But do they call me Mick the Builder? Mick the Miner? Bollocks they do. But I fuck one sheep…”

He does not in direct terms, no. But he does direct attention away to society:

He deplored the “crude manipulation of sexuality so prevalent today,” saying that not only the church, but also families, teachers and the news media and entertainment industries have to take responsibility for “moral renewal.”

Let’s share the blame? No. Set an example first, by bringing people like Law to justice, and then spread the message further.

A “moral” authority like the Catholic Church cannot afford to have a moral deficit. Not to this extent (there will always be bad apples, but this is a structural thing).

I know the consequences of cleaning up the Catholic House will be dire (accepting human fallacy in matters of faith, for instance) but they will be worth it. To put it bluntly: When Christ had himself nailed to a cross for his convictions, why should not the Pope show equal courage?

However, I am not convinced by your quotes that the Pope is blaming society.

Blaming society for a crime as serious as child abuse, within the ranks of the clergy, is also a cheap shot. Especially since this has been going on for decades and that the Church’s response was simply to send offenders to another parish. Not just in the US, also in Europe.

The Church should have responded fiercely to these crimes from the beginning, within its own ranks. There seems to be a moral deficit here that threatens the very credibility of the Church’s message. That is why I used the word “subversive”.

“If the Church has survived this long (and still thrives in many places) it is because it still has a message which resonates.”

Of course. And this goes for other religions too. But this also highlights the Catholic Church’s responsibility in these matters.

“And its not a bad thing to criticize secular society.”

Of course not. That is why I said I accept the moral guidance the Catholic Church, among others, can and should offer. Therefore it is not a bad thing to criticize the Church, or other religions, either when it seems necessary.

For what it’s worth, I was raised a Catholic. I went to a Catholic school and was even singled out for priesthood (an invitation which I declined) precisely because I was, and still am, sincere when addressing these issues.

It is not a matter of slinging cheap shots at an easy target. This issue saddens me profoundly.

It seems though that the Pope and the Catholic Church are constantly subjected to cheap shots. The history of the Church (which in many ways is the history of the western world) cannot be reduced to the sexual abuse of children or its stand against gay marriage. If the Church has survived this long (and still thrives in many places) it is because it still has a message which resonates.

And its not a bad thing to criticize secular society.

Benedict told a gathering of bishops on Wednesday they had “sometimes very badly handled” the decades-old problem of pedophile priests. But he urged efforts “to address the sin of abuse within the wider context of sexual mores.”

“What does it mean to speak of child protection when pornography and violence can be viewed in so many homes through media widely available today?” the pontiff said on the first full day of his US visit.

Instead, he suggested as a remedy an urgent reassessment of “the values underpinning society.”

Describing clerics who sexually abuse children as “gravely immoral,” the octogenarian pope warned that the scourge of pedophilia “is found not only in your dioceses but in every sector of society.”

“It calls for a determined, collective response,” he said, but did not outline any firm action that the Vatican intended to take to purge the church of pedophile priests.

Instead, he had measured praised for the efforts made so far by the US church to heal the wounds left by the scandal.

“Your efforts to heal and protect are bearing great fruit,” he told the bishops.

“If they are to achieve their full purpose, however, the programs you have adopted need to be placed in a wider context,” the pope said, urging church leaders to join with parents, teachers, and the media to protect children.

The first one (religion is not a private matter) is about strengthening the Church’s authority in society at large.

The second one demonstrates, at least to me, the Church’s tendency to subtly shift the blame towards society.

See for instance this article:

Six years after the Boston revelations broke open the scandal nationwide, the U.S. bishops – who, aside from the perpetrators themselves, are most responsible for the catastrophe – have never been held to account for their actions. Though two-thirds of bishops sitting in 2002, when the scandal broke, had shuffled around pederast priests, the U.S. bishops responded by placing a heavy yoke on parish priests and lay Catholic volunteers – but effectively let themselves off the hook. So did the Vatican. (…) Mr. Lawler, a conservative Catholic and Benedict supporter, told us yesterday that he’s comforted by the pope’s admission of shame over abusive priests but that it isn’t enough. Said Mr. Lawler: “It would be truly liberating to hear him acknowledge that he is also ashamed of the bishops whose negligence – and even complicity – allowed the scandal to fester and undermined public confidence in the church.”

I remember years ago when there were similar scandals in Belgium. A senior church official almost immediately blamed child abuse within the Church on homosexuality and society’s mores.

For an institution that deals by definition with morality and higher authority this approach is at least as selective as my quotes.

The sad thing is that I do value spirituality and that I do believe religious institutions can play an important role in providing moral guidance. Yet, if those very same institutions are themselves unwilling to live up to the very same moral authority they accord themselves then they are as subversive as the dreaded “secular society”. Even more so, because you can rightly expect them to be better.