Jim Taylor’s Weblog

Sunday March 28, 2010

Pope’s pastoral letter misses the point

By Jim Taylor

Larger perspective
        These allegations of abuse are not just aberrations – a minority of rogue priests, a single isolated country, a tiny percentage who are victimized… Similar scandals have erupted in at least 19 other countries.
        Among them, Canada had its Indian Residential Schools, its Mount Cashel orphanages…
        The Los Angeles archdiocese paid $660 million in settlements. The Boston archdiocese was disembowelled by evidence of recurring coverups. Several U.S. dioceses have filed for bankruptcy protection.
        Europe has reeled over exposure of cases in Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, and Poland. Switzerland alone reports 70 cases under investigation.
        No doubt many will tell me I have no right to lecture the Roman Catholic Church on what it should do, or should not have done – that as a Protestant, an outsider, I cannot understand the Roman Church. Maybe so.

The institution’s reputation
        In fairness, Pope Benedict’s letter said many good things.
        He acknowledged – if in passing – that “the problem of child abuse is peculiar neither to Ireland nor to the Church.”
        He called the Irish Church to “acknowledge…the serious sins committed against defenceless children.”
        He commiserated with the victims: “Many of you found that, when you were courageous enough to speak, no one would listen.”
        He censured those who abused more than 15,000 children: “You betrayed the trust that was placed in you.”
        But he failed, in my reading of his text, to address the underlying problem. Which is not, I suggest, about discipline, morals, or obedience, but about the Church’s understanding of itself.
        Cardinal Sean Brady attended meetings where child victims were required to sign vows of silence. Why silence? Not to protect the children. Not to rehabilitate the offending priest. But to protect the institution that the priest represented.
        The Pope revealed this overriding concern when he asked readers to “reflect on the wounds inflicted on Christ’s body” and on “the long-term process of reconciliation and ecclesial renewal.”

A matter of theology
        “Christ’s body” is, of course, the Church — the means by which Christ remains present to today’s world. “Ecclesial” comes from a Greek word meaning “church” or “congregation.” Ecclesiology is the Church’s self-definition.
        In the episcopal tradition, the Church sees itself as divinely ordained, the lineal successor to the original apostles. Authority is literally handed down from Jesus to his disciples to present day bishops, by the laying on of hands.
        The Church, therefore, is not its 1.5 billion lay members. The Church exists in its bishops, who delegate authority to priests and religious orders.
        That makes a priest, even a lay worker, a representative of the immortal, the infinite, the divine… By contrast, mere lay people are mortal, finite, sinful…
        Could there be a greater imbalance of power? Especially among impressionable children? To a child, saying no to a priest is like rejecting Almighty God.
        The issue is not celibacy, despite the rantings of some who cannot imagine life without sex.

Undoing centuries of dogma
        Ram Puniyani, a writer from India, notes that sex scandals have also afflicted Hinduism and Buddhism. The common element, he writes, is a belief that as one attains greater spirituality, “the body becomes insignificant and interest in sex is reduced to nothing.”
        Experience teaches that such a belief is in error. When a spiritual leader is placed on a pedestal, that person gains power over those of lesser faith. With power comes the potential for abuse of power.
        As Henry Kissinger observed, “Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.”
        Of course, not every priest or religious succumbs to the temptation presented by that power. But a few do.
        St. Augustine of Hippo, one of the shapers of Roman theology, taught that the sacramental function of a priest was independent of the priest’s personal life and morals. Whether or not Augustine was right – and I personally side with the opponents he ruthlessly slaughtered – one cannot expect ten-year-old children to distinguish between a priest’s public persona and his private acts.
        Had the Pope seriously tackled these issues, he would have had to admit that the Church can be wrong.
        He didn’t.
        Perhaps – given the inertia of 20 centuries of tradition — he couldn’t.
        But I wish he had.
=====================================
Copyright © 2009 by Jim Taylor. Non-profit use in congregations and study groups permitted; all other rights reserved.
        Please tell your friends about these columns. To send comments, to subscribe or to unsubscribe, or to request permission to reprint, write jimt@[email protected] Be sure to include Soft Edges or Sharp Edges in the subject line, so my spam filter doesn’t delete your message.
=====================================

Your Turn



Not as much mail as usual about last week’s column on the hidden racism in Canadian society, but some significant contributions.

=====================================

About My Books

Over the years, I think I have written (or ghostwritten) about 17 books. Several of them (mercifully) are no longer available from any source. But here’s a listing of those that are still available. The ones marked “WLB”, you can order from Wood Lake Books, either on-line at http://www.woodlakebooks.com, or call Wood Lake Books directly at 1-800-663-2775 in Canada, 1-800-654-5129 (Pilgrim Press) in the U.S. The ones marked “JT only” are now available only directly from me — as collector’s items, I price them all at $25 Cdn.

=====================================

*****************************************