Responding To The Pope's Critics

Fr. Z does a far better job than I could.

Read the whole article, but note especially the last bit.

A few days ago a priest who once worked in the Washington DC nuntiature made the unfounded claim that Pope Benedict certainly was involved with the decisions about this abusive priest. That priest, Fr. Doyle, also said that Pope Benedict is a "micro-manager".

In turn, that same errant claim was picked up by Christopher Hitchens for a truly vile hit piece on Slate.

Fr. Doyle therefore did terrible damage to the Holy Father’s reputation.

First, anyone who knows anything about Joseph Ratzinger personally, knows that he is not a micro-manager. Quite the opposite is true. He is the supreme delegator. Furthermore, and this bears repeating, the role of the Vicar General in German dioceses includes most personnel decisions. There will be times when the chapter and ordinary are involved, but mostly the VG handles these matter. This would be particularly the case with then-Archbiship Ratzinger of Munich, who is not a micro-manager, but rather tends to delegate administrative decisions.

This is an excellent point. Doesn't anybody remember the days leading up to and immediately following the conclave? You couldn't get away from the talk about how Cardinal Ratzinger was a scholar and theologian, an ivory tower guy, who couldn't possibly work out as the sort of pastor and administrator that the Church REALLY needed as Pope. This sort of commentary was rampant. Now, all of a sudden, the Pope is a micro-manager who isn't the sort not to be involved.

As is typical, consistency is not the strong suit of the papal critics.