Should The Pope Resign?

[The Happy Humanist]

OK, so Joey Ratzinger gets elevated to "Pope Ratzo I", despite having been in the Hitler Youth, and despite having turned a blind eye to the philanderings of several clerics on his watch. I mean, think about just this one story...
A priest (!) raped (!!) 200 (!!!) deaf (!!!!) boys(!!!!!)
Can we take it, from Ratzo's inaction (and continuation in the Shoes of the Fisherman), that the Catholic Church is OK with homosexuality, priests violating their oath of celibacy, and the serial rape of handicapped children? What other conclusion can we come to?

[fredonly]

I am honestly astounded that so many people say the Pope should resign immediately, not waiting for more information. This strikes me as a lynching based on superficial media reports. I certainly acknowledge that the worst may be true, but this is far from being proven at this point. But help me understand, what is the specific crime that you are so thoroughly convinced he committed that leads you to vote "resign now."?

For most leaders in governments and industry, the level of suspicion and accusations now being leveled at the pontiff would lead them to resign at least until their name has been properly cleared.

The church is not a government and is not industry. No Pope has ever resigned, its a job you get for life. There is no liturgical method for him TO resign, and certainly no method for him to do so temporarily.

Pope Benedict accepted the resignation of Bishop Roger Joseph Vangheluwe of Bruges, Belgium who is 73 and steps down two years before the normal resignation age of 75, after he admitted to abusing a young man decades ago. So this self-confessed criminal faces the humiliation of having his sins known and gets to retire two years early. He should be behind bars.

Agreed - Vangheluwe should be behind bars. You have mentioned no wrong doing by the Pope, so what's the relevance?

In a related story, Benedict also lifted the excommunication of Bishop Richard Williamson, a Holocaust-denying bishop in 2009.

"Related"? In what way? Is it that you think he made a bad decision? You think the Pope should reflect on this decision, realize what a goof it was, and decide to resign because of it?!

He also decided to revive a Good Friday prayer for the conversion of Jews.

Again, you think he should reflect on this decision, finally see it your way, and conclude he's unfit for Pope-dom? Really, he didn't write the prayer - it's apparently part of their liturgy, and seems pretty harmless - unless you think the prayer will be effective. It's certainly consistent with the belief of all Christians that the Jews are wrong for failing to accept the divinity of Jesus.

Earlier in April, the pontiff's personal preacher compared the attacks on the church to anti-Semitism, though the priest later apologized.

You've got to be kidding. THIS is a reason the Pope should resign? Because someone else used some inappropriate hyperbole?!

Benedict last year said that condom distribution "increases the problem" of AIDS during his first papal trip to Africa.

I disagree with the asinine statement as much as anyone, but the Pope didn't create new doctrine here - he repeated the Catholic view that dates back to Augustine. You are suggesting he should resign for FAILING to change a longstanding doctrine of the Church. Nice try.

[fredonly]

OK, so Joey Ratzinger gets elevated to "Pope Ratzo I", despite having been in the Hitler Youth, and despite having turned a blind eye to the philanderings of several clerics on his watch. I mean, think about just this one story...

If the pope broke laws, I think he should go to jail. If he was personally involved with transferring known pedophile priests rather than dealing with them appropriately, then I will join the bandwagon. BUT all we have before us is accusations, and only a lynch mob convicts people because of accusations.

A priest (!) raped (!!) 200 (!!!) deaf (!!!!) boys(!!!!!)
Can we take it, from Ratzo's inaction (and continuation in the Shoes of the Fisherman), that the Catholic Church is OK with homosexuality, priests violating their oath of celibacy, and the serial rape of handicapped children? What other conclusion can we come to?

If you're in the habit of jumping to absurd conclusions, there are a great many alternative ones you could also jump to.

I'm not defending bad behavior, but I do lament the fact that so many people in the general public (and on this forum) have the attitude of "guilty until proven innocent." Do you guys believe everything you read? Are newspaper articles the equivalent of hard evidence? I voted, "waiting for more info" NOT that he "acted responsibly" - this seemed the only rational choice.

