Photosales
niJobfinder
niCarfinder
Home Delivery
Propertynews
Why the Pope's solution is simply beyond belief
Benedict's failure to carpet the Irish bishops over child sex-abuse is proof of a Church bereft of either backbone or principle, argues Malachi O'Doherty
Thursday, 18 February 2010
Yet much of the media responded as if these were brave words, a rallying call to a demoralised Church to recover its focus.
Actually, what he said was just a statement of the obvious, almost a tautology like 'Sin is a bad thing'.
He said also that the problem of sex-abuse by priests had arisen from a "weakening of faith".
Taking account of what the bishops had told him, his pastoral letter will now be issued during Lent.
It will, apparently, be a call on Catholics to strengthen their faith and restore the damaged relationship between the clergy and the people.
The Pope's words have been deeply disheartening for those who thought that he was going to carpet the bishops, demand some resignations, or at least accept the ones that have been offered, and impress the Irish with his vigour.
After all, this Pope is the notorious Joseph Ratzinger who, in the past has been well able to strike terror into the hearts of creative theologians he disagreed with and have them cast out of their teaching jobs in Catholic universities and seminaries.
He clearly has the resolve to get rid of those who offend his principles when he wants to, so, many thought, no bad thing if that famous wrath gets turned on the wimps and moral cowards among the Irish bishops and scatters them.
So why didn't it happen?
Well, probably because the Pope, inevitably, sees abuse of children by priests as a spiritual problem with a spiritual answer.
If you go to a biologist for an answer to the problem of celibate priests tinkering with children, you might get a recommendation of chemical castration or hormone therapy; go to a pope and you'll be told to pray. It's what popes do.
So we got the call for the bishops to observe the penitential season of Lent, to show true humility and to, in effect, pull themselves together and work to recover their standing among the Irish people.
Pope Benedict's preferred outcome from this crisis is that a celibate and male priesthood will once again inspire reverence in Ireland - and the sooner the better.
The optimism and relief exuded by Cardinal Brady at his Press conference, as he anticipated 'humiliation', suggests that he likes the medicine the Pope has prescribed.
But does Sean Brady seriously expect that the Catholics of Ireland will take heart from his readiness to face Lent in a prayerful and humble way?
Is it likely that most Catholics really believe that the abuse of children by priests is just a spiritual problem, arising from their forgetting to say their prayers and, therefore, remedied by more intense devotion?
The papal message appears to be that there is nothing wrong with Catholicism that can not be put right by Catholic teaching.
At the same time, many Catholics believe that what is really required now is a radical overhaul of the Church, an end to the bar on priests having sex lives of any kind and the ordination of women. It was always inconceivable that Pope Benedict and the bishops would have come up with solutions like those.
But the more worrying implication of Rome's management of the Irish bishops is its understanding that it is not part of the problem itself.
The Pope is content to have celibate priests working under the disgraced bishops who continue to administer schools and hospitals and welfare institutions in Ireland and to moralise to the rest of us about our sexual conduct.
He appears to have addressed the bishops like the CEO of an international corporation, pulling in the staff of a branch office and giving them the old pep talk about core values and sending them away again with the injunction to stick to the rules and not embarrass the firm again.
The papacy has always kept at a distance from the regional child-abuse scandals, talked of it as an Irish problem, even though it has instructed local bishops to maintain secrecy.
Its concern appears to be that allowing the scandals to raise questions about the Vatican's dealings would put doctrine in jeopardy.
Catholics might more readily make the case that it is the very structure of the Church which is the problem, particularly the requirement that a celibate priesthood pledge obedience to the bishops.
So, where do we go from here?
Many will think that the linkage of child-abuse to the weakening of faith is at least as eccentric as, say, Iris Robinson's claim that homosexuality can be cured. Indeed, in some ways, it is worse, for at least Mrs Robinson didn't claim it could just be done by prayer. And the danger now is that the bishops will return to Ireland smug and confident that they are on their way back to being in good standing with the Pope and with God.
Of course, it may be that Rome has more surprises for them and that we haven't yet seen the full package of measures.
The expressions on the faces of some of the bishops tell us, however, that they now feel they have survived the worst and that the climb back to dignity and respect has begun. They have taken their medicine from the Boss and it wasn't so bad after all.
But the Catholics of Ireland expected Rome to deal more harshly with them and - disillusioned now - may speak much more plainly themselves for want of a single human principle and a backbone to be found anywhere in this Church.
- Text Size
As far as we know, Jesus himself was celibate, so celibacy is not intrinsically evil. Celibacy does have value as a sign of generosity when embraced by those who have a true vocation to it. Indeed, the Roman Catholic Church needs a radical reformation. Why not start by ordaining celibate women?
Posted by Luis Gutierrez | 25.02.10, 21:05 GMT
The devout Irish are silent, the priests are silent and so are the cardinals and the Pope. And what have we heard from God himself lately?
