Here’s something you don’t see everyday. Amid all of the British detractors, Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s Scott Stephens has written a stunning defense of Pope Benedict XVI. It’s a welcome surprise not only because it comes from a secular source, but also for its accuracy.
Among some of the highlights, Stephens writes, “Surrounded by ill-wishers within and without, Benedict has nonetheless remained unflappable, even resolute. When asked by journalists aboard the papal plane how the Church could become more attractive to Britons in the face of an especially virulent strain of chic British atheism, the pope said ‘a Church that seeks to be particularly attractive is already on the wrong path, because the Church does not work for her own ends, she does not work to increase numbers and thus power. The Church is at the service of another ... she serves to make the proclamation of Jesus Christ accessible.’”
Stephens continues, “Benedict’s pastoral resolve could not provide a more striking contrast to the hysterical posturing and outright mercenary opportunism displayed by his high-profile detractors - of whom Geoffrey Robertson QC is but the latest example.”
“My complaint against Geoffrey Robertson is that he has indicted the wrong man,” writes Stephens. “He seems to have allowed himself to be swept along by the fashionable tide of anti-Catholic jingoism. Had he not, perhaps he would have recognised that, for all of his failings and inadequacies, no one in the Catholic Church has done so much to secure justice and healing for victims of sexual abuse, to punish the guilty and the bishops who were complicit in their crimes, and to lead the Church into sincere penitence and renewal, than has Pope Benedict XVI.”
Hat tip to John Paul the Great University’s professor Michael Barber at the Sacred Page for drawing attention to this article. It’s well worth taking the time to read.
Comments
Post a Comment
I’m afraid the ABC has been caught up in “religious correctness”. Must not hurt believers’ feelings.
You reproduce the vacuous praise of Benedict based on his having done better than unnamed others in the Church. That is like being the fastest runner in the Seniors Over-75 Marathon, given that those to whom he would be compared are such as Law, Sodano, Castrillon Hoyos, Danneels, etc., etc. His posture as “unflappable, even resolute” is better described as inert. His efforts “to punish….the bishops [and above?] who were complicit” remain less notable than his refusal of Irish resignations, chastising the Austrian cardinal, deploring the Belgian crime investigation, and dismissively attributing the fuss to “chiacchiericcio (gossip)”. What we do see every day leaves room for improvement.
I really like the quote by Benedict. Thank you for the article!
Jack, do your homework. Pope Benedict is anything but inert. You imply that someone above the bishops must be punished. I’m honestly not sure how Pope Benedict would punish Christ, let alone why He should. I’m sure, of course, that you meant Pope Benedict himself, but he is a bishop, and he is guilty of nothing. The Church hierarchy is not analogous to a major corporation, allowing you to punish the CEO for the sins of other executives. Your fingerpointing would be more similar to blaming for the actions of a US governor.
If the Holy Father had accepted Irish resignations, he would have been accused of letting them off too easy. By rejecting them, he is instead accused of ignoring their offenses. No, rather, he is letting them live with the consequences and learn the hard way how to deal with the problems.
The events surrounding Cardinal Schönborn’s comments were confidential, so I don’t know how you presume to know what happened. I suppose you’re just guessing based on your prejudices.
The Belgian investigation was carried out illegally and without any regard for the privacy rights of victims. If you think the state has the right to violate ethics, then you believe the ends (dubious as they are) justify the means, an awful fallacy.
Face it: Pope Benedict XVI is the best man for the job. You may hate the Church or have gripes with the bishops, but you simply can’t provide anything Pope Benedict has done wrong.
Pope Benedict XVI, we love you!
A bit of homework, Micah, would show that, above those commonly called bishops, there are some known as archbishops and three levels of cardinal, who may be bishops also. The Church distinguishes these by title, rank, duties, and privileges. That’s before one gets to the unique bishop called Pope with “the full power of shepherding, ruling and governing the universal Church”, as John Paul II explained (Feb 24 1993 Gen. Aud.). Thus, “bishops [and above?]”
It does the Pope a disservice to guess that his motive in refusing the two Irish bishops’ resignations was to allow them continuing education at the expense of their flocks. They had judged themselves unfit to continue in office due to neglect in abuse matters. He must have had some better private reason for choosing not to act.
An unusually explicit communique from the Vatican press Office/VIS on June 28, 2010, reports on the meeting of the Pope and Cdl Shonbron and its results. It leaves no doubt that the Cardinal was put in his place, publicly.
In evolving Belgian events, the important difference between state ethics and individual ethics needs to be recognized. The ends of state and individual are different, and, therefore, ethical differences are necessary and licit. (The death penalty is a simple illustration. 1994 Catechism #2266)
I read that article, but most of the comments seemed anti catholic to me. Mind you, some were anti Christian as well as everything else.
1 TIMOTHY 6:1-10
The New American Bible
Alcohol,abuse of:381,401
United States Catholic Catechism for Adults
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.