The last time a pope resigned -- Gregory XII in 1415 --
it was to end a 40-year schism that threatened to tear the church in
two.
Today, the church faces a crisis that may be no less profound, and it
has to do
it with the entire world watching. (Gregory didn't have to contend with
the
Twittersphere.)
And while many things remain opaque in the secret and
closeted Vatican, one thing we know for sure is that the church faces a
fundamental divide that threatens its future far more than the scandals
that
are dominating front pages.
"This time is different, the crisis is much deeper and
more difficult to solve than it appears," an Italian bishop with long
experience in the Curia laments.
"Catholics are deeply divided between a group
of conservatives, constantly looking toward the past that will never come back,
and progressives, who pushed themselves too far from any possible compromise
with the other group. I don't envy the next pope."
According to sources close to the pope, Benedict XVI
resigned because he felt he no longer had the physical and intellectual energy
to address the Vatican's problems.
These problems started to emerge in the late
1990s,with the revelations of sexual abuse of children by priests in the United
States.
Church officials hoped the scandal could be contained in America, but
soon there were similar reports of abuses and church cover-ups in Ireland,
Belgium, Britain, and even Benedict's old parish in Germany.
The fallout from
the abuse investigations was compounded by other scandals including remarks by Benedict that upset
the Muslim community in 2006, the rehabilitation of Holocaust-denying bishop
Richard Williamson in 2009, and revelations
of money laundering at the Vatican's bank, IOR, last year.
If Benedict were
an elected politician, it's unlikely his government could have survived.
The most recent blow to the pope's authority was the
"Vatileaks" scandal, which erupted in January 2012 when the Italian journalist, Gianluigi
Nuzzi, received a trove of secret documents directly from the pope's apartment --
documents that proved beyond any doubt the disarray inside the Curia.
The
revelations pointed to widespread corruption within the Curia, including bribes
demanded to secure a papal audience. Benedict asked three trusted and
experienced cardinals -- Julian Herranz, Jozef Tomko, and Salvatore De Giorgi
-- to investigate the matter, and they produced a report that was given to the
pope a few weeks before his resignation.
The report is classified, but that
hasn't stopped rumors about it from swirling around the world.
The rumors suggest that church leaders have been
routinely participating in at least two or three of the deadly sins.
The most
outrageous accusation is that inside the Vatican there is a "gay
lobby" strong enough to influence the church leadership.
It is not clear
whether this accusation is actually written in the report by the three
cardinals; however sources inside the Curia confirm to me that something like a "gay lobby"
exists, just as they confirm the struggle for economic power around IOR, the
Vatican bank.
The pope apparently knew all about this corruption before
the report came out but didn't think he had the strength to fight the battle.
Therefore he decided to resign as a "great act of governance of the Church," as
his spokesman Father Federico Lombardi put
it.
Benedict couldn't solve the problems himself, so he opted to shock the Vatican
and push for the election of a successor that will have a better chance to
redeem the Holy See.
The Conclave that is about to start will decide the
future of the Catholic Church.
In theological and ideological terms, the
cardinals seem quite united: the princes of the Church that will elect
Benedict's successor have all been named by him or by John Paul II, and therefore
share a traditional point of view.
But that point of view puts them out of
touch with an increasingly large number of their own flock. According to a
recent Pew
Research Center poll, 46 percent of American Catholics believe the church
should change course.
Just to give an example, 58 percent would approve of
allowing priests to marry.
The next pope doesn't necessarily need to dilute the
Catholic teachings to please the crowds: after all, the successor of Saint
Peter should still be able to do God's work, instead of following polls and
spin doctors.
However if the Church doesn't find a united and convincing
message, one that doesn't deny its teachings but is also able to confront
modern challenges, it risks becoming a small minority, as Joseph Ratzinger himself
wrote, though he believed the world would eventually come to its senses and
return to the church.
The struggle for power inside the Curia, however, might
be the strongest obstacle to a real and effective reform.
During the last eight
years, the Holy See has been governed by the secretary of state, Cardinal
Tarcisio Bertone, a position roughly equivalent to the Vatican's prime minister:
right or wrong, he is considered the person most responsible for all the
successes and shortcomings of the Vatican.
Bertone was born in Piedmont and was
Joseph Ratzinger's right-hand man when the then-cardinal was the leader of the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith -- the Vatican's chief enforcer of orthodoxy.
No one knows and interacts with Benedict better, though Bertone has a somewhat
more approachable public persona: he is passionate about soccer to
the point
that he once anchored a TV show about the game and even started a
Vatican league.
Perhaps somewhat more relecant to his candidacy, he's
also an Italian -- and after two
successive foreigners, the Italians would like to regain the papacy.
The
next
most likely candidates are the similarly conservative-minded Cardinals
Gianfranco Ravasi, Angelo Scola, and Angelo Bagnasco -- with several
alternatives
ready to jump in the race. Though "progressive" Catholicism may be a
growing
cultural force around the world, it's still virtually unheard of among
senior
church officials.
On the other hand, the desire for reform may pressure the
cardinals away from an Italian candidate. "This would be the right time to
elect an English-speaking pope," the American Catholic philosopher Michael
Novak told me in an interview.
After all, Catholicism is shrinking in Europe,
while it's growing in Africa, Asia, South America, and the United States.
An
English speaker would be in a better position to communicate to the Church's
main growth market than an Italian.
The main Anglophone candidates would be New
York Archbishop Timothy Dolan, Boston's Sean O'Malley, and George Pell, the archbishop
of Sydney.
"Novak is a very intelligent person, and whatever he says
makes sense," Dolan said during a recent interview at St. Patrick Cathedral.
Dolan said that whoever thinks he is a leading contender (what's known as a papabile) is "smoking marijuana,"
however he added that "we should not rush to the Conclave."
Rushing, in fact, is a key issue -- it might actually
define the process for the election of the new pope.
The Italians, or
the Curia
in general, would like to rush the Conclave: the less time the cardinals
have
to discuss and possibly argue, the more likely it is that an internal
candidate
will be selected.
The "foreigners," not just Americans, would like to
have more time to understand the scandals' real dimensions and choose a
candidate that is most equipped to uproot the weeds and reform the
Church.
Either way, the next pope has his work cut out for him.