Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens have launched in their latest crusade by seeking to indict the Pope. It’s not the humourless arrogance that I mind; rather it’s the muddling up of issues and the ignorance of the law.
Contrary to what Dawkins and Hitchens (and Monbiot) argue, putting the Pope on the dock will not bring any justice. The accusation of crime against humanity is not based on the Pope’s direct action or complicity in crimes. The responsibility for child abuse rests with the perpetrators and with those organisations, in this case, the dioceses that have aided the crime or failed to stop it. If there are cases where the Pope is directly responsible, they would be a matter for the national courts, not for an international criminal court. A head of state, such as the Pope, has no legal responsibility for his citizens, unless s/he is directly implicated. We would not hold the Queen or the Prime Minister accountable for the criminal behaviour of British citizens in the UK or abroad.
The issue for the Pope is not a legal one, but a moral one. The Vatican has lost its moral authority. They are feeling the heat and act as the victims of the media in a secularised society. As a result, not a day goes by without some ludicrous statement is made to be then is retracted or clarified. First, Father Raniero Cantalamessa, the Pope’s preacher, likened the media’s treatment of the Catholic Church to anti-Semitism; then Babini, Bishop of Grosseto, called the media’s criticism of the Vatican a ‘Zionist attack’ and blamed the Jews for the holocaust, and now Cardinal Bertone blames child abuse on homosexuality.
It is saddening and depressing to see members of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church displaying such ignorance, prejudice and bad taste. Pope Benedict XVI’s reign has so far been embarrassing and perhaps the first one where the Pope had to say ‘sorry’ left, right and centre. The Vatican is being reprimanded by heads of state (France and Germany), not just the media. This is, however, not the result of our 'secularised' society, but of a moralised society where human rights are finally recognised and cherished and where accountability is demanded from all authorities.
The Pope is sorry, but he’s not showing moral leadership. The changes in child abuse policy are welcomed but they are too little too late as ever. A brave Pope would understand the times, the call for accountability and initiate a Concilium for the renewal of Catholicism, for a rethink of Church doctrine, and for an increased participation of Catholics to Vatican politics and policies. That would take courage and humility, the same courage and humility Pope John XXIII had. I’m not holding my breath for Vatican III.
11 comments:
The cuirrent incumbent was the sidekick to the last one. He gave (long term interest free loan) $2 billion to the Croatian Nazis on condidion that they said they wouldn't spend it on genocide. They did & as he clearly expected, they did. Then the Vatican provided weaponry, including ground to air missiles, to the equally openly genocidal KLA.
The Pope is unquestionably an onscene, corrupt Nazi war criminal involved in racial genocide, child rape & organlegging. Bit like the members of the LibDem party then.
Personally I think emulating Hitler at genocide is a bad thing but I couldn't expect you to agree.
such a concentrate of ignorant idiocy in just one comment!
Well spotted the article about Child Abuse & Homosexuality.
While this is the links drawn by the ignorant, those with some experience of child protection recognise that Paedophiles will choose to put themselves in positions of authority and beyond approach, like a member of the cloth, nowt to do with Homosexuality!
"That would take courage and humility, the same courage and humility Pope John XXIII had."
Huh? All I know about John 23 is he meddled in HRE politics so much he eventually got exiled from Rome to Avignon. Why is he a standard to aspire to in particular?
Indeed Francis, but since you made no attempt to intorduce any knowledge into your remark the reliance on ignorance can be no surprise.
You clearly know everything I said is 100% true but being a Nazi supporter of war crimes, genocide & worse you would look bad admitting it.
The only thing that is clear is that you didn't understand my post. I certainly did not defend the Pope. My post was not an analysis of his personal record, of which the worst was his role in South America rather than his youth in Germany. My argument was for renewal of Catholicism the way Pope John XXIII did. However, as I'm not a Catholic, I'm not particularly concerned.
John XXIII called the Second Vatican Council in 1962 revolutionising Catholicism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_John_XXIII
I never mentioned "his youth in Germany" either. If he committed genocide in South America that is deplorable but should be proven.
He is most certainly not responsible for genocide nor is he a supporter of Nazi war crimes. In fact, he's not even responsible for the child abuse cases in the Catholic Church (unless directly involved). Dioceses are independent. Antireligious intolerance is just that: intolerance.
I take it you claim he isn't Pope either & any evidence that he is will simply be ignored.
Next thing you will be telling us the LibDems never supported criminal wars & with equal credibility that the LibDem party members aren't all organlegging child rapits?
Hi Francesca! I agree the pope and catholicism need to renew their commitment to moral leadership, and to accept accountability.
I think the pope was directly involved in the cover up of child abuse tho, and protected the abusers by moving them to new areas. This is rightly a scandal.
I think that is why Dawkins has taken up this issue of making the pope accountable for his actions (as historically the pope has been immune). Questioning the pope in this way will hopefully encourage him to question his actions and so become a better leader.
BTW the lib dems are great! Good luck in the election xx
Post a Comment