On The Resignation of Cardinal O'Brien

The Catholic Church is never short of a scandal or twenty, whether it be the infamous legacy of the Borgias, or the seemingly contagious and contentious acts of resignation the Church has witnessed in the last month.

I was met today with a flurry of newspapers whilst shopping in Sainsburys, and every single one documented Cardinal O'Brien's decision to resign from his post of Archbishop of the Diocese of St Andrews and Edinburgh. He was due to resign in a month's time anyway, in line with his 75th birthday, but, as no doubt you'll have heard, his resignation was prompted earlier due to the allegations of "inappropriate conduct" with which he was met.

This seems to insinuate that the allegations may pertain an element of truth. It's extremely difficult when rumours circulate, as indeed they do rather quickly, and particularly difficult to control them as they can escalate particularly viciously and be far removed from the truth. I sympathise greatly with Cardinal O'Brien, simply for being on the receiving end of all this backlash, whether or not the accusations are true.

 I think he deserved to go to Conclave. One has to presume that people are innocent until proven guilty, and in this matter, Cardinal O'Brien's place to vote in Conclave was stolen by the rumours that conveniently arose just before he was due to give his duty of service to the College of Cardinals. Where have the accusers been until now? Supposedly these "inappropriate" events occurred a number of years ago - even as far back as the 1980's. Why is it that so many skeletons come running out of the closet when they could have been dealt with a long time ago when they had flesh on the bones? It adds to the difficulties when things are prolonged, and wounds are cut a lot deeper when issues like this are harboured, both for the perpetrators and victims, whoever they may be in this case.

However, I do not think, with the amount of authority that Cardinal O'Brien has (or did have) that he should have refused to serve Mass last Sunday. He should have taken up his cross, as a religious advocate of Christ, and stuck through the difficulties. As a priest, and a servant of God, he should have stuck to his guns and served the people of his parish not buried his head in the sand, almost condoning the rumours. No doubt, even if he had of stayed in his position, he'd be damned if he did damned if he didn't (in the non-literal sense!) and he'd have been met with cries of hypocrisy; but what is institutionalism if not hypocritical? It's full of humans who make mistakes half the time, and are scared of making the same mistakes for the other half of the time. It's no wonder we go wrong.

I don't know the truth of the matter - I don't know whether these are simply vicious rumours circulated by power-hungry people hellbent on ruining Cardinal O'Brien's vocation (which they have succeeded in doing, whilst defaming the poor man in the process); or whether indeed there is some truth to the matter, which most people would find easy enough to believe, with the reputation of the Catholic Church currently in shreds over numerous issues.

The idealistic solution to the problem of personalities that seems so evident within the Catholic Church appears to be a complete overhaul of the system. Rather than priests and bishops grouping against each other in enmity, there needs to be a real sense of continuity and solidarity amongst the priests and bishops of the Catholic Church. Though hierarchy naturally seems to put in place a pecking order, this in no sense should condone the vociferous cruelty that some bishops seems to bestow upon their priests, and in turn, the priests should not be so keen to rebel against their leaders. The key is mutual respect. The whole scandal with the Pope's resignation seems to have make it crystal clear that his resignation was in part, if not mostly due to internal issues and irreconcilable difficulties with the system. One of the intricate difficulties with the priesthood is that although it should first and foremost be seen as a vocation, it is in practice very much a day job, involved with all democratic decisions of regular jobs. However, priests have an innate responsibility entrusted to them by the people to live up to their vocation, and although failings do occur, to continue to strive to emulate Christ, who is presumably the reason why one becames a priest in the first place.

What has ironically been forgotten amongst all this bureaucracy or rather, lack of it, is the religion behind it all. Catholicism is supposed to be an advocate of true Christianity - a sense of humility, love, self-sacrifice and fellowship - the virtues which Christ himself taught. And despite all the efforts of the Church to cover up the mess with words of love and prayer and hope, these core values are completely overshadowed with the masks of personalities and power, something completely at odds with the true Christian message.

At this time, in continuity with what I posted about the Pope Benedict XVI, I think Cardinal O'Brien deserves some peace, both from the Press and from his adversaries. He deserves the dignity and time to reflect on his personal circumstances, for only he knows the truth and he should be given the opportunity to have his say, and though speculation is inevitable, his decision to resign should be respected by the Press, the public and his colleagues in Christ, regardless of motivation.

It is at times like this when one's faith is indeed tested, at least to the extent of if you can't turn to your leaders for direction and guidance, you have to soldier on through and try and grasp the shreds of hope that remain within faith. That's easier said that done of course, especially when the answer coming from your leaders is to escape their position of authority and retreat (whether in the religious sense of the word, or not!)