In Defense Of Church Scandals
Author: Walter Nuñez
First things first: let a word of caution shall be called into order so as to dispel any cloud of doubts as to any ulterior motives or hidden agenda as the title might have strongly and prematurely suggested. So don’t be carried away with the title! After all, nothing is what it seems. However, far from what you think this is not meant to take up the cudgels for the Church? Nor, should this be understood as an attempt to justify with the subtle intention to exonerate if not, tolerate the wrongdoings that the human dimension of the Church, has committed. Don’t get me wrong here? But I have an absolute understanding of the concept of what is right and wrong: I see white as white and black as black. No ifs and buts. To that effect, I personally condemned such acts that deviate from the norms and standards. I could only hope that justice shall be meted out to those proven guilty of such misdeeds. So what is this all about? Anyway, this is an earnest endeavor to lay the proper perspective in order to qualify the issues surrounding such circumstances.
The Church, since its incipient days until now, has been beset from almost all kinds of scandals: imagined or real. Among them are as follows:
In New Testament times, Judas Iscariot betrayed, when he conspired with the people wanting to have Jesus killed. In the end, he led the way for the crucifixion of Jesus on Mount Calvary. Also, but of minor consequence, Peter, when asked if he knew Jesus, denied on three occasions of having had an association with Him.
In the Middle Ages, the Church-sanctioned Holy Crusade where Christian Monarchs in Europe were brought to the task to reconquer the Holy Land, had cost the lost of innocents and unnecessary waste of lives. Alongside, the Church had been accused to have killed and burned in the stakes by way of the establishment of Inquisition Court to purge out heretics from its flock in order to safeguard the integrity of its doctrines and teachings. Sometime also in the middle ages the Church was accused to have elected a female Pope named “Joan.” But now as agreed by scholars and historians we came to know that all this is nothing but stuff of legends.
Moreover, the general inclination of the Church in the past to meddle in the political affairs of the states, had led to a life of corruption and unholy collusion to the powers that be. At its height, this brought about the Investiture Controversy where the Church had challenged the authority of Monarchs over the power of appointment of church officials.
Not to mention that there are also erring Popes, like Pope Alexander the VI born Rodrigo Borgia which was notorious for debasing the papal standards. There was also the so called “Avignon Popes” or otherwise known as the “Babylonian Captivity” where French and Roman contenders alike had contested for the Papal throne. Among others, this led the rebellious Anti-Popes who, after going against the authority of the Church to elect the Pope, ended up electing themselves as the self-proclaimed Pope.
Of course, not to be excluded in the list are: The scientific persecutions, which were systematically undertaken by the Church in order to conform with its accepted position on the knowledge of the natural world: notable of which was the case of Galileo for his position that the Sun is the center of the solar system and the Earth and other planets revolve around it, rather than vice versa.
In the aftermath of World War II, the Church was accused of the seeming inaction and disregard to condemn the German NAZI persecution of the Jew in the holocaust, which costs around six million innocent lives.
Today, the Church has been shaken with a new kind of scandal, one that calls into question and threatens the integrity of its servants: the Priest. Of late, the Church has been hit with sex scandal after the other, one that involved the molestation and abuse of children and illicit relationships with their parishioners. But the way that the Church has handled and dealt with it discreetly, has drawn severe criticisms from almost all sectors of society.
In retrospect, in March 12, 2000, the late Pope John Paul the II had issued a public apology: “Mea Culpa” asking for forgiveness for all the wrongs and lapses (i.e. the commission and omission of the same) that the Church had inflicted to humanity throughout all history. On the contrary, the Pope clarified that it is not the Church (being the Mystical Body of Christ) per se, that had committed such wrongdoings but rather the sons and daughters of the Church (being all too human, therefore, frail and fallible), who were behind its hierarchy and administration.
In the same way, we should not tend to forget that a Priest, though a servant of God, is also a human being like us who equally share each our weaknesses and tendency to make mistakes. There is no better way to put it, in the words of Alexander Pope: “To err is human, to forgive divine.”
Comments (7)
Seriously. Let your child/mother/father/brother/sister be raped/molested and then, you look into the rapist’s eyes and say “To err is human, to forgive divine.”
Bravo !
True to form! Your yahoo I.D. speaks diminutively of who and what you are? Hence, I will not dignify such garbage talk with a comment.
The comment of “You’re an Idiot” is not invalid just because of his/her ID.
