Can a teaching pope get his house in order?

Has the Holy See ever thought of a professional P.R. firm. A good one? This Pope has much to offer. At least, people should be required to vet their speeches befor they put their foot in their mouths.

You ask - "is his lofty teaching -- what he sees as his real legacy -- destined to remain buried under an avalanche of crisis and dysfunction?"

Lofty, intellectual teaching is irrelevant if words are empty, and action is missing. As someone noted in a column somewhere, one doesn't need an advanced degree in theology to know that raping children is wrong.

Benedict could have turned this around if he had felt the horror in his bones. But he, along with most of the priests who hold high-level positions in the church, have no intuitive understanding of this, which is why they don't react as normal people would to the press criticism. As an academic, an intellectual who has spent almost his entire life in an intellectual ivory tower, surrounded by mostly celibate males, removed from the normal life lived by almost everyone else in the world, he seems to have no intuitive understanding of the impact and horror of the sexual abuse on tens of thousands of children and young teen-agers, and on their families and friends, and probably their spouses and children (if they were able to put themselves together to live more or less normal lives). The victims, including the families and friends, are probably in the hundreds of thousands.

To a casual observer, Benedict's concern seems primarily with the "failure" of priests who could not "live up to their vows," and not with the victims. He spares a few minutes to talk with a few victims, but only after the media roar could no longer be ignored.

If he truly wanted to "fix" Rome's image and his own, he could do a couple of simple things to demonstrate his conversion of heart (the marvelous intellectual ponderings of his head are meaningless when he doesn't have any understanding of real life).

1. Remove Cardinal Law from his various prestigious posts and send him to work in an inner city parish somewhere. A poverty-stricken third world village without electricity or running water, infested with disease, and with a maternal and child mortality rate that is several times greater than in the west, would be perfect. But, given his age, perhaps a parish in a poverty-stricken area of a city in Europe would do.

2. Ask for resignations from those prelates whose track records are among the worst. There are plenty to go around, he could pick a dozen or so. And transfer the bishops who assisted Law. Instead of being "demoted" or marginalized, as was Thomas Doyle, and Geoffrey Robinson (who waited until after retirement to speak out), Rome promoted those who advised and assisted Law in Boston - made them bishops, perhaps on the path to cardinal.

"After five years, it’s clear that Benedict is not interested in the nuts and bolts of internal ecclesiastical administration, and the people he trusts to make the trains run on time have what might be politely described as a spotty record."

When St. Bernard of Clairvaux was asked which of three candidates for pope--a holy man, a scholarly man and a prudent man--should be elected, St. Bernard said, "Let the holy man pray, the scholarly man study and let the prudent man be pope." Clearly, Benedict XVI is the scholarly man. He can write books and encyclicals well, but he does not have the administration part of the job down.

Some of his subordinates--Cardinals Bertrone, Sodano and Castrillon Hoyos--have have helped create this mess. (To be fair, even Jesus had problems with his hand-picked men.) If we look at great American presidents, especially George Washington and FDR, they had the uncanny ability to surround themselves with very talented subordinates. Benedict has not shown that ability. Granted, some of BXVI's subordinates are leftover from John Paul II's era. Unfortunately, in this papacy, as much as the former one, theological conservatism is more important than ability when it is time for promotion. The upper ranks of the church are filled with second rate men. Benedict needs to start finding men of ability. When people like Bernard Law and Archbishop Burke are on the bishops committee, no wonder the church is in trouble.

Steve

I think Mr. Allen should delve more deeply into why the media, which does or should know these things, is so intent on portraying the Pope in a negative light. Why the unrelenting hostility and deceptive reporting? He should perhaps ask the reporters and editors involved and then publish their response. I for one see this as a combination of simple bigotry, ideology, and an attempt to silence the Church on issues which have nothing to do with child abuse. In fact most reporting uses the children as props rather then showing any real concern for them.

I am so glad you referred to Benedict as a "teaching pope". For the past 3 or 4 years some lady friends and I have been reading/studying/discussing some of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger's books as well as his encyclicals and very naturally we compare his writing to that of JPII and time and time again we find his style much more didactic or perhaps it is that the thread of his thought is easier to follow.

