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]