The coexistence inside Vatican City of Pope Francis, the current Bishop of Rome, and Benedict XVI, his retired predecessor, may not be as peaceful as depicted these past few months, writes Robert Mickens. Beneath the seemingly placid surface of this highly unusual arrangement of having “two living Popes”, there are troubled waters. And in recent weeks they have begun to spill out into the open.At issue are contentious church matters in Germany. One concerns the decision taken by some dioceses to break a long-standing Vatican prohibition and begin carefully offering the sacraments to divorced and remarried Catholics. Another surrounds the German Episcopal Conference’s investigation into the lavish spending habits of the so-called “luxury bishop” – Franz-
02 November 2013, The Tablet
‘The cases are the greatest challenge Pope Francis has had to face since his election’
Get Instant Access
Continue Reading
Register for free to read this article in full
Subscribe for unlimited access
From just £30 quarterly
Complete access to all Tablet website content including all premium content.
The full weekly edition in print and digital including our 179 years archive.
PDF version to view on iPad, iPhone or computer.
Already a subscriber? Login
User Comments (4)
I am overjoyed to see such a cogent response to IDS's cruel policies.
I would have liked to have seen a more prominent place for the Benefit Cap in your letter, however.
This cruel policy is state-imposed child neglect, which is driving many affected single mothers to the brink of breakdown. On the £20K cap my landlord will still get his £15K, and each of us are left with just £1K /year or £2.75/day.
World extreme poverty is $1.90/day.
The stereotypes are so far from the truth: I worked whenever I could professionally as a scientist and teacher during a twenty year partnership/marriage producing 4 beautiful children -2 unplanned.
Now 51 & redundant, all I can get is zero hours work which, at ~13h/week ie <16h/week, doesn't fulfil IDS's criteria for "work" so I am both capped and derided as a skiving shirker while we squash into a 2-bed house and use the foodbank.
Please someone speak up for us before April causes many family crises!
I have read ID Smith's response to your original letter and indeed this follow up of yours. He suggests that his changes to the benefits system is to help incentivise work. What have he and his colleagues done to encourage employers to take on those seeking work? In particular, those with a disability?
Wow! What an impressive list of "prominent Catholics". Anybody heard of any of them? I've not, but then again, I'm just a simple, ordinary layman, working and praying in the vineyard.
While the issue of restricting child benefit to two children is not specifically discussed, it is also part of the picture. Every child is a human being who may be advantaged or disadvantaged by government fiat.
But in this case there is an additional factor. Our fertility rate, even though supplemented by the higher average fertility of immigrant families, is below the level needed to replace the population. The message that having three children is a self indulgence, and the financial penalty for so doing, takes us in precisely the wrong direction. The ultimate result will be a greater disproportion between the pensioner population and the working population. Future generations, not the current Government, will pick up the tabs for that.
On the contrary, the Government should be encouraging three children families, and be ready to support that through chjild benefits.