We've taken to calling him, "Pope Benedict, the Great Teacher"...maybe it'll stick. I wish we taped our discussions for all the Catholic world to here, you'd all enjoy a good laugh, we're like "The Catholic View" (a take on Barbara Walter's show).

John Allen, you have spent too much time in Rome. You think just like they do.

You wrote

The sex abuse crisis happens to be the MELTDOWN DU JOUR, ...The list is depressingly long: the furor over Benedict’s September 2006 speech in Regensburg, which many Muslims took as an insult to Muhammad; the 2007 controversy over the Latin Mass and the Good Friday prayer for the conversion of Jews; comments in Brazil that same year that appeared to celebrate the forced conversion of indigenous persons; his 2009 lifting of the excommunications of four traditionalist bishops, including one who’s a Holocaust-denier; a cause célèbre related to comments en route to Africa in March 2009 suggesting that condoms make the AIDS crisis worse; the recent clamor over his decision to welcome traditionalist Anglicans into the Catholic fold;

You are equating the sexual molestation of children and young teens, which literally destroyed lives, with the pope's famous gaffes - and although all of those speeches and comments reflect a lack of understanding of the real world, they pale in comparison with horror that was caused by the complicity of the church's hierarchy in protecting sexual molesters for decades. Without the free press in the U.S. and elsewhere, these crimes would still be hidden, and bishops would still be transferring them from parish to parish, where they could find new victims.

You, like Rome, need to understand that the human devastation that the church has left in its callous wake, is more than a "meltdown du jour."

John Allen will be on the Papal Plane to Malta. This is what makes most people I know, who read NCR, very suspicious of John's objectivity in reporting on Joseph Ratzinger's tenure as Bishop of Rome. Benedict ceased being a teacher when he became a Cardinal. His thinking is backward and he is afraid of the future. He should be. Most Catholics do not trust any members of the hierarchy as a result of the secretiveness and the lack of transparency in the child sexual abuse crisis. Benedict is showing all of the signs of a man who is anything but transparent and his papacy will be remembered for the great damage he has done to both the spirit and the authentic teaching of Vatican II. He has failed on these fronts and it will be interesting to see just how objective John Allen will be in reporting this and upcoming papal visits to other countries. Let's watch and listen. I hope we will not be disappointed. John Allen wants to maintain his "insider" credentials at the Vatican so I would not expect too much.

Thank you very much, Mr. Allen. This article, like so many you have written, is of such quality as is rare today. I can always count on you to find the truth that too often gets lost in the wars between left and right. I, too, wish that the Vatican would handle these problems better, and was greatly grieved by Cardinal Bertone's imprudent comment. It is so sad that the pope's record on reforming the Church is being ignored and replaced by a misguided narrative about how he is complicit and resistant to change. God bless you.

iT is hard to know where to begin to comment on this story, not because Allen is off the mark but because there are so many marks.
A question has to be: why did the Cardinals elect him? Did they truly listen to the Holy Spirit or did they ignore him? C Ratzinger had a large target on his back before the election so what was in the minds of the Cardinals?
another question has to be, in connection with the first, ratzinger was already known as a writer -- poets are not well known for their administrative abilities.
Allen has observed that as chaotic was the papal office under John Paul II, that it seems worse now. An interesting appointment was the press secretary -- it had been a priest before because, you know, it really has to be a priest to be the day to day communicator, but no less than John Paul II broke with that tradition.
it has long been thought the cardinal secretary of state functions as the pope's prime minister -- clearly, this is another failure. a world wide concern can not be run on "feelings". Since the public presence of the catholic church will always be the head of state of the vatican, the pope, it must be clear that the pm has to be the hatchet man.
the major solace is that our founder has promised to be with us through the end of the world -- thank god.

Thank you, John. It does seem that Benedict is either very foolish - which is illogical, to say the least - or he is being a "stubborn German". (I am 50% of German background - and 25^ Swedish - so I know something about that.). I do wish that he would read some of the press. We often need to bounce our thoughts off others. No one is right 100% of the time.