[McCulloch]

The church is not a government and is not industry. No Pope has ever resigned, its a job you get for life. There is no liturgical method for him TO resign, and certainly no method for him to do so temporarily.

Are you saying that if the Pope lost his marbles and was completely incapable of doing his job, he would still remain as Pope? If he lost his faith and decided to become a Mormon, a Methodist or a Muslim, he would remain on as Pope? If he were convicted of a crime, he would remain on as Pope from prison?

Agreed - Vangheluwe should be behind bars. You have mentioned no wrong doing by the Pope, so what's the relevance?

You and I agree. Does Benedict? Should he not indicate to the Belgian authorities that he would not hinder any prosecution?

"Related"? In what way? Is it that you think he made a bad decision? You think the Pope should reflect on this decision, realize what a goof it was, and decide to resign because of it?!

Only related in that it shows the man's lack of moral authority.

He also decided to revive a Good Friday prayer for the conversion of Jews.

Again, you think he should reflect on this decision, finally see it your way, and conclude he's unfit for Pope-dom? Really, he didn't write the prayer - it's apparently part of their liturgy, and seems pretty harmless - unless you think the prayer will be effective. It's certainly consistent with the belief of all Christians that the Jews are wrong for failing to accept the divinity of Jesus.

I guess that it is the prerogative of any Pope to thwart any ecumenical understanding.

I disagree with the asinine statement as much as anyone, but the Pope didn't create new doctrine here - he repeated the Catholic view that dates back to Augustine. You are suggesting he should resign for FAILING to change a longstanding doctrine of the Church. Nice try.

You're right, the Pope should stay on. The longer he stays, the poorer the RC church will be, both in terms of donations and membership. Long live Benedict!

[fredonly]

The church is not a government and is not industry. No Pope has ever resigned, its a job you get for life. There is no liturgical method for him TO resign, and certainly no method for him to do so temporarily.

Are you saying that if the Pope lost his marbles and was completely incapable of doing his job, he would still remain as Pope? If he lost his faith and decided to become a Mormon, a Methodist or a Muslim, he would remain on as Pope? If he were convicted of a crime, he would remain on as Pope from prison?

You have some interesting hypotheticals there, but yes - there is no mechanism for removing him. In the past, this resulted in schisms - a loss of membership, but the Church lives on.

Agreed - Vangheluwe should be behind bars. You have mentioned no wrong doing by the Pope, so what's the relevance?

You and I agree. Does Benedict? Should he not indicate to the Belgian authorities that he would not hinder any prosecution?

The Pope HAS said they support prosecution, for example in an open letter, a section of which was to the abusers: "You betrayed the trust that was placed in you by innocent young people and their parents, and you must answer for it before Almighty God and before properly constituted tribunals." (from section 7 of: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/bened ... nd_en.html)

[The Happy Humanist]

This clip from Rachel Maddow fairly summarizes what I mean by "the crime of doing nothing."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#36748361

As you can see from the documentation available, this rises above the level of "petty gossip."

The Pope needs to answer for his inactions - or worse, his obfuscatory actions - in the cases set before him as head of the CDF. It would be unseemly for a sitting pontiff to answer a subpoena while wearing the robes of St. Peter; thus, it would be "in the best interests of the Universal Church" for him to step down before facing the music.

[fredonly]

This clip from Rachel Maddow fairly summarizes what I mean by "the crime of doing nothing."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#36748361

As you can see from the documentation available, this rises above the level of "petty gossip."

The Pope needs to answer for his inactions - or worse, his obfuscatory actions - in the cases set before him as head of the CDF. It would be unseemly for a sitting pontiff to answer a subpoena while wearing the robes of St. Peter; thus, it would be "in the best interests of the Universal Church" for him to step down before facing the music.

I agree the Pope should give a full disclosure of his actions. I don't know if it is possible to force him to answer a subpoena - in some ways he's a head of state (due to the sovereignty of Vatican City), but I think it would be good for him to provide any information requested of him.

