The pope abdicates: Holy See change
Those pining for some kind of “reinvention” or “modernization” of the Roman Catholic Church with the abdication of Pope Benedict XVI most assuredly will be disappointed. After all, the College of Cardinals, now at nearly its full complement, is dominated by Benedict appointees who share his conservative orthodoxy.
We don't note that as any kind of pejorative. It is a fact. And it's one that the next pontiff must use to his and the Catholic Church's benefit.
Benedict, who turns 86 in April, announced on Monday that he will end his papacy, the church's 265th, on Feb. 28. The pontiff cited his failing health. And for that, he should have the faithful's gratitude. For he apparently decided to spare his flock the kind of long, slow and painful-to-watch demise of his predecessor, Pope John Paul II.
But surely this act, one with precedence (though 598 years ago), is an act of humility in more ways than one. The Catholic Church has been rocked by a number of scandals, the most serious being the sexual abuse cases. And some have argued that many of the church's failures to act can be traced directly to Benedict's prior role when, as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, he oversaw the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which was responsible for dealing with abuse cases.
To be fair, Benedict's papacy dealt forthrightly with the pedophilia scandal. But it is only with a new pope, with no baggage from this scandal, that true healing can begin and be achieved.
That said, Benedict's pontificate, in an era of what he called “the dictatorship of relativism,” indeed leaves a legacy of fealty to one of today's rarest commodities — principle.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- So, where’s the I-70 ‘Welcome to Pennsylvania’ sign on the Pa.-W.Va. border?
- The Fiat Chrysler mess: Government’s virus
- Mon-Yough Tuesday takes
- Pittsburgh Tuesday takes
- Grabbing guns: Obama overreach?
- Yes, the IRS targeted conservatives
- Sunday pops
- Greensburg Tuesday takes
- The Export-Import Bank: The Senate’s shame
- At the VA: The waiting dead
- Alle-Kiski Tuesday takes