The recent flare-up over Bill Clinton's comments concerning the Pope highlight a real issue for me. Clinton, when asked about the Pope's legacy, replied that the Pope would have a "mixed legacy" because he had been a brave reformer but had made mistakes. I agree with his statement.
But the press got a hold of the quote and suddenly Clinton was colored as having been negative about John Paul II. A brief but intense firestorm came up and Clinton eventually recanted, claiming that he meant only that the Pope had done both conservative and liberal things during his reign. In other words, he changed his words to back off.
Why? Why is it wrong to dare suggest that someone, even the Pope, has made mistakes? Now that the Pope has died, it is no longer "fair" to critize him. The only way that we can hope to do better in the future is by remembering the past appropriately. If we whitewash the record, then we will not learn. Even more annoying, the conservatives in the blogsphere have been leading the call for groupthink here. Across the web, conservatives have labled anyone who dares to speak one word against the Pope as a bigot. This Pope has made mistakes and achieved great victories, there is no reason to not acknowledge the truth of this Pope's legacy. I will say it: this Pope's legacy will be mixed. I will not recant and that's the way it is.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder