U.S. Catholics Speak Out on Pope's Resignation : YES or NO ???

The Pope can't be kicked out of the Catholic Church. Nor is there any way to force him to resign. It's not even clear that he could resign, since no one  has the authority to accept his resignation.

Yet many have pondered and some have "demanded" that Benedict XVI resign his office for mishandling the Church's response to the "sex abuse" or "pedophilia" issue and scandal that is nearly worldwide now. The question is, how do ordinary Catholic people feel about all this?

On May 5th, the National Catholic Reporter released results on a few key issues found in a Zogby Poll which was to be released May 6th. The NCR reported on results based on the following three questions:

Do you approve or disapprove of the overall job that (a) Pope Benedict XVI, (b)  that the American Catholic Bishops are doing?   [emphasis added].

Over half (56%) of the American Catholic adult population expresses confidence in the overall job the Pope is doing. Only about 3 in 10 (32%) disagree that the Holy Father is doing and adequate job. However, when asked about the American bishops' "job rating," the split is basically 50-50. forty-five percent said the Bishops are doing a good job, while 44% are not happy with the overall job the bishops are doing.

Perhaps the full report will give further details and other comparisons. As it stands now, whether the Pope or the bishops are doing a "good job"overall may well be influenced by specific issues. for example with the American bishops, some could be very "pro-life" with the bishops but against them on immigration. Some people support the Pope's efforts on getting rid of sex abuse but oppose his efforts to stave off global warming. There is a more specific question.

Overall how would you rate (a) Benedict's, (b) the American Catholic bishops' efforts to address the sexual abuse situation within the Catholic Church?

Regarding Pope Benedict, 38% say he is doing an "Excellent" or Good" job handling the sex abuse crisis. But more than half of all adult Catholics (56%), express negative feelings about Benedict's efforts to address the sexual abuse problem in the Church.

The American Bishops fare even worse than the pope. Only one-fifth of American Catholics (20%) are positive about the Bishop's efforts to solve the crisis. On the other hand, three-quarters of  American Catholics are negative about the bishops' efforts to solve the sex abuse crisis.

How might we explain these very negative ratings? Many have already tried to explain the "loss of faith" in Catholic leaders. Just a few of the reasons given include: moving priest abusers from parish to parish so they might abuse again, fearing more for the reputation of the institutional Church than the harm done to the abuse victims, the lack of compassion to the victims and their families (and we learn now, a lack of compassion toward those priests who have been exonerated by civil and religious authority). The list is nearly endless.

Certainly individual cardinals, bishops, priests, lay persons employed by the Church (E.g. lawyers, media spokespersons, etc), have made "mistakes" and even sins in the way cases of sex abuse have been handled.
Some Cardinals have praised bishops who refuse to cooperate with civil authorities. Some American bishops have been very slow to implement the procedures (E.g. "One-strike and you are out") to attend to sex abuse as agreed to by the Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Vatican with the Pope's blessing. Many of these examples apply to mistaken judgments on the part of individual clerics, some of whom were  naive or misguided. In some other individual cases, I suspect that sinful motives of power, control and advancement were present, even dominant.

The American Catholic community, like the U.S. population in general can be very forgiving and compassionate as long as leaders accept responsibility and make amends, even if that involve resignation from office or imprisonment.

Until the very bureaucratic, secretive system that has grown, not only for legitimate governance, but also as a control mechanism, is thoroughly modified from top to bottom, with a very high level of transparency, trust will never be fully restored. The American people have suffered at the hand of misguide or criminal entrepreneurs, politicians, bankers, and Congresspersons. What they are upset and angry about is that the institutional Church has not held itself to a higher Christian code of ethics. Again, a more Christian, humane, transparent, justice with mercy  system must be established to restore the faith and confidence of American Catholics.

Some have called for the Pope to resign as a result of the sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Others believe he should not resign. Do you believe that Pope Benedict XVI should resign or do you believe he should continue?

There is clear evidence in this survey that the bulk of American Catholics do not believe that the Pope should resign. In fact, almost two-thirds (64%) say that Pope Benedict XVI should continue as pope. Only 16% say that he should resign. Finally, about 20% of American Catholics say they are "insure" or "Don't Know" if the pope should continue or resign. Assume for a moment that the entire group of "unsure" and "Don't know" Catholics make up their minds in favor of resignation. Even then, those in favor of the pope remaining in office would be double the number favoring resignation.