It is unequivocally true that a number of bishops hid the problem, and perpetuated by transferring pedophile priests. Exactly what was Ratzinger's involvement remains to be seen. There are certainly allegations of involvement, but (as I've said repeatedly) an allegation is not a proof of guilt. There is (quite understandably) a lot of emotion behind those who are demanding his head. Nevertheless, I contend that facts need to be established and evaluated soberly.

Certainly the most important thing is that the Church put in place processes that prevent such things from happening in the future. They certainly seem to be doing something. Is it enough?

[The Happy Humanist]

I agree the Pope should give a full disclosure of his actions. I don't know if it is possible to force him to answer a subpoena - in some ways he's a head of state (due to the sovereignty of Vatican City), but I think it would be good for him to provide any information requested of him.

Yes, I believe that might be a good thing.

It is unequivocally true that a number of bishops hid the problem, and perpetuated by transferring pedophile priests.

But how do we know this? By what manner did we come by this information, that differs from how we've learned what we've learned about Ratzinger's involvement?

Exactly what was Ratzinger's involvement remains to be seen.

That's my point: Internal memos generally don't lie. He is alleged, by his own church's paperwork, to be involved. That's enough for me to demand his resignation.

There are certainly allegations of involvement, but (as I've said repeatedly) an allegation is not a proof of guilt.

But a lot of the bishops you say are "unequivocally" involved, we are condemning largely on the weight of the same type of paperwork.

Certainly the most important thing is that the Church put in place processes that prevent such things from happening in the future. They certainly seem to be doing something. Is it enough?

No, and I'll tell you why. Do you have any doubt that this has been going on for centuries? And only now, in obvious response to public pressure and NOT in response to any sense of moral outrage, do they "do something"? Obviously, Job #1 is "Protect The Mother Church" and not "Do What Is Right." What assurance do we have that, after this controversy dies down a century or two from now, the church will not seek more insidious and successful ways to hide this, their "dirty little secret"? [/i]

[bernee51]

No, and I'll tell you why. Do you have any doubt that this has been going on for centuries? And only now, in obvious response to public pressure and NOT in response to any sense of moral outrage, do they "do something"? Obviously, Job #1 is "Protect The Mother Church" and not "Do What Is Right." What assurance do we have that, after this controversy dies down a century or two from now, the church will not seek more insidious and successful ways to hide this, their "dirty little secret"? [/i]

Just carrying on a long tradition - how much has changed since the time of Eusebius who allegedly wrote:

"I have repeated whatever may rebound to the glory, and suppressed all that could tend to the disgrace of our religion" (Chp. 31, Book : 12 of Prae Paratio Evangelica).

"It will sometimes be necessary to use falsehood for the benefit of those who need such a mode of treatment." Eusebius of Caesarea

[Metatron]

The church is not a government and is not industry. No Pope has ever resigned, its a job you get for life. There is no liturgical method for him TO resign, and certainly no method for him to do so temporarily.

Actually, this appears to not be true.

In 1045, Pope Benedict IX agreed, for financial advantage, to resign the papacy. Pope Gregory VI, who to rid the Church of the scandalous Benedict IX had persuaded him to resign and became his successor, himself resigned in 1046 because the arrangement he had entered into was considered simoniacal; that is, to have been paid for. His successor, Pope Clement II, died in 1047 and Benedict IX became Pope again.

The best known example of the resignation of a Pope is that of Pope Celestine V in 1294. After only five months of pontificate, he issued a solemn decree declaring it permissible for a Pope to resign, and then solemnly resigned. He lived two more years as a hermit and has been canonized. The papal decree that he issued ended any doubt among canonists about the possibility of a valid papal resignation.

The last Pope to resign was Pope Gregory XII (1406-1415), who did so to end the Western Schism, which had reached the point when there were three claimants to the papal throne, Roman Pope Gregory XII, Avignon Pope Benedict XIII, and Antipope John XXIII. Before resigning he formally convened the already existing Council of Constance and authorized it to elect his successor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_resignation

[Misty]

The Pope and Catholic heirachy should resign immediately, most of them are implicated in turning a blind eye to the sexual abuse of children.