Everlasting silence.
Posted by A.J. Molenkamp | 20.02.10, 09:58 GMT
The reformation resulted in changes such that many broke away from Rome. Some of these breakaways developed systems of church government that had some sort of process for parishoners to vote and hold office holders accountable. The church of Rome needs to be rebuilt from the bottom up. Monarchies have been dismantled the world over. The solution, it seems to me, is to abolish the monarchy and create some sort of representative church government.
Posted by Stephen Armiger | 20.02.10, 06:35 GMT
Mary, I think you'll find there's far more "penance" in being sent to jail for being complicit in child abuse.
The church acts as if the offences are agains the church and cares nothing for the chldren....
Posted by Frankie D. | 19.02.10, 16:15 GMT
To me, it's plain simply: if so many priests, being sexual predators, are covered by their bishops, I'll avoid them.
I'll seek a FSSPX parish and I'll stick on it. That simple.
If they wish it to be so, so it'll be.
Posted by Miguel Serrano Cabeza | 19.02.10, 15:49 GMT
I still think that the problem is the discipline of Celibacy which, in my personal opinion, is not only unnatural but is not part of Christian teaching.The early Popes were married, were they somehow flawed in their behaviour? In the light of the now global incidence of Child Abuse and torture within the Catholic ethos the Pope should reverse the requirement for this discipline because the first thing people all over the world think of now when Catholicism is mentioned is Child Abuse. The prophecy of St Mallachy says that Benedict is the next to last Pope after which the next Pontiff will be Peter-the Roman and following that the ethos will end by being brought to judgement. It seems possible because if this were any other ethos, without such access to political power and money, in my view, it would have been closed down long ago.
Posted by Keith | 19.02.10, 13:25 GMT
If Christ were walking on earth today he would throw all of the self proclaimed "holy men" out of the Vatican leaving it essentially vacent. They preach to the world while hiding their own horrible crimes.
Posted by CER | 18.02.10, 23:17 GMT
This is one of the best articles I have read on this topical issue. I can't see any real change arising from this at all.
The Roman Catholic Church has been exposed for what it is - a bloated multi-national, concerned for its hierarchy and not for its victims.
Posted by Arthur Sully | 18.02.10, 22:56 GMT
The peculiar proposition that only practising Catholics can discuss Catholicism equally implies that only practising paedophiles can debate paedophilia.
Posted by George | 18.02.10, 19:25 GMT
There is a right to be angry but to demand heads to roll may not be the best solution. What Penance is there in that for the individual? There is more penance in being told - go back and deal with the mob. Think about it - it is harder and more devastatingly painful that handing in a resignation. And, when righteous anger turns into mob vengenance - the innocent and the victims suffer more.
Posted by Mary | 18.02.10, 17:55 GMT
Is Malachi O'Doherty a practising Catholic? If not, why does he presume to know what any "Catholics of Ireland" expected?
Posted by John O'Brien | 18.02.10, 15:46 GMT
It seems to me that the argument of this article transcends logic for the sake of making some cheap ideological slams on the Catholic Church. The argument that the Catholic worldview, with its particular understanding of sin and repentance, is incapable of offering an effective manner of dealing with human acts of injustice and evil must find better support than merely ridiculing it, or proffering solutions that in fact have no basis in reality-based evidence. For example, statistics on the percentage of sexual child-abuse in among clergy admits of no evidence that celibacy increases its incidence. While the papal response is absolutely subject to critique in terms of its viability to incite real change and reform, to use this lacuna to undermine doctrine and ethics is disingenuous and, well, a cheap shot that equally does nothing to advance serious reform. I still think Benedict Groeschel's Scandal to Hope represents the finest response to the broader scandals of abuse.
Posted by Tim O'Neal | 18.02.10, 14:27 GMT
it's a clear sign that these people are above the law just because of the label of religion. If a business covered this up, the consequences would be jail for everyone who knew, say you are a religion and you are allowed to deal with it yourself, internally investigate and "fix" the problems while the state sits back and lets them away with it!
Posted by Joe | 18.02.10, 13:04 GMT
grace francis i agree one hundred percent, just because the paedophile is a priest does not mean he should not be treated like anyother paedophile, the pope should have sacked these people ,and given information to the authorities ,to get them out of the reach of children.
Posted by Spot on | 18.02.10, 12:33 GMT
Dear Friends in Christ,
To me let it be anybody who harms a child should be hanged let alone priest its disgusting to even think about it, they should resign, i know Christ taught us forgiveness, but there is a limit to it
Posted by Grace Francis | 18.02.10, 08:23 GMT
Its as much a sin to know something is happening and hide it, but when that something is a poor innocent child being sexually molested by a paedophile priest and when vatican is made aware of it they hide the sin and let these evil doers carry on ,then it is the pope himself who is to blame, taking it god would not approve, it is a sin against god and humanity.
Posted by reflect | 18.02.10, 08:15 GMT