Those who seek resignation do so for a number of reasons. Most salient these days is dissatisfaction with  the handling of the pedophilia / abuse reality as indicated in the answer to the second question above.  Also there is a belief by some that the way the pope, Vatican Congregations and bishops conduct affairs to much too secretive and authoritarian; that in today's world the Church must be more "open" and "democratic".

Yes, there is much frustration and anger that so much has been covered up in the past and that vigorous reformation of  the procedures and processes in the Church are too slow and incomplete in light of the terrible seriousness of this situation. I too am frustrated and saddened over the current state of affairs!!

But should Pope Benedict XVII resign?????  NO !!! I have come to this conclusion on my own, but I was influenced by two recent articles in NCR  by John Allen. Allen praised and critiqued the Pope. He laid out things that the Pope could do and and "should do" to deal with the Sex Abuse issue and set the stage for appropriate procedures in the future.

Allen suggests that Pope Benedict XVI is the best available (only??) person to have at this time for response to this particular crisis. Benedict knows more about the history of sex abuse than just about any living person. Since being made responsible to handle all sex abuse cases in the 1980s as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, he has the best overview of what has transpired recently.He has also made some very important changes. He was a key player in approving the American Bishops' "One strike and you're out" policy and telling bishops to cooperate with civil authorities. More recently he has shown some compassion toward the actual victims themselves.

Yes, in spite of the slowness of these moves and errors in judgment and action, The Holy Father is the most knowledgeable person and the one with the authority to set the record straight, require bishops to respond in appropriate ways and implement necessary changes to provide transparency in Church decisions, procedures.

If the Pope resigns can anyone not realize the confusion and vacuum that would delay any further progress in dealing with this issue? Can anyone not realize how long it would take a new pope to "get up to speed" on this issue? Although it has been much less than adequate, Benedict has the knowledge and experience to act. How many others, who have a chance to be elected pope, have this knowledge and experience? How many have realized that a new pope might be more conservative, even reactionary and undo what has been done. Anyone for a certain French bishop as pope?.

No, what we need now is relatively quick action to handle this issue now! The responsibility of the laity and much of the lower clergy is to address our frustration an/or anger to influence (pressure?) for changes we know must occur.

What do you think about resignation or continuation for the Pope?

Do you have any suggestions for me or others of ways to successfully influence the Pope (and the Vatican / bishops) to implement better ways of responding to this issue?

I would appreciate comments on this post :)

Sex Abuse Questions: How would you answer them?

On Easter Sunday our pastor preached on the sex abuse scandal in the context of 5 people who were joining the Church. Our pastor is one of the most respected priests in the diocese. He was called out of retirement to become pastor of the parish after some serious difficulties the parish had been through recently. On April 11th he wrote a piece in the parish bulletin  (Scroll down to page 4) asking the following questions of himself, of us, and the Church itself. Here they are. See how you would answer them:

 I. The Problems of today [in the Church] were not handled as well as they could have been. The structure of the Church as begun by the Lord, handled problems differently than we might expect. Perhaps, some of the approaches to problems are archaic in our personal estimation. [Yes, No]

II. The following are general statements and do not necessarily apply to all circumstances (I put them in the form of questions for all to come to their own conclusions). .....

1. Is there [currently] an archaic understanding of humanity and the human condition, especially mind and body ???
2. Is there [currently] a misunderstanding of some maxims of theology; namely, as to the grace of God and the potentially terrible aspects of human beings???? [That] some people cannot be adequately and properly rehabilitated in spite of the grace of God. (Grace builds on nature).
3. Is there an unfortunate disregard for the importance of civil law ????
4. Is there a distorted understanding of the purpose of authority, leadership and accountability in the Church ????
5. Is there a lack of proper care or concern for those affected by the changeable nature of humanity [human "nature?"] ????
6. Is there a lack of courage to look at the fully human needs and aspects of human beings ????
7. Is there an inordinate attempt to control information ???? [In other words], Is there an attitude of secrecy to protect the Church and Church personnel and at the same time a lack of proper concern for the victims of the distortion of human beings ????

