The Pope - Media Player or Servant of the Church?

Today, the Pope announced that he'll meet with more abuse victims. This comes on the same day that a letter signed by him is revealed to have stalled the defrocking of another child molester - Stephen Kiesle. In this letter, Ratzinger wrote that "the good of the universal church" needs to be considered before defrocking Kiesle. Seven years before this letter was written, Kiesle was arrested and pleaded no contest for tying up and molesting two boys. He wasn't defrocked for another two years after Ratzinger wrote this letter. Ratzinger's interpretation of "the good of the universal church" only seems to apply to the image of the church as an establishment...not its actual members.

In meeting with Abuse victims, is the Pope trying to save his image? Or is he really trying to nurture and care for his church? I want the latter to be true. I do. He's a very powerful person who can do a lot of good with the resources he has. However, he had decades to meet and pray with abuse victims, but never did so until the media started pointing out this exact problem - that he allowed a culture of half-tolerance for child abuse in the church, and worse, ignored its victims.

HRC - Chicken or Egg?

I had a conversation last night with a relatively new fundraising person at HRC who works on major donors. Andrew Sullivan's name came up, as we were talking about people who do/don't support the organization. This HRCer was annoyed that people like Andrew and me don't give HRC any money, but we complain that that the organization can't get anything done. I tried to explain to him that most people don't want to give money to an organization that they already know to be wasteful and ineffective. I suggested that he and HRC first prove to people like us that they are being fiscally conservative and making an impact, and then ask us for money. Basically, show us what you can do with a little, and we'll make sure there's more (it's how most investor-funded businesses are started, and it works) His reply (as I remember it) was "something has to come first, the chicken or the egg." Imagine approaching an investment firm and saying that.

The Pope is Not a Bad Guy - a personal conversation

You don't devote your life to Christ, and be elected by a bunch of other people who have devoted their life to christ, and still be a bad guy. I had a fascinating conversation with a close friend about this today. That friend was kind enough to let me publish our conversation - typos and all. Check it out:

Friend: okay chase you are pushing it!!! Lol I know the Pope scandal is a big deal but I think you are going over the top with the blatant Nazi references. it's like you're having fun with this

Me: well, the nazi reference wasn't mine...

Friend: I will not claim to know all there is to know about this, for sure, nor that the pope is not at fault.

Me: he was actually a memnber of the nazi party, and his personal preacher is trying to connect him with people who suffered under the nazi party

Friend: and did Ratzinger actually inflict any damage? wasn't he nazi youth? not okay, but not auschwitz

Friend: and I agree completely that comparing his suffering to the suffering of hte Jews is egregiously stupid

Me: I don't know if he killed or hurt anyone as a Nazi youth member. But he wore the uniform, and is, for better or worse, associated with the Nazi party. To try to claim a connection between media suffering and jews suffering in camps is ridiculous. I hope my tone doesn't sound like I'm having fun with it

Friend: oh sure

Me: I genuinely think the Pope is a bad person. I genuinely think he is a bad leader

Friend: okay well I disagree with you there, although I respect your right to feel that way remember that those were not the pope's words and I feel that while they were a poor choice of words on the priest's part, they seem to be blown out of proportion

Me: I genuinely think the Christ I got to know growing up would not want the Pope to be the leader of 8 billion Christians

Friend: what about the pope bothers you? I don't think he chose to be a member of the nazi youth. as for all of this scandal thing, I don't know enough about it to pass judgment

Me: no, it's not his nazi past that bothers me

Friend: but have you read any of his encyclicals? have you read his writings or anything good about him or just the bad stuff people are reporting?

