I realize I'm being exceptionally chatty today, but it's hard not to be right now, with one significant article after another coming out about the deep-seated problems of the Catholic church and its clerical culture.
I want to note right now Tom Roberts' latest article at National Catholic Reporter, commenting on the New York Times article about which I posted earlier this morning. A significant quote:
Certainly by the late 1980s among members of the hierarchy lots was known. John Paul II chose to ignore some of the most egregious incidents and actors. He could become terribly indignant about liberation theologians (without whom the face of Latin America would arguably have been far bloodier and oppressed), about nuns who questioned an all male clergy, about thinkers and writers who dared question the increased centralization of church power and what was being referred to as the “creeping infallibalism” of the papacy. But about those who repeatedly molested and raped the community’s children? No urgency there from the papal throne.
Yes. And this is one of the primary reasons I still stand solidly opposed to the attempt to canonize John Paul II. In my view, his legacy is far from unambiguous, and in some respects, he and his right-hand man Joseph Ratzinger have been seriously destructive forces for the church they have claimed to love.
Very much part of the problem. Not part of its solution.