Father made three statements after listing the questions. Briefly,

• That in spite of these events and terrible revelation, that the Church will survive.
• The Church must learn from this terrible chapter in its history. Never again should a situation like this be handled as it was.Justice and mercy must be properly balanced and properly imposed.
• Our God looks down on the Church and asks, "What have they done to my people?" "How dumb could they be?" "How uncaring for all in the Church."
• Father then expresses his faith and hope in the Church.

How will you answer Father's questions? Are they fair questions? What other questions could / should be asked?


Please use the "comments" page to answer the questions and/or estimate how Father or I have answered them.

I will post his and my answers in a couple of days !!!!

NOTE: (words in parentheses in the original)  [words in brackets were added by me for clarification]

Sex Abuse and both/and ?

Can there be a middle ground in the ever widening sex-abuse scandal engulfing the Catholic Church? John Allen of the NCR asked this question yesterday and provided his judgment on that issue

I consider myself a Vatican II Progressive Catholic, but deeply impressed into my being is an appreciation of and commitment to the "both/and" characteristic (sacramentalism, analogical imagination) of Catholicism. I understand, but appreciate less, the "either/or" view of life. The world always appears in terms of gray, thus the both/and view is essential. However, we are sometimes (often?) called upon the make specific and clear choices.

The sex-abuse scandal is a complex situation and the issue of Benedict's action makes it more so. Those who have read my previous posts should know that I believe:

•  That the primary response of individuals and "the Church" must be compassion and assistance to the victims of abuse.
• That prevention of further abuse must occur even if that calls for dramatic or major changes in Church administration, internal procedures, and practices (E.g. optional celibacy, Married priests secrecy,).
• That abusers should also be treated with compassion, but should always be prosecuted to the full extent of Civil and Canon law. The goal must be the protection of the community (society) and not revenge. 
• That we must stop talking about "mistakes." Call things what they are: "illness" or "moral" evil as the case may be. In both civil life and the Church no one ever seem to do anything "wrong" these days. Everyone seems to only "make mistakes." Abusers my be ill; they make bad or sinful decisions. An adult doesn't just mistakenly abuse a child or anyone subject to his influence, authority or power.
• What has been said of abusers applies even more so to priests, bishops, and a system that neglects, covers up or "makes mistakes" about sex abuse. I have experienced the culture in which deviant behaviors (E.g. alcoholism, sexual behaviors)  were interpreted only as moral/spiritual problems. That is the culture that many Church leaders grew up in. However that day must pass.

I long for and struggle to discover the kind of both/and view and decisions that will move us forward. I must admit it's a difficult. Any of, you, my readers, have any insights or suggestions? Send a comment!!!

When it comes to the current crisis, especially regarding the Holy Father, John Allen asks whether there is a middle ground.  Based on his extensive knowledge and experience, he makes two points.

The two cases from Pope Benedict's past that have recently come to light, one in Munich and one from his years at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, raise important questions, and the pope needs to answer them in order to move ahead. (Emphasis added)

 We live in a new age, a time that requires, demands, transparency. Look at our political life. Think of Richard Nixon and Watergate, Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky affair, the whole debate about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, or recent accusations of "back room politics" and health care reform. People can no longer, and will never, accept "cover-ups, appeals to secrecy, etc.

People want, increasingly demand, the "truth" and admission of wrong doing from their leaders. Whether or not Benedict has told the "truth" or allowed or participated "cover ups," it will eventually become necessary to provide a credible explanation and, if necessary admission of wrong doing by commission or omission.

Allen's second point is that:

Those questions, however, have to be seen in the context of his overall record on the crisis, and particularly since 2001, when John Paul II put then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in charge of reviewing the case files, there's a lot to be said for that record.

I believe any objective observer will agree that some positive change has occurred since 2001. The question is whether there has been enough "positive changes" and if they are the correct changes in the right places.
If you have an opinion leave a comment.

Sadly, Allen reports that response his article(s) has been divided between the two extremes: those who claim that he's part of the extreme Left and doing a "hatchet job" on the Church. At the opposite extreme, commentors  say things like, "Don't you ever get tired of being an apologist for the Vatican?"

