I suspect that most RC faithful, as good people, would know what should be done, or at least come up with it and work it out among themselves if they were allowed to have a greater say (and, I am not talking about the local parish stuff often thrown about as examples of real local empowerment).

That is not to say that everyone would agree, differences would likely emerge as some regional differences are met (as does with governments). Some may even leave if they do not have their way with change (like with the Anglican discussions. But, doing the right thing always carries some risk, as "not doing the right thing" also carries risk.

So, my suggesting is broad -a change in organizational structure to include more of the faithful in broader organizational decisions, versus the current "old guys network". To me this would inrease local input and impact real change to meet some of the deficiencies that are easy to see.

I realize that religion is not a democracy - but IMO, the RC church organization can do a better job of inclusion in decision making. Some "faithful" may say that is already happening - but, if so, it is not happening fast and broad enough, and the door of change is not wide enough.

Part of the slow reaction to the child sexual abuse issue was because of the current structure. Top folks saying they are sorry rings hollow, without breaking down the structure (and people) that caused it and the structure and folks that enabled it to continue for years. I remain unconvinced that potential abusers have not gone in hiding, only to emerg again, and to do a better job of hiding their sinful and harmful acts.