The Catholic Magazine U.S. Catholic Blesses Us With Thoughts On Pope Benedict Five Years

You know U.S Catholic. That magazine that pretty much is just kept alive because I suspect most non Catholic folks in charge of public Libraries are under the huge misunderstanding that many people pay attention to it. Oh wait we need a Catholic Magazine for the library hey lets pick U.S Catholic. YOU know it is true. How often is it even cited by either traditioanal or liberal Catholics?

THIS IS TOO RICH ( The bolding is all mine)

Hans Kung has thrown down the gauntlet with his open letter to the world's Catholic bishops, including a six-point plan for reforming the church. Kung's advice, which culminates in a call for a new council, is wise and even, despite his reputation, much of it undeserved, as a theological renegade.

More controversial will be his account of the pope's five-year tenure, which he catalogs as a series of missed opportunities on ecumenism, relationships with Jews and Muslims, a revisionist interpretation of Vatican II and its liturgical reform, and now most seriously with the sex abuse crisis.

Kung's critique is a fair one, and I'd go as far as to say that in these five years the Ratzinger papacy has lurched from catastrophe to catastrophe, beginning with the Regensburg speech of 2006, continuing with the unconditional rehabilitation of the bishops of the Society of St. Pius X, and culminating in the international sex abuse crisis, which is only going to get bigger.

Kung points his finger directly at the Roman Curia, and its reform is certainly number one on the to-do list. Its members have usurped the proper authority of the college of bishops and has stifled any attempt at regional approaches to problems facing the church. The fact that many dicasteries are headed by men far outside of the mainstream of the people of God--all on the extreme far right--practically guarantees no movement in the direction of reform and more retrograde movement in the areas of liturgy, ecumenism, and interreligious dialogue.

But now we must ask: Where are the world's bishops? Why won't anyone offer an alternative approach? What do they have to lose in speaking their minds from their experience as pastors? The church is foundering and about to hit the rocks, and too many of us are arranging deck chairs.

Kung raises good, hard questions, but I fear his letter will fall on deaf ears. Now is the time for openness, for public discussion, and for a new beginning, but no one in power seems to have the nerve. The fact of the matter is that the church is now too large and too diverse to be run by a medieval bureaucracy in the capital of an ancient empire. The gospel and the disciples called to proclaim it deserve better.

Where to start!!! This article might as we be called- We are Passing the Buck!!

A few observations.
"Ratzinger papacy has lurched from catastrophe to catastrophe, beginning with the Regensburg speech of 2006, continuing with the unconditional rehabilitation of the bishops of the Society of St. Pius X, and culminating in the international sex abuse crisis, which is only going to get bigger"

It seems as to relations with the Muslim World that they can just think of the Regensburg speech. A speech by the way I actually thought was needed to be said. U.S Catholic fails to note the important outrach it has done in other areas. Including a huge groundbreaking conference the Church was involved in with the House of Saud that took place in Europe. So to be blunt this is rubbish.

What is this "uncondtional rehabiltaton of Bishops of the Society of St Pius X they are talking about? That has not happened. What happened was in a symbolic gesture the Church's most harsh sanction was lifted in order to promote the contuining of this conversation. One gets a sense through this piece that the author would much not to have to dine at the table with this folks.

Kung points his finger directly at the Roman Curia, and its reform is certainly number one on the to-do list. Its members have usurped the proper authority of the college of bishops and has stifled any attempt at regional approaches to problems facing the church. The fact that many dicasteries are headed by men far outside of the mainstream of the people of God--all on the extreme far right--practically guarantees no movement in the direction of reform and more retrograde movement in the areas of liturgy, ecumenism, and interreligious dialogue.

Right wing? What? So the Bishops that are promtoing immigration reform, Health Care, that work against State Execution, that work for the voice of the poor, that sometimes I view have downright extreme views on Pacifism are right wing? No I think this is code for "THEY DON"T BELIEVE IN GAY MARRAIGE and other assorted issues. Is that now Right Wing? Again this authors view of the "people of God" is sadly limited.

As to ecumenism what about the breakthroughts with Lutherans, with Anglcians, and with the Eastern Orthodox!! This author is not interested in that ecumenism because I suspect he not interesting in conversations with "those Christians"

By the way what is exactly the authroity of Bishop's Conferences anyway? Why does the United States Bishop's conference have authority over what my BISHOP does in my Diocese? Does the author know that this is a issue that is very complicated.

But now we must ask: Where are the world's bishops? Why won't anyone offer an alternative approach? What do they have to lose in speaking their minds from their experience as pastors? The church is foundering and about to hit the rocks, and too many of us are arranging deck chairs.
I am noticing the Bishops speak all the time. They have been speaking non stop. Perhaps though not giving the answers the author wants to hear.

Now is the time for openness, for public discussion, and for a new beginning, but no one in power seems to have the nerve. The fact of the matter is that the church is now too large and too diverse to be run by a medieval bureaucracy in the capital of an ancient empire. The gospel and the disciples called to proclaim it deserve better.

This gets to the nuts and bolts of this article. THE PASSING OF THE BUCK. The fact is this. The abuse by Catholic Clergy reached its highest point during the reign of Pope Paul the VI. This was when the "new blood" was in full control in the local Diocese. REVOLUTION BABY. In fact they had been in control for some time. UHH what happened dudes!!

I mean they were in effective control of a lot of Diocese, seminaries, and college Campuses. They were very much in control of Catholic Colleges. Where is your role in all this.

It is quite apparent that problem was not ROME was not involved and it was not till ROME got involved (BENEDICT) that we started seeing as to the sexual abuse crisis the start of ending this sin and scandal.

This is like reading a Piece from the old Pravda. The author indeed has a vision of the new Church. It is a vision that excludes a lot of the "people of God" .