Vatican coverage faulted
A sub-headline on the Feb. 17 front-page article “Breach of faith,” about what has been called “VatiLeaks,” described “tales of rivalry and betrayal” and “allegations of corruption and dysfunction” at the Vatican, so I expected to read how they led to the spiraling downfall of a host of characters that, in turn, implanted some sort of unending evil.
But that’s not what VatiLeaks is about. As described by The Post, it involves a mere seven players, hardly a “fractured Vatican full of rivalries.” I’d allow for a small cast, should it have masterminded some massive deluge of moral transgressions, but that’s not the case, either. It’s about one archbishop’s discontent about his reassignment. History shows that one man’s discontent can lead to a sea of change, so I thought that might be the result. Wrong again. The change is a commitment to what we love: transparency.
In short, VatiLeaks involves a betrayer who was tried but later pardoned, and the Vatican committed to getting better.
The article ended with an oblique reference to a circuslike atmosphere. Perhaps that refers to a media pursuit of scandal.
Meg Kummer, Rockville
How sad that your Feb. 12 chart “Transition at the Vatican” omitted the most consequential recent pope: John XXIII. In his short tenure between the papacies of Pius XII and Paul VI, John XXIII convened the Second Vatican Council, and through his moral clarity, force of conviction and personal integrity, he dragged the Catholic Church out of intolerance and medieval obscurantism. Had he lived longer, he never would have tolerated the Vatican’s mafialike conspiracy to protect the child rapists in its midst. If the church is to revitalize itself, it should choose as Benedict’s successor a man capable of emulating the example of Pope John XXIII.