Yes indeed,   a man of ironies who began as a young progressive-leaning priest and finished as a far-right conservative Pope.
.
This man of "towering intellect" has become remarkably clueless in the ordinary matters of life,   which makes him a somewhat sympathetic character in the ecclesiastical drama.     Teaching the minutiae of theology with great finesse does not necessarily translate into successful application in a complex world with messy human beings — the latter being the only place it really matters.     Books are "tidy" — human reality is not.
.
Benedict seems lost within a caricature of himself.     He will no doubt be remembered as a great theologian,   but as a pastor and pope...   not so much.

Am I reading this correctly or is this a dream---the invoking of Rudy Giuliani?--Are we being kidded? Is this a joke?
Or has John Allen been in Rome too long and is now tone deaf not to know that Rudy is the poster boy of failure--political failure but also the poster boy of political fixers whose made a fortune on 9/11. Maybe that is an apt comparison after all--Rudy and Benedict--anything is possible in our church today--Rudy of several wives, and Benedict becoming estranged from the world and retreating to his papal theological books while Rome burns. Rudy whose become fodder for the Huffington world and Benedict whose become fodder for Hitchens and Dawkins. And elsewhere we have Burke and Tobin blasting away at nuns. Time to stop reading any of this and to get on with life.

As I read John Allen's article above, I am struck by somewhat of a metaphor of the Nixon Administration. Undoubtedly, President Nixon enjoyed some significant foreign affair conquests and rightly deserved commendation for such; however, his downfall was his inability to openly address the central cause of his fall from "grace"---the Watergate Affair. The more he and his aides attempted to stall, spin, defuse Presidential involvement in and management of the debacle the more telling the severity of the crisis. His denials and sleight-of-hand efforts to derail efforts to get at the truth of the matter led to more interest in and efforts to exhaust all measures to get to the "truth" of the matter. As we all know, this led to his eventual resignation as President of the United States. I was convinced then and firmly believe now that had he faced the matter honestly, repented for his error of judgment, his redemption from disgrace would have been avoided. I believe the American people would have forgiven him and allowed him to complete his term of office. I recognize this even though I was absolutely opposed to most things that Richard Nixon stood for in his decisions for the United States. I find myself in the same position with Pope Benedict XVI---I disagree with most that he stands for and much of what he has done. His teachings are marvelous---his behaviors belie his ability to act on what he teaches. Maybe it is with him as it was with Mr. Nixon---
"Doctor heal thyself."

This is thought-provoking. But one can't be confident that the big problem is one of PR. The recent "crisis" seemingly sprang from nowhere. The other "crises" Mr. Allen mentions (the Regensberg speech, so forth) involve the Pope speaking the truth according to his own lights and standing for principle, and the world can make of them what it will. The current crisis,however, is directed at a genuine failure by the institutional Church, and is played so that any response whatsoever sounds like lame rationalization (so even the Pope's reflections on penance yesterday are written up in the New York Times in a way to imply that now the old fox is trying out some different tricks).

The whole crisis, at this juncture, seems artificial and arbitrary. Unless it should turn out that Cardinal Ratzinger was somehow personally (or officially) culpably negligent in the original Munich case,nothing new or current has been revealed: no ongoing instances of child molestation, no ongoing attempts to cover up the sins of the Church. The whole effect (I dare not say intention) is the personal discrediting of Joseph Ratzinger. Each instance, as it comes up, is shown to be based on misinterpretation or misinformation--but the machinery of the "crisis" rolls on. And, who knows, maybe if we turn over enough rocks, l eventually something will slither out.

Mr. Allen berates Cardinal Bertone for drawing a link between pedophilia (here, the debauching of pre-teen boys) and homosexuality--a bad PR move, it seems. Peggy Noonan, in her most recent prissy lecture to the hierarchy , mocks some poor bishop who actually did make a distinction between pedophilia and homosexual attraction to adolescents. And meanwhile Deal Hudson thinks the whole solution is for the bishops to flagellate themselves for knowingly ordaining homosexuals . I doubt that J. Walter Thompson, William Bernbach, and Donny Deutsch, combined could come up with an effective PR response to all this.

