What remains to be said about recent claims of Papal "cover-ups" concerning allegations of sexual abuse by members of the clergy in Europe or America, except that the truth will always prevail over seriously flawed narratives? In the cases at hand, segments of the secular press, fortunately, have censured their own for what has the appearances, at least, of one major newspaper’s relentlessly spearheading a host of baseless charges, curiously raised during the most sacred season of the Christian calendar; namely, Eastertime.
Thus, New York’s Daily News, on 3 April, asked in an editorial: "What exactly did then-Cardinal Ratzinger do wrong?" His office approved the trial [of a particular perpetrator], the News noted, and he waived the ordinary limitations. "Those are not," it concluded, "the makings of a coverup."
Also, in commenting on the Pope’s action in response to a fresh allegation in the German weekly Die Welt (reflecting a New York Times report that the Pope and Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone declined to respond to appeals from the Archbishop of Milwaukee about a priest in the late 1990s), The New York Times somehow ignored documentary evidence contrary to its own reports.
Most fair-minded people, it appears, view the anti-Papal charges as part of a severe culture war; the Church stands squarely in the way of those who would compel the Western world to accept abortion, gay marriage and homosexual behavior. In this collision, publicized, scandalous failings of a few priests are being used as weapons against all priests and the Church. Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the Dean of the College of Cardinals, used the phrase "culture clash" recently in the Vatican journal, L’Osservatore Romano. Pope Benedict, he explained, "embodies moral verities that are not accepted." Such verities, generically enumerated above, are, specifically, the sanctity of every human life from the moment of conception, the sanctity of human sexuality, and the sanctity of marriage as an institution created by God. What is there about these objectives that would engender outrage from so many?
Various Web sites throughout the world have been countering erroneous reports of anything resembling a Papal cover-up. One of the most instructive is the carefully structured rebuttal of Cardinal William Levada, who heads the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Point by point, Cardinal Levada offers evidence that Benedict, prior to his election as Pope, had been a leader in combating the problem of abuse. In fact, Archbishop Levada served as the head of an American archdiocese when reports of abusive clergy emerged in this country. At the time, he stresses, Cardinal Ratzinger supported the American bishops in formulating their specific guidelines for investigating and disciplining wayward clerics. For The Times to dismiss such evidence, the Cardinal said, amounts to "rushing to a verdict" based on an "anachronistic conflation."
A careful reading of any one of The Times’s articles attacking the Pope for alleged refusal or protective delay in proceeding against reports of clerical abuse, can hardly give rise to a creditable case. Assailing the Holy Father by pointing to a single piece of correspondence that allows for several interpretations can hardly be described as evidence against him. Likewise, a series of documents devoid of context. Questions about translations of documents have also arisen. For example, a writer for one Italian journal points to what he sees as "a gross translation mistake," apparently resulting from the use of a computer. (Recall the Italian adage: Traduttore; traditore ("A translator is a traitor").
Of all the secular newspapers and Web sites recently, The Wall Street Journal should be credited with mounting a fair defense of the Pope. An informed article by William McGurn on 6 April argues convincingly that Cardinal Ratzinger did more than anyone to hold abusers accountable.
Indeed, the underlying motivation for the sustained assaults on the Pope is quite enigmatic, even given the obvious hostility toward the Church on the part of the secular world in general. New York City’s former Mayor Ed Koch’s comments should be taken seriously: "I believe the continuing attacks by the media on the Roman Catholic Church and Pope Benedict XVI have become manifestations of anti-Catholicism." Mayor Koch went so far as to say that some articles display malice, owing to rejection of certain Catholic ethical positions, including abortion, gay sexual behavior, gay marriage, the ordination only of men, clerical celibacy, civil divorce and contraceptive sexuality.
Catholics are called to be signs of contradiction. When the world goes wrong, Catholics must continue to persevere in holding to and living by the Scriptures as read within the Church. Throughout history Catholics have been challenged to take a stand "against the world" (a phrase associated with St. Athanasius, when almost the entire fourth-century Western world slipped into Arianism). In the past, positions at odds with the Bible and reason have been propagated largely with political and economic pressure as well as imprisonment, torture or death. Today certain of the secular media have joined in the opposition, and moreso than before it seems, segments of academia.
In condemning the horrifying behavior of some clerics, we gladly stand with the Holy Father in our common efforts to rid society from the scourge of abuse, and to safeguard and assist the victims thereof. According to The Times’s Web site, there currently are 39 million victims of childhood sexual abuse in the United States. Forty to 60 per cent were victimized by a family member; five per cent by school teachers; less than two per cent, allegedly, by Catholic clergy. The problem is obviously societal.