Me: 1) he's out of touch with Catholics. Especially in regards to the sex abuse, he either deliberately or accidentally kept his head buried in the sand

Me: 2) he is staunchly homophobic. This doesn't effect me too much, except that his dogma empowers a lot of other people to keep people like me from coming out, from being honest, or from being a part of a church they want to be in

Friend: okay, that's the teachings of the church as a whole, not just the pope, so I think that issue is with Catholicism overall. not that it's okay, and yes he's a part of it, but any other pope would be the same at this point

Me: 3) He has repeatedly spoken against the use of condoms to prevent HIV/AIDS in Africa, saying that abstinence is the christian way to do it. Again, dogma is hurting real people, and hurting them in huge numbers

Friend: ah, yeah that's a sticky issue. again, not just him, but I know what you mean, he's the leader. Yeah I mean I’m not Catholic! and some of those are parts of the reasons why. I just am challening you, not because I"m mad, but because I want to have that discussion

Me: but this one is him specifically, because he has personally spoken publicly on the issue, and refused funding for safe sex campaigns in Africa that have been proven to work by non-christian organizations

Friend: ah I see

Me: i'm not mad either, and could never be mad at you!

Friend: :}

Me: but there are several tangible reasons why I don't like the Pope. it's not just a knee jerk reaction to the Catholic faith which he happens to lead. His own speeches and opinions are actually harmful to people

Friend: yeah I see. I know, it's hard for me because on the one hand I understand theologically why he feels certain ways. even if I don't agree, so I am not angry at him in the same way and I sort of understand the morally sticky situaton he is in, but I also agree with you taht there is bad crap coming out of it. yeah, I just think it's easy (not that you're doing this) but it's easy for a lot of people to just look at the press and turn him into a villain without taking a closer look at what he has done and that I get frustrated by

Me: I admit that I don't look at the good things he has done. a media problem anywhere, bad news is better news

Friend: right, and that's the case all the time, not just with this. here is an interesting article that my husband found and I want you to look at the stuff that's come directly from the pope

http://www.vatican.va/resources/resources_card-levada2010_en.html

you may not agree but it's an interesting poitn of view to consider. and one that I wasn't familiar with.

Friend: anywya thanks for discussing with me! :}

Me: reading the article now

Me: the writer seems to be saying, in the first half, that the victims should have gone to civil authorities. The fact is, they didn't. They went to the church and the church did nothing. One can't blame the victims for not going to civil authorities after religious authorities shunned them

I have trouble with religious leaders (clearly). On the one hand, how can the Pope be a bad guy? He's connected to Christ every day right?

Friend: it says the police and prosecurors ignored reports from victims, which implies that they DID go to civil authorieis

Me: my bad, it says that the church people should have gone to civil authorities

Me: so, my point would change - either way, the church did nothing. how can you turn your back to a crying child?

Me: I mean, the Pope should be a good guy right? He's devoted his life to teaching Christ's love (that was a big part of the speech he gave when he was first elected to the Papacy...connecting with Christ)

Friend: well, okay, the point of this article is to say that while everyone is blaming the pope, a lot of the blame should be placed on the diocesan authorities. I think he is not necessarily trying to address the idea of Benedict's guilt but is emphasizing the logical fallacies in the writer's piece (which, granted, may not necessarily relate to what you and I were discussing)

Me: so, I get frustrated when there is a lot of hatred, or passive ignoring of problems like HIV/AIDS, women's roles in the church, and child molesting priests

Friend: right but, the pope is an easy scapegoat

Me: he's in charge

Friend: and as the leader of the Catholic church, he can be connected to those things for sure

Me: he was literally in charge of addressing the child rape problems

before he was pope

Friend: I still feel like there is a lot of bureacracy there, it's not like things came directly to him. And again, I am not trying to argue his innocence, I am just saying that there are things that are issues with the church as a whole, or with diocesan problems that may not have been well dealt with that are getting translated into a criminialization of the pope

Me: I don't know how much he knew. But, if he didn't know what was going on, he wasn't effective in his position

Friend: okay, and that's a legitimate argument

Me: it wouldn't surprise me if we all find out that the people under him hid things from him to "protect" him

Friend: yes, me neither, which would be a problem, but not his fault

Me: unless he knew people were hiding it and accepted it

Friend: I just basically take issue with a lot of reporters that seem out to demonize him

the Catholic church gets hated on a lot and I understand the reasoning behind some of it

Me: frankly, they are the source of a LOT of hate.