One would like to think that the truth will come out in time. But this may not be the way things work. The popular historical view of things is often an oversimplification of the more sensationalist contemporary journalistic reports. So Pius XII cheered on the holocaust, and Benedict XVI, if not a pedophile himself (compare MSNBC) covered up and collaborated in the abuse of children. Fair-minded people, of course, are capable of acknowledging obvious truths: Pius was perhaps the only world statesman of the time even to lift a finger to concern himself with the fate of the Jews; and Benedict took actual steps to address the abuse of children by priests. But it will be bad taste to give too much attention to minor truths of this sort: it will show lack of concern about genocide, and about the sexual mistreatment of children.

Mr. Allen is right that the Pope is one of the great teaching Popes. However the evidence the he adduces to illustrate this does not necessarily mean great teaching: public and editorial approval. There have been great teachings by Popes which were not well received by the public/new editors. Great teaching by a Pope means an explanation of and defense of the patrimony of the Faith. The great failing of this Pontificate is an inherited failure which commenced with Bl John XXIII's medicine of mercy approach to dissent, disobedience, and heresy. That has been a failure and has allowed the Church to be hurt and infiltrated by false teaching and moral turpitude. Pope Paul exacerbated this by demoting the Holy Office and making a diplomatic office supreme in the Curia, the Secretary of State, and Ven John Paul II by and large continued the same line. The munus of the Pope as a bishop is to teach, govern, and sanctify. Recent Popes including the present Pontiff and emphasized teaching and sanctifying. Governance has atrophied. The Pope is both Bishop of Rome and Bishop of the Catholic Church. There are some things only he can do.

I am beginning to think that NCR needs a new Rome correspondent. Mr. Allen seems to have crossed over into being an "insider" on Vatican affairs. I find it interesting his criteria for evaluating Benedict's papacy have very little to do with his pastoral leadership, his ability to lead the Church of Christ in these very difficult times. His bishops, especially those in the U. S. are hardly known for their spiritual leadership; most seem primarily interested in higher church office in Rome. Clearly, the age of the laity is upon us. We need to mobilize and take up seriously our mission of bringing Christ's good news to our broken world. It seems the hierarchy has little or no interest in this.....

I think the Pope is one of the greatest intellects of our day. In addition to this, he has a most comprehensive and global perspective on the world, not to mention the afterlife, and the purpose of man. In light of this, and the nature of his mission, he is bound to say things that disturb people. Let's not forget that Jesus, Himself, was crucified! The Pope's books are on the shelves at the major bookstores, not just religious bookstores, which leads me to believe that that there are a large number of people, many who aren't even Catholics, who are interested in what the Pope has to say.

With regards to getting the house in order, he seems to have done a good job, but is unfortunatley now tasked with explaining how the house got dirty over the last several decades. Where did the dirt come from? The Church has obviously changed from when I was little. The tabernacle containing the Eucharist is often no longer on, or directly behind the altar. Confessionals have been removed from some churches. Were these wise decisions? And if you arrive early to mass, you often see very few people praying. And yet if our Church is in such dire straits, why not pray for it before Mass? There is much that the average Catholic can do to help get our Church back on course. Let's help our Pope!

I think the Pope is one of the greatest intellects of our day. In addition to this, he has a most comprehensive and global perspective on the world, not to mention the afterlife, and the purpose of man. In light of this, and the nature of his mission, he is bound to say things that disturb people. Let's not forget that Jesus, Himself, was crucified! The Pope's books are on the shelves at the major bookstores, not just religious bookstores, which leads me to believe that that there are a large number of people, many who aren't even Catholics, who are interested in what the Pope has to say.

With regards to getting the house in order, he seems to have done a good job, but is unfortunatley now tasked with explaining how the house got dirty over the last several decades. Where did the dirt come from? The Church has obviously changed from when I was little. The tabernacle containing the Eucharist is often no longer on, or directly behind the altar. Confessionals have been removed from some churches. Were these wise decisions? And if you arrive early to mass, you often see very few people praying. And yet if our Church is in such dire straits, why not pray for it before Mass? There is much that the average Catholic can do to help get our Church back on course. Let's help our Pope!

