*An example of a Culture of Power: Mea Maxima Culpa

The code of silence and the protection of priests from the nucleus of Catholic power propogates a culture of power. If the culture is not dealt with, the culture that is instantiated by canon law, the corruption and habits of power do not change. The tale of priests molesting and abusing children goes deeper than what the media presented in the early 2000s. It is not simply a tale of U.S. priests and not simply something that was outside of the authorities in the Vatican. Ratzinger's resignation is shrouded in further mystery and his position prior to his papacy is telling about his involvement. The fact that there is an actual paper trail and a blatant "turn of the cheek" is revealing of a culture and the habits of power. Not only can we talk about cognitive dissonance in terms of individuals but for institutions and the authorities that allow those institutions to function can also be equally applied to the theory of cognitive dissonance. The tensions involved pronounce the methods of discourse and avenues by which rationalization and justification can happen to reduce dissonance as well as perpetuate the culture of power.

On a broader scale, any discussion about religion in the public sphere must also deal with the relationship between international law and canon law. Not just whether we can use religiously specific terminology in a multi-religious environment but rather how major religious institutions and traditions are going to cooperate and function within the boundaries of law. The separation between church and state has created separate spheres of law, practically indemnifying those who bear the cloth from criminal and civil laws of a society and leaving those who do abuse reigious power and trust to a separate court without accountability to the victims.

The documentary (embedded below) Mea Maxima Culpa: Silence in the House of God (which aired on the BBC Storyville) is a good example of what I am referring. I remember reserving judgment on many things about these scandals, not about the abuse but where the responsibility should lie, but it seems that what the press presented was not even half the story. The paper trail, the Vatican's history, and the role of Benedict is much more damning than I thought. And I think it is fair to say that Ratzinger was both responsible for the silence and, at the same time, helpless to the silence. Whether Francis will be able to deal with the hypocrisy of the Church on these issues is yet to be seen.   








*Update: Benedict emerges from silence, defends his abuse record in letter to prominent Italian atheist