias.

Erik Bates | April 14, 2010
[hidden by request]

Amy Austin | April 14, 2010
Well put, Lori... very well put.

Jackie Mason | April 15, 2010
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | April 15, 2010
Well put, all. I appreciate the comments.

For me, there are two questions brought up by this scandal.

First, does this reflect on papal infallibility? These things were done long in the past, before Ratzinger became Benedict, but on some level they must reflect on him personally, and does that bear whatsoever on the notion of infallibility in his moral teachings? If infallibility is just a pretense that isn't taken literally, then how many other tenets are just pretense, and where is the line drawn? A lot of people have found themselves testing the church's dogma with simple logical questions like this for centuries; it's something that most Catholic students go through at some point. So maybe it's wasted energy even to wonder.

Second, how should Ratzinger's actions once upon a time be considered – as mistakes, or as wrongs? Did he make an error in judgment that the best thing to do for all parties (including the faithful worldwide) was to deal with the matter internally, or did he intentionally cover it up (and even allow it to continue) in order to avoid retribution? And were the same thing to happen again today, what choice would he make now? This is obviously completely speculative, but along with the bias that Steve mentioned, it's essential to the matter, I think.

I have no agenda in this discussion, at least consciously, and I'm not out to challenge anybody or anything. I just thought I'd write down the questions I'm pondering in my head and see what other people are wondering at the same time. Thanks for thinking aloud with me.

Erik Bates | April 15, 2010
[hidden by request]