Two more good pieces about the recent New York Times article of Laurie Goodstein and David Halbfinger re: the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict), and its relationship to the abuse crisis in the Catholic church:
The first piece is Mark Silk's "The NYT's Non-Hatchet Job on the Pope" at Spiritual Politics. Mark Silk's (soundly argued) conclusion:
Thanks in no small measure to the investigative efforts of the Times in recent months, a portrait is emerging of Pope Benedict as someone who (in contrast to others in the Vatican) grasped the seriousness of child sexual abuse and was prepared to bring the hammer down on abusers, up to and including the monstrous Marcial Maciel Degollado. But from his days running the CDF to his papacy, he has not been willing to challenge the curial system and its determined commitment to circling the wagons. Indeed, when push comes to shove, and he perceives that it is threatened, his reaction is to jump into the arms of the likes of Cardinal Sodano, who epitomizes all that is wrong with that system.
And then there's Diane Winston's "Gunning for the Pope?" article at Huffington Post today. Here's her take:
Critics complain that the Times is out to get the Church and Pope Benedict, in particular. They cite theological inaccuracies, historical misunderstandings and editorial intimations to justify their stance. But they miss the forest for the trees. The intricacies of priestly ordination, Vatican law and institutional preservation are important to the story, but they're not the point. The point is the church's choice: opting to safeguard the institution, its priests and reputation at the expense of children and families. The Times is, as any news outlet should be, interested in making sense of this decision and, of course, grabbing readers' attention.
I'm grateful to reader Jim McCrea for bringing these two fine statements to my attention. The defenders of the indefensible will obviously keep on screaming bloody murder as more information comes out about the connection between the current pope and the cover-up of abuse cases. But no one is now going to turn the tide as one revelation after another comes forth--and as Catholics who want to know the truth because we are seriously seeking healing for our church increasingly welcome the investigative reporting.
The wasted energy for some years now in the church; the witch-hunt for liberation theologians while sexually abusive clerics were ignored; the suppression of the women's movement; the deliberate undermining of the Second Vatican Council; the clamp-down on all discussion of issues of sexual ethics; the jettisoning of the collegiality in pastoral decision-making mandated by Vatican II; the elevation of the clerical elite in the church while the voice of lay Catholics is totally ignored; the crack-down on theologians throughout the church and in theological faculties in particular: all of these decisions have grievously undermined the ability of the church to meet the challenges of this moment of history. And at the very center of the decisions the current pope has stood for years now.