Irony has absolutely nothing to do with the situation we are looking at in our Church. To suggest irony is to suggest distance. Distance from the situation of the sexually abused---outsiders in your purview---has been precisely the dilemma. Insider/outsider dichotomies are the problem. Benedict is the Pope. He has responsibility. He is not acting that way---he seems to be joining you in the ironic arguments. Such a perspective is NOT ONE of a shepherd---more wolfish I think. Much more wolfish.

Dear John, anyone who writes, in direct contradiction to Jesus, as Benedict does in "Jesus of Nazareth," that only Jesus has the right to call God "father" because Jesus was "God" and we aren't, that Catholicism is the one true religion because "God" founded it, and that women can't be priests (in direct contradiction to St. Paul and Hebrews) solely because of their gender, is not a "towering theologian" as you put it. Nor is someone who deliberately adopts the rhetoric of the Protestant fundamentalist American right in claiming to "defend the family" when they mean and intend, not to defend any family, but to continue to oppress gays and lesbians and deny them basic human rights. The problem is not with public relations as you argue. The problem is with substance, adherence to an outdated and oppressive theology and an outdated institution that deliberately enforces such a theology claiming, falsely, that it is "God-ordained" when, in fact, it is nothing but hoary cultural prejucice. Jesus condemned the Pharisees who preferred their "traditions" to the common sense suggestions of Spirit. He would likewise condemn Benedict and his curia, your defense of them notwithstanding.

Surely the problems with the church's structures of governance go a great deal deeper than simply trying to put together a less inept public relations machine. Who, among those in high places, has yet shown the courage and the integrity to face up to the question of how much the structures of governance themselves may have contributed to the severity of the sex scandals? The Vatican -- and most bishops, it would seem -- give the impression of being a group of aging men who listen to none but themselves, relying only on those who are like-minded to confirm their views of the world, views that to many others, Catholic and otherwise, seem narrow and warped.
It is very true, as Sodano and other say, that the pope should ignore petty gossip; but what if that petty gossip comes from the inner circles of his advisers? (e.g., the views of "media conspiracies" and the like).

Thank you, John, for this clear, interesting, insightful and balanced analysis of Pope Benedict's ironies.

As a liberal Catholic, I was disheartened when Ratzinger was elected, and was surprised early on when he seemed to be a better pope than some. He did not, for instance, initiate the avalanche of excommunications that his previous record from his time at the CDF would predict. He disciplined Fr. Maciel, a step his predecessor would not take. His first encyclical appeared balanced and and sound enough that I purchased it at the bookstore. But then, the Regensbrug incident happened,among other things. And the sexual abuse crisis, which, when you look at the record, Benedict has been addressing, although ineffectively. This papacy has for me been one of confusion.

The Vatican needs to realize it is hard for anyone to even hear a message, much less recieve it, if people roll thie eyes everytime the messenger speaks, because they have come to expect him to say something offensive or irrelevant. Effective PR is not just about "spin," which seems to be what a lot of people think. Effective PR is about effectively communicating a message in a way that makes people more likely to receive it. Effective PR enhances the credibillity of the messenger. It is unfortunate that regardless of how sound Pope Benedict's teaching may be, or his reaction the sex abuse crisis, people have not been recognizing it because of his lack of effectively publicizing the message.

"TOWERING THEOLOGIAN" NOT...
The problem is with substance, adherence to an OUTDATED AND OPPRESIVE THEOLOGY and an outdated MID-EVIL MALE HIERARCHY. An institution that deliberately enforces such a theology claiming, falsely, that it is "God-ordained" when, in fact, it is nothing but hoary cultural prejucice. Jesus condemned the Pharisees who preferred their "traditions" to the common sense suggestions of Spirit. He would likewise condemn Benedict and his curia, your defense of them notwithstanding.
Thank you John D. for your input.
VATICAN III or REFORMATION II long overdue !!
In the meantime I watch from the CONFORT, LOVE and COMMUNITY received in the BODY & BLOOD at my neighborhood ELCA-Evengelical Lutheran Church of America.
I pray for PENTECOST and HOLY SPIRIT to reclaim Catholic Church.
BLESSINGS TO ALL....