John  ends by asking, about very controversial issues, "Is there room for a middle ground?"

My answer right now is "I don't know, but I hope so."

What about you, my readers? Do you have an opinion?

Reactions to Benedict's Letter to the Irish People

Before all else, people owe it to themselves to read the Pope's full letter.

There was never a question but that the Holy Father:'s  the letter would please some and anger others. In his letter:

• He shows his personal sorrow over the sex abuse charges.
• He speaks directly to those abused with words of comfort.
• He chastises the abusers and the bishops of Ireland.
• He asks for forgiveness for the abuse in the name of the Church.
• He says that he is currently setting up a "Visitation" (investigation) of the dioceses and Catholic institutions in Ireland.
• He directs the clergy and bishops to cooperate with civil authorities in bringing abusers to justice.
• He directs that "spiritual practices" be carried out in penance and petition for healing; he specifically mentions Eucharistic Adoration in every diocese, a mission for all the clergy, and year long petition and penance by all the Irish people.

No one who is fair-minded can deny that this is a positive step in the right direction. John Allen gives a number of instances in which, for a number of years, as Cardinal Ratzinger and as pope, Benedict has taken other positive steps to stop child sex abuse.

Today however, many remain critical of the pope and his letter to the Irish. The most salient criticisms seem to be the following:

• He placed all the real "blame" on the accused priests and local bishops alone.
• He did not discuss, what many believe is the crux of the problem: the systemic nature of Clerical power and actions or inaction of the higher clergy in hiding or covering up abuse.
• He did not address the increasing international sex abuse scandal, currently being investigated in Germany, Holland, Switzerland, Italy and Brazil.
• He, himself, didn't announce specific Vatican actions and programs for a "zero tolerance" policy similar to the program approved for the U.S.
• He didn't accept personal responsibility for the system nor say anything about his own role in these cases while he was archbishop of Munich.

Most of the dailies (Washington Post, New York Times, National Post) reported on the letter with a mixture of fact and subtle interpretation none of which was particularly positive. That may be  because of the outrage over such hideous crimes. The "comments" by readers of the various articles were all disappointed or angry that the pope did not take a stronger stand. The comments made in  the three British dailies (The Guardian, The Times, and the Daily Telegraph) I follow expressed extreme anger over the sex abuse and how the Church has handled it. These comments were often vicious attacks on the Catholic Church itself.

Personally, I agree that the Church must discover and implement a process that is much more transparent and honest; a process that places the victims of abuse and the People of God above the "protection" of the institutional church's current manner of dealing with new issues.

Yes the abusing priests committed unspeakable crimes. Yes, the bishops made terrible "mistakes" as the Holy Father said in his letter. These men must accept the responsibility for what happened. On the other hand, the Vatican has fostered or allowed practices of secrecy, even directing all involved: Bishops, clergy, abusers, and very often the victims themselves to remain silent under the pain of sin or excommunication. Why?

The easy answer is "pure power" and maintenance of the the status quo. There is some truth to that argument. However there are other elements to consider. Most of the Cardinals and senior bishops come from a time and a culture in which alcoholism and sexual deviance were understood only as moral problems. In that culture it was sufficient to confess, do penance and renew one's prayer life. Such moral deviance was the province of the Church to cure or punish. It was never understood as something that related to secular authorties.

This view easily led to the idea of "protecting the Church" from "scandal." Although not right, it is understandable as part of the early defenses of the Church after the Reformation. The exercise of near absolute power by the hierarchy became "standard operating procedure."

But as 20th century theologians, liturgists and Scripture scholars began to understand and appreciate the situation of a Medieval Church facing the modern world, they suggested ways to speak to this new world. Pope John the XXIII was inspired to call Vatican II with its many changes. However, many old inadequate procedures continued. For some reason fundamental changes never came about.

Fortunately or unfortunately, the sex abuse scandals are forcing the Church to reassess its internal and external processes and methods of operation. The Church hierarchy are called to enact more transparent and collegial ways to lead the People of God; more compassionate ways that include justice tempered by mercy.