Can the Pope bare the consequences of his sins?

In 1985, the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict, is alleged to have blocked the defrocking of a priest in California who had abused children. A signed letter has been leaked showing him pleading that before such a decision is made “the good of the universal church must be considered.”

The accused priest, Rev Kiesle, had already been convicted of lewd conduct in 1978 after he tied up and molested two young boys in a San Francisco cemetery. Despite Ratzingers Oakland Diocese recommending his removal in 1981, it did not happen until 1987. Keisle, now 63 and a registered sex offender, went to Prison in 2004 for sexually abusing a young girl.

Allowing a convicted Paedophile to remain in a position of ministry to families is unconscionable. It would be like not removing a teacher from a school who had been convicted of child abuse.

There is not a democratically elected head of state in the world that would have survived these allegations, and remember the Pope is a head of state. If he were a CEO the share holders would also have gotten rid of him. The question therefore is what does it take to remove a bad Pope?

As painful as it will be for Roman Catholic Christians, if it is proved that he allowed such crimes to take place on his watch and refuses to step down, he will show himself to be both unrepentant and unaccountable and there must be an ecclesiastical revolution. If however he were to step down and throw open the Vatican records, he could set the example and force wide spread change by his resignation.

Maybe then, 25 years on, Ratzinger should once again be considering “The good of the universal church” before defrocking a Priest – himself.