Benedict XVI is GREAT! TRULY GREAT! I was thrilled to read that some of our Catholic people are great enough to recognize his greatness. God help us if any of his criticizers were in such a powerful position!

I don't take it for granted one bit that Benedict XVI is a "towering intellectual". I know it's been said a lot, but that does not make it true. How could you possibily live and promote such an inherently conflicted life and philosophy, and be a "towering intellectual"?

This Pope and John Paul II have tried to throw the Church back to a time before Pius IX for crying out loud.

Your comment makes sense but there will be people who have ears but refuse to listen and eyes but refuse to see.
This crisis is the eternal conflict between good and evil.We stand with Christ or against Him.
Currently His Vicar is Benedict 16. He is a gentle natured scholar.The Holy Spirit continues to guide our beloved Church. If the Vatican loses the PR battle in the eyes of the world it will not change the ultimate outcome the gates of hell shall never prevail against the Church despite our human weaknesses and frailties It will survive because Jesus promised it would and He never breaks His promises.

This crisis possibly is also about the roleand identity of The Church as primarily a spiritual power verses a policing , punishing worldly agent , like any other secular power !

True, the bishops should have used all out spiritual warfare tactics , with every instant of even suspected abuse, called out the whole parish and diocese to join etc :; we read how the Holy Father had wanted the priest in California, to be treated diligently , considering his young age and if the Bishop had embraced the time honored teachings of Church in what is diligent treatment of such , then may be we would have had a whole lot of repentant powerful men who would have been there to help a lot more persons out there for the world too !

Yet,we not need to put all the blame just on the bishops either !

The Church as a Body had become sick and weak and bleeding, yes esp. through all the burden of sin, in areas of sexual immorality , among laity , even pious laity, through use of contraception, even abortions !

Thus may be the enemy who got in its foothold , could not be easliy expelled !

And this may be the right time , for the full arsenal of dealing with these to be employed - a raising of conscience of abuse at all levels , including abuse against unborn, the elderly, women , the poor so that all the little ones who are abused, all those who need to make themselves little, for sake of mercy would all be brought in, like those ash particles being washed off into the ocean , into His mercy !

The noise and lightenings are good happenings , to release the ash , in many hearts !

It is in the midst of loss of temporal power that Pope Pius 1X was blessed to proclaim the Dogma of Immculate Conception and papal infallibilty , to serve as light houses , for the faithful !

May be all these seeming loss of popularity and labor pains are to help The Church onto the next vista of truths - more Father honor and glory and the Mother presence , for every life, by inviting her in as Mother of all, by the acceptance of the 5th Dogma !

United to the powerful heavenly intercession of Pope John Paul 11, such may be the means to drive off all the smoke !

Thank you, John, for the continuing thoughtful, thorough and provocative reporting and observations.

Two thoughts: what you point out as dysfunction in communications makes it painful and challenging to be "Catholic" today. I abhor both the narrow-minded hypocrisy and tone deafness that come from the hierarchy in general.

Still, the faithful seem more durable than ever. Note Nicholas Kristof's great piece in Sunday's NYT in reference to this. This bespeaks a "wind blowing".

The real tragedy here it seems is the terrible reduction in what could be significant contributions from a brilliant and very spiritual pope. Is it possible he could "get out more", see what the real world is like? Even very smart people need guidance, no?

Steve Schulte
Los Angeles

BXVI is NOT a theologian. Certainly not a "towering intellect." Disastrous pope, yes. I agree with commentator John Dioro about the spiritual, intellectual POVERTY of his Jesus of Nazareth book. Pope BXVI "doesn't have a clue on any deep understanding of Jesus's message." Indeed his strange book(s) and his devious and destructive papacy confirm he is NOT a theologian, or a scholar. Jesus is absent from his book and from his papacy. Lots of Church Father stuff instead. This pope abuses women, men and children, and only shills for fellow clerics and their entitlements.