Chatter, inspiration and the pope

Q:A senior Vatican priest last week compared outrage at Pope Benedict's handling of sexual abuse scandals in the Catholic Church to the persecution of the Jews. Church leaders disavowed the comments, but went on to complain about a "vile," anti-Vatican media campaign aimed at weakening the papacy and its authority. Is the news media being fair to the pope? Is the media biased against the Catholic Church or its hierarchy? How would you advise the pope?

Anti-Catholicism most certainly does exist, but not in the way the Vatican seems to be emphasizing in its defense of the Holy Father. In fact, I would argue that the Vatican is unconsciously replicating some of the structural elements of anti-Catholicism in its criticism of the media. In any case, the whole discourse surrounding the sexual abuse scandal has become so ideologically tinged that it is difficult to find space for intelligent discussion, let alone for "the truth." Benedict XVI would be wise indeed to avoid amplifying the "chatter" surrounding charges of anti-Catholicism. Instead, the Pope might look to the example of one of his predecessors for guidance about whose voice matters most.

Many Catholics see anti-Catholicism everywhere while many non-Catholics see it nowhere at all. Anti-Catholicism of the bigoted kind should not be confused with criticism of Catholic theology or honest analysis of the historical and contemporary actions of Catholic institutions and the Catholic hierarchy. While such skeptical or suspicious approaches may indeed be anti-Catholic in the sense that they challenge some of the fundamental claims Catholicism makes about itself, they are often part of reasoned and necessary debate.

Where this kind of anti-Catholicism veers into prejudice is not easily discernible. In my own personal experience, I have found bigoted anti-Catholicism expressed in off-hand comments made to me by friends and colleagues who caricature my own Catholic identity in terms of tendentious stereotypes. The issue here is that the specificity of my own personal experiences and views as a Catholic is subordinated to a series of polemics that overly simplify Catholic views about authority, sexuality, and gender identity. There are also scholars and commentators who insist upon talking about Catholicism in a way they would never tolerate, ethically or intellectually, if another religious tradition were the subject of discussion. The issue then is neither criticism nor suspicion per se, but the inability or unwillingness to appreciate the diversity and depth of Catholic life.

One can see both forms of anti-Catholicism in media coverage of the continuing sexual abuse scandal. Often coverage of clerical sexual abuse is joined with arguments made against elements of Catholic spirituality, such as obedience, or against Church disciplines, such as celibacy. While many of these issues are worthy of discussion, moving too quickly from the facts surrounding sexual abuse cases to arguments about the nature of Catholicism risks crowding out the voices of the victims in pursuit of a larger ideological agenda and can prevent a careful analysis of specific cases of sexual abuse and the institutional malfeasance that allowed the abuse to continue.

Anti-Catholicism of the bigoted kind comes usually in form of rhetorical excesses that intentionally distort Catholic views on infallibility and other aspects of doctrine in order to play on popular prejudices and sell copy. The irony here is that many commentators who are the most ostentatious in using bigoted anti-Catholic tropes, nonetheless have very trenchant points to make that could be fruitfully considered if their rhetoric left room for dialogue.

Against this background, it might stand to reason that the Vatican is correct to aggressively challenge anti-Catholicism in the media. But it isn't.

Most obviously, without journalistic scrutiny, few of these cases of abuse would have come to light. While some journalists are probably motivated by anti-Catholicism of the bigoted kind, their rhetoric reflects cultural dynamics that shape the lives and work of rank and file Catholics far more substantially than the lives and work of curia officials and the Holy Father.

Ironically, perhaps, the Vatican has structurally replicated elements of anti-Catholicism as it defends itself. For example, high level Vatican officials have made various sweeping statements about media conspiracies and secularism in which all discussion of clerical sexual abuse is lumped together into an undifferentiated "anti-Catholic" whole. Such an approach prevents any sophisticated understanding and appraisal of the media and contemporary Western society. Lay-Catholic commentators are guilty of the same kind of un-nuanced analysis by laying the blame for the scandal on post-Vatican II Catholic culture and thereby positing some sort of golden age in which such sexual abuse presumably never happened.

Of course, the most objectionable defense against anti-Catholicism was advanced by the preacher for the Papal household who likened anti-Catholicism to anti-Semitism. Anti-Catholicism most certainly has never reached the level of violence associated with anti-Semitism. But what is more, in times past the Catholic Church has stoked anti-Semitic hatred in passion plays held during the Easter season. Likening anti-Catholicism to anti-Semitism is simply not an option ethically available to Catholics. The Vatican's defense of itself has thus added to a dynamic of stereotype and caricature rather than helping us to move beyond it and confront the reality of clerical sexual abuse.

While the Holy Father could attempt to move beyond the "chatter" surrounding anti-Catholicism by maintaining his authoritative distance, it seems unlikely that such an approach will work either to quiet media attention or to respond to the needs of victims for a fuller accounting. If the Pope personalizes his response by offering his own reflections on his experiences in dealing with sexual abuse in the Church, it would mark a radical departure from protocol and elicit difficult theological issues. But perhaps that is the best option in dealing with a crisis that shows little signs of abating.

As he reflects on the challenges facing Catholicism and his Pontificate, the Holy Father might consider the experience of John XXIII. In writing about his decision to summon the Second Vatican Council, John XXIII reflected: "one must accept the good inspirations that come from the Lord, simply and confidently." If he feels inspired to speak about the crisis more personally, Pope Benedict XVI should draw strength from a previous successor of Peter who made a seemingly risky and radical decision but had a deep faith that God would eventually sort out the details.

By Mathew N. Schmalz  |  April 8, 2010; 2:06 PM ET  | Category:  Benedict XVI , Papacy , sexual abuse scandal Save & Share:                 
Previous: Silence is praise | Next: Can you be a Buddhist in America?

Posted by: Rongoklunk | April 12, 2010 12:10 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Posted by: bilmul83 | April 9, 2010 9:47 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Posted by: futuralogic | April 8, 2010 11:46 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Posted by: Secular | April 8, 2010 11:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Posted by: Schaum | April 8, 2010 6:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Posted by: Mary370 | April 8, 2010 4:54 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The comments to this entry are closed.