But truly, can you say to the rapist: “It’s okay, go ahead, after all we’re not divine but only humans.”?
While you traced the “sins” of the Church in the name of God and ended it with the “Mea Culpa” of PJP-II, you are more concern in distinguishing the “sins” of the sons and daughters (more precise, the lords and princes) of the Church from the “Mystical Body” of Christ than to call for God’s justice in the name of the dehumanized victims (especially children and women) of the said scandal!
This is precisely the protest of both the believers and non-believers worldwide: We are so much preoccupied in protecting the “mystical body” of Christ and sacrifice the call for God’s justice in favor for the weak and the oppressed. Don’t we have prophets in our time? Why are they silent? Are they all dead?… Unless we’re ready to name an atheist like Hitchens a prophet.
There’s nothing to defend here. You don’t have to defend the erring sons and daughters of the Church. Even, the “Mea Culpa” of our late beloved pope John Paul II was not enough. The call for God’s justice in favor of the victims is the only morally correct stand even by the apologists.
I was provided a link here by innermind. I almost forgot this thread. But let me clarify some things here:
As I noted that the article lacks the call for justice, I would like to note that in his personal level, the writer hope that justice is served.
“I personally condemned such acts that deviate from the norms and standards. I could only hope that justice shall be meted out to those proven guilty of such misdeeds.”
I was expecting a direct call to action for the vindication of the victims from the article. His personal hope for justice in the first paragraph is not enough. After he wrote ““To err is human, to forgive divine.” there must be a call for catholics to petition, for example, the pope for the speedy resolved of the scandals by giving justice to the victims. A call for justice is more active than a mere hope for justice.
You may argue that this is an apologetic article and not a petition paper. But even an apologetic paper is not immune from the ethical demand of the prophets and Jesus himself about the call to action in behalf of the victims.
sorry for multiple entries.
please delete other entries. it was due to internet connection. thanks
In response to comments of Nomadic Gadfly:
On your first point: I agree that the yahoo I.D. of “You’re An Idiot” does not in any way invalidate his comment nor affect the validity and the soundness of his argument. But then again neither did I assert that to be the case? As is evidently his clear intent, the comment is loaded with sarcastic insinuations. So I opted for a quid pro quo counterpoint to give him his own dose of medicine, hence, the utterance of such quip. So that being the case, renders your point moot. Secondly, the matter at issue is only hypothetical, and is not a matter of fact. Obviously, it is not so wise to comment based on speculation. Thirdly, the oft quoted line by the poet Alexander Pope was taken out of context. It is only meant to be a poetic expression rather than a literal one. But “You’re An Idiot” took it so literally. Of course, that could hardly be done in reality. To go to such extent is an impossibility (it is like asserting that man is perfect or that man is immortal). Fourthly, you might have missed the point here because you’re taking the issue to the extreme. But let it be put on record that I am not saying that it’s okay to wrong your fellow individual. What I’m pointing at is the tendency to make mistakes being all too human. That being said does not excuse them from the equivalent consequences of their actions.
On your second point, the distinction between the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ and the sons and daughters of the church is only a qualification rather than the main intention. We are of the same side: we are calling for “God’s justice…” “…Prophets in our time”?? Beware also of false prophet! Hitchens might fit the description!
On your third point: Indeed, there is no point defending the side of the Church. But isn’t it, that is, precisely what my disclaimer is all about: Not to take the cudgels for the Church? If anything at all, I only laid the proper perspective and underscored the fact that such thing is commonplace out there in the real world: both in biblical and general history. In so doing, the truth shall be set free in due course. Again, to reiterate my position: We all are calling for God’s justice as well as the justice of the land to uphold and protect the interests and rights of the aggrieved parties.
On your fourth point: I fully agree with you that it is rather best to call for justice than merely hope for justice. But wait! I think that you might have been barking up the wrong tree here. The right course of action is to petition the state rather than the church because the church, the erring priests, in particular is the defendant here. It is the state that prosecutes the case and dispenses justice to the aggrieved parties. As it is now, based on the latest development, this is already unnecessary, since the Church has already opened its doors and cooperated with the proper authorities for an impartial investigation in order to serve justice to where it is due. True enough, convicted erring priests are jailed and made to pay for damages for the crimes that they had committed. This just goes to show that even servants of God like the priests are not immune from the law of the land. Even priest have their day in jail. “No one is above the law!”
Leave a reply