Don’t be daft — you can’t put the Pope on trial

17 April 2010

/article_images/articledir_11823/5911953/1_listing.jpg

Benedict XVI’s handling of sex abuse cases is not above criticism, says John L. Allen Jr. But the campaign for him to be hauled before an international court is ill informed

None of this is to say that Benedict’s record is above criticism. The cases from his past which have come to light in recent weeks have to be examined one by one, and in several the future pope’s role is quite marginal. Yet at least in the case of Fr Peter Hullermann, a German priest who came into the Archdiocese of Munich facing accusations of abuse while Ratzinger was in charge in 1980, and who went on to abuse other people, it seems clear that appropriate precautions were not taken. What the future pope knew at the time is almost irrelevant, because it happened on his watch.

Certainly the defensive tone coming from some senior papal aides, comparing criticism of Benedict to anti-Semitism or to ‘petty gossip’, has not helped the pope’s public image.

Nonetheless, proposals for hauling someone into court ought to be based on something more than bad PR strategies or individual cases wrenched out of the context of someone’s overall record. An indictment has to be based on facts, and the facts simply don’t support putting the pope in the dock.

John L. Allen Jr is the senior correspondent for the US-based National Catholic Reporter and author of The Rise of Benedict XVI (Penguin, 2005).

Previous page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4

More articles from: John L. Allen Jr. | this section

Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (4)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

Ricky

April 15th, 2010 2:49pm Report this comment

Of course, Dawkins and his set of secular fundamentalists wouldn't dare to take on any homophobic or judeophobic Muslim hate preachers.

Where were they when Quradawi was being welcomed by the former, not much lamented Mayor of London, Livingstone?

They are content only to attack relatively passive faiths like Judaism or Christianity.

Perhaps these zealots prefer the weak anger of the bishopry to the deadly consequences of a fatwa - like so many other members of the fatuous Liberal Elite commentariat.

David Bouvier

April 15th, 2010 3:35pm Report this comment

A rather pointless article since the author is confusing international tribunals with a Hamas-style 'lawfare' operation as used on Tzipi Livni.

I assume the goal is to arrest the Jo Ratzinger on a warrant granted under UK human rights laws with universal (or should that be catholic) jurisdiction.

, beloved of the human-rights-law left, and seek to prosecute the Pope under UK laws of universal (or should that be catholic) jurisdiction.

If the Pope comes with diplomatic credentials then there is no problem.

David Bouvier

April 15th, 2010 3:36pm Report this comment

Oops - please ignore 3rd paragraph...

John Patrick

April 19th, 2010 9:50pm Report this comment

At last, a sensible and balanced article from a journalist. I was beginning to despair that such journalists existed after reading the sensationalist and over-the-top reports from such as Rod Liddle or Libby Purves both writing in The Times. The problem is that newspapers such as The Times, the New York Times and the Irish Times have spewed forth a dust cloud of incriminations againt Benedict without any real proof of their accusations that it is difficult now to see the man in a true light.

Post comment