EXCERPT:
After twenty centuries, Catholics symbols can get pretty complex (some of us knew that even before The Da Vinci Code!). And this week's events in Ireland gave two ancient symbols a new relevance.
The first involved the washing of feet. At a special ceremony of repentance in Dublin's Saint Mary's pro-Cathedral, two bishops -- Cardinal Sean O'Malley of Boston and Archbishop Diarmuid Martin of Dublin -- knelt to wash the feet of eight victims of priestly sexual abuse. The full church watched these bishops lie prostrate as abuse government reports of child abuse cases were read by lectors. They also saw the bishops join in applauding the several victims who interrupted the ceremony to give their own spontaneous testimonies.
The foot-washing ritual, of course, has deep Christian roots….
…This week's ritual in Ireland added yet another layer, echoing the repentant woman who anointed Jesus’ feet as much as Jesus himself. This was a gesture, not only of service, but of abject apology for the suffering of all the people those eight victims represented.
But another, less hopeful symbol also intruded, for at least one victim (Paddy Doyle, who was among the first to blow the whistle on Ireland's scandal) was unimpressed, and invoked another image from Catholic tradition to express his skepticism:
They said the cardinal from Boston wanted to wash my feet, but it sounded like they wanted to wash their hands of the whole thing, so I said no.
Off-hand, the phrase "wash their hands" might seem like an everyday figure of speech, but of course it also derives (like many "everyday" expressions) from the gospels. ..
...How sadly ironic that, for too long, church officials faced with charges against priests mimicked Pilate, washing their own hands of any responsibility for the fate of abuse victims and the future behavior of child-abusing priests.
Patti Doyle's doubts are perfectly understandable… Most often past churchmen have simply repeated "Roma locuta est." -- Rome has spoken -- to squelch any questioning of the hierarchy’s authority.
Even when they acknowledged some past misdeeds, such admissions have been consistently couched in a convenient but specious distinction between the Church (which never failed) and individual members of the Church's leadership. I call the distinction specious because, if the Church is the People of God, it fails if the leaders fail and the people follow their lead. But this was an admission we never heard.
What gives me hope in this case is that Sean O'Malley used the right words for a change. Yes, he first asked forgiveness for "the sexual abuse of children perpetrated by priests," and these words were par for the course. But then he went on to ask forgiveness for the past failures of "the Church's hierarchy, here and in Rome, the failure to respond appropriately to the problem of sexual abuse." This refers not to abuse itself, but to the mismanagement that covered up that abuse -- and this places responsibility for that squarely on bishops and even on the Vatican. Such a statement goes well beyond the usual grudging admissions of churchmen.
Finally, O’Malley stated:
Publicly atoning for the Church's failures is an important element of asking the forgiveness of those who have been harmed by priests and Bishops.
Again this refers to the failures that covered up abuse, holding "bishops" responsible. But more striking to me is the phrase "the Church's failures" -- clearly breaking with that old pretense that the Church itself never fails. Yes, we believe that divine guidance guarantees the Church will never experience total failure in its mission or disappear from the face of the earth. But divine guidance does not make the people of God any less human. O’Malley’s statement finally breaks through the denial of that sinful humanity.
No comments:
Post a Comment