Friend: a lot of churches are sources of a lot of hate, fundamentalist churches are oftn just as bad. not that that makes it okay!! But…

Me: yes, not just Catholics

Friend: and I truly believe that the pope, and the good catholics out there, are doing their best to work towards a loving and Christlike world and some of their tactics are not Christlike

Me: to your point, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. I shouldn't be hating on the church so much....why spread more hatred?

Friend: which is not okay, but perhaps true! although Id o think it is legitimate to challenge things that are hurtful or bad, but I do think that we tend to spend a lot of time looking at the things that divide us and don't necessarily make the effort to find the good, or the commonalities

it isi a lot harder especially when the bad stuff can be so hurtful

Me: I definitely fall into that category. of course, it's also easy for people in the US to villainize the Pope because we don't have a personal connection with him

Friend: I think we all do. but anyway. here's hoping the Vatican, and we, can move forward in a good and loving direction towards justice and a future free of this kind of awfulness

Me: maybe the media has ignored him saying this, but what a statement it would be if he got up and said, "Children of Christ, I am sorry for your pain that any Church official has caused you. Abuse is unacceptable and I want to promise you that we are forcefully ridding our Church family of this problem." again, I probably don't hear the good stuff like that he says trying to actually read some of his recent letters/speeches now

Friend: yeah, I know he made a speech about it when he came to the US

Me: he's the first pope to ever meet with sex abuse victims, that's a huge wall to break down

Friend: I wish I could find the text of his speech, I just found this, which is Catholic News Service: http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0802072.htm

not exactly unbiased, but a start

Me: here's that speech: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2008/april/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20080416_bishops-usa_en.html

Friend: good find

Friend: okay, so it's about two paragraphs of the whole thing. they're good of course, the question is, is it enough? but it's something

Me: so, in this speech, as well as in his recent letter to the Irish Bishops, he constantly says (paraphrase) "YOU need to have better relationships with your diocese...etc."

Friend: yeah, he's not talking about it as his job, but his job to shepherd them in doing it right

Me: it was especially noticeable in his letter to the Irish: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2010/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20100319_church-ireland_en.html

Friend: I don't think at this point that he's trying to pass it off

Me: he's trying to get them to do the right thing I think

Friend: yes

Me: but it seems like he's trying to do it without taking responsibility for leading them into doing it it seems he's saying "you should do this" instead of "I am going to make sure this doesn't happen anymore"

Friend: yeah, again, I'm not sure whether that is passing it off, or legitimately acknowledging that it's their job. i think some of that has to do with hierarchy and bureacracy

Me: maybe i'm too in love with Obama, who has made every problem a personal goal of his to change, lol

Friend: hahah I know. but I see whta you mean, too. we want to hear him make it more of a personal goal for him, himself. very interesting

I actually have to go now

The Pope is the Victim?

'Ratzinger's personal preacher likened accusations against the pope and the Catholic church in the sex abuse scandal to "collective violence" suffered by the Jews.' - you know...the same violence that Ratzinger inflicted as a member of the Nazi party. How shameful for the Pope or anyone around him to play the victim and try to identify with victims that actually suffered under his hand as a member of the Nazi party.

Any person with half a Christian heart knows that the victims are the children who suffered. If the Pope and his cronies would grow a pair and take charge of the problem, they might earn back some respect. But so far, what a disgraceful group of people over in Rome.

Why is he the Pope?

Either the Pope lied and covered up sex abuse, or he failed in his job to rid the church of sex Abuse - a task for which he was specifically brought to Rome by JPII. The church claims that Ratzinger knew nothing about the alleged abuse reports when he Headed the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, which begs the question - if he was not aware of the most critical issue facing his Church in centuries, an issue he was specifically tasked to resolve, why is he the Pope?