“I cannot comprehend how any person, much less one with qualifications in theology [ED] ... could consider the rape of a child to be a moral failure but not a crime,” Justice McClellan said in a speech to the Australian Human Rights Commission. “This statement by leaders of the Catholic Church marks out the corruption within the Church both within Australia, and it seems from reports, in many other parts of the world.”It's easy when your theological training effectively makes mercy to the criminal more important than justice to the victim.
As I've said before there are two elements to this saga:
1) The particular crimes committed by the individual criminals.
2) The institutional response once the crimes were made known to the Church.
As the institutional response was the same throughout the world, the failure of the Church to respond appropriately should not be seen primarily as a failure of specific individuals to act, but rather a systemic problem in the Church rooted in its "operational" principles.
I don’t know if you’re aware doctor, but there’s a new film out by Terrence Malick out, “A Hidden Life.” It’s based on the life of Franz Jagerstatter, who I believe you have mentioned.
ReplyDelete@ Jason
ReplyDeleteThanks for the recommendation. I've looked at the trailers and it looks amazing. I'd not heard of Franz Jagerstatter before and reading his biography today moved me.
Deeply.
I hope to see the movie though I expect I'll cry like a baby.
One of the thoughts that has been on my mind in the last few weeks is the concept of the resurrection. Jagerstatter experienced one of those pitiful anonymous deaths that totalitarian regimens are known for. Even the townsfolk wanted to disown him following his stance and he was essentially forgotten. And yet today there is a full feature length movie being made about him. He is dead but his memory has been reborn.
Deep stuff.
I mean all said "priests" should be in death row as what they did was sacrilege and sacrilege was punished with death by god. Which in a sense ensures both mercy and justice
ReplyDeleteI don't think that the intellectual/theological problem lies precisely in putting mercy for the criminal above justice for the victim. That may be true in some cases, but we are here dealing with not merely an attempt to shield the perpetrators from criminal punishment, but also their deliberate placement in situations where they could perpetrate even further harm. And one can in fact hold that mercy is in itself more important than justice while still insisting that justice be done.
ReplyDeleteIt lies in the failure to truly appreciate concrete damage done to people simply considered as people in favor of abstract principles. This has several aspects which I'll break down here.
1) The suffering of the victims is considered as insignificant and not really worthy of consideration compared to sin, the breaking of the law of God. To this mindset the "real" evil is the obtaining of sexual pleasure outside of marriage and fecundity, everything else being accidental. Thus you see the continuing effort on the Right to connect the abuse scandals with contraception, homosexuality, the sexual revolution, etc. This is the direct result of an emphasis on following/breaking laws vs. what promotes or hinders human flourishing.
2) The good of the Church, the unspotted Bride of Christ, the only true way of salvation, is much more worthy of consideration than the suffering of a few isolated individuals, and mere laypeople to boot. Therefore we should simply not admit the guilt of Father, even if he's admitted it himself. I mean, think of how the reputation of the Church will suffer. And these individuals probably have an ax to grind against the Church anyway. Thus, you see continued denialism in many quarters of the Right (cf. Bill Donohoe and gang), where there isn't really a grave crisis - it's just a conspiracy of the secular press aided by their allies in the secular government to tarnish the Church.
3) And finally, a simple denial that suffering is an evil we need be concerned with at all.
Didn't Christ Himself suffer serious damage? Who are we to complain, etc?
@LP
ReplyDeleteThat may be true in some cases, but we are here dealing with not merely an attempt to shield the perpetrators from criminal punishment, but also their deliberate placement in situations where they could perpetrate even further harm.
It perfectly explicable if you thinking is along the lines of "He's been forgiven, lets give him a chance to start anew." I agree, it's not how your prudent man would think, but with significant theological training prudence can be dismissed in favour of "Christs transformative power", "the mystical healing power of God," "the ability to restore things anew" etc....or whatever theological thought is du jour.
And one can in fact hold that mercy is in itself more important than justice while still insisting that justice be done.
One can do that, yet justice wasn't done. And given that this was systemic response to the abuse of minors, it would not appear to be a "bug" of the system but an inbuilt feature.
The suffering of the victims is considered as insignificant and not really worthy of consideration compared to sin
As I've said before, the Church's focus is on redemption of the sinner to the exclusion of all else. Francis's logic with respect to the Death Penalty is exactly on those lines. The Death Penalty is prohibited to give the sinner every chance at redemption. Frances pushes this further--and which totally consistent with this type of theology--and is now advocating for the abolition of life sentences, the aim being that the sinner can't get to reintegrate with society under this punishment. Zero concern about the duties owed to the victim.
With regard to sex, the Church has it issues, but I don't think it is applicable in this context and is more a distraction than anything else. Sexual crimes are salacious and that's why they capture the attention and focus but they're a distraction from a far deep malaise. Look at its response to financial crime. The Church is incapable of weeding out financial corruption on its doorstep in the Vatican, the latest exposés being thoroughly depressing. The bottom line is the Church has given up on restorative or retributive justice.
Yep, there were instances where the crimes were suppressed for the sake of preserving the reputation of the Church but even this is a theological denial of justice owed the victim. Everything matters more than the victim in modern theology.
And as for suffering, I think in some quarters of the Church there is almost a worship of it, seeing suffering as a good. This is Christian Buddhism 101 and explains a lot of the Church's passivity in the face of evil.
@Social Pathologist
ReplyDeleteThe most merciful outcome for crime of sacrilege conducted by the priest by committing the hideous sin of sodom is most definitely death penalty.
Because on the verge of death he will be more induced to throw himself at God mercy and save his soul. Or if he refuses to repent to lessen his final punishment lest more sin increase the severity of his torment.
Did God not put to death Nadab and Abihu for strange fire? So it should be with Priests.