Question: Does Safety trump Forgiveness?
Maybe this is not the proper forum for this but I need some input from traditional minded Catholics about something that has been eating away at me. I need some different (if possible) takes on this and, out of desperation, thought I would take a shot and throw it out here. What better place than the CWG, right?
Okay, here goes. In their justified and necessary quest to prevent further scandals in the church the USCCB adopted the Charter for the Protection of Children & Young People (including vulnerable adults) which was modeled after guidelines established by the Dallas Charter of 2002. The bishops had to act and they did a marvelous job addressing the issues and implementing safeguards etc. So, what is my problem?
As a Eucharistic Minister who visits the home bound I was required to go through a two phase process to remain eligible to continue in this ministry. Part A) was a level 2 background check which included complete fingerprinting run through the FBI data-base. Part B) was the requirement to attend a “safe environment” training seminar. At this seminar a packet of various papers was handed out and included in these papers were three sheets listing 47 different offenses that immediately eliminated a person from any diocesan job (paid or volunteer) where children or vulnerable adults might be. Then one of the moderators happily explained how the FBI check had turned up a man with a DUI from 20 years earlier and how he was immediately relieved of his volunteer position as a school bus driver for field trips and other functions. This guy had not had a drink or been in any trouble since the DUI. I immediately was upset with this and asked about “forgiveness” and was told that “we HAVE to protect the children”. Look, I’m a parent and a grandparent. I know about protecting kids. This to me was over the top.
Second case had to do with a 29 year old man who I know very well. This guy has a learning disability and was hired as a dishwasher at a local Catholic high school. His problem was that, when he was 19, he and some of his teen aged buddies got drunk and this guy passed out behind a local restaurant. His friends left him there, the manager saw him and called the police and when the police tried to wake him he shoved the one cop. Result: “resisting arrest” and “battery on a police officer”. The FBI check pulled up these charges and he lost his dish washing job, just like that. Since then he has wound up being treated at the local mental health clinic and is severely depressed and on medication.
My question to anyone who may read this is; Does “Safety trump Forgiveness”? Did Jesus tell the woman caught in adultery to “go and sin no more but stay away from kids and vulnerable adults for the rest of your life”. I don’t think so. Your convicted pedophiles and sexual deviants cannot be allowed around kids. That’s a no-brainer. But, have we stepped over the line with this and are we, as catholics, unforgiving those who have charges against them that can be of no threat to anyone. Safe Environment predicated by Zero Tolerance seems to me to be a tool that can only lead to disenfranchising many catholics and even causing scandal by rejecting forgiveness. Help me out here, PLEASE.
- He Died in a Concentration Camp—His Crime Was Being Catholic - May 2, 2024
- REJOICE! The Journey to Christmas Has Begun - December 5, 2023
- A Gangbanger’s Journey to Sainthood: Meet Peter Armengol - November 7, 2023
Larry, I've noticed that, often, the people who talk the most about the need for forgiveness are the least likely to extend it. Perhaps this is because they are without sin (which probably explains the rock in their hand). Coupled with the fad of "zero tolerance" and it's permission to not have to actually think, there is currently a twilight of common sense and personal responsibility in the exercise of societal control. To my mind, this leads to two results; a "I was just following orders" mindset and a "one strike and you're out of here" style of thinking. This latter element has most likely been with us since the garden and is something Jesus was correcting when he said to Peter, "…not seven times but seventy-seven times."* Unfortunately, it has become codified in what was once the Christian West. With the rise of information technology, every man now carries the mark of Cain. It's a good illustration of of the remark, "Man never forgives, but Jesus does."
* Matthew 18:21-22
(The CWG blog shows up on my FB page. I got this reply):
Theresa A Henderson My thoughts are, and always have been, that Jesus taught the spirit of the law was equal to the letter of the law. In other words, he taught forgiveness which was dependent upon regret for the sin, pay the debt of the sin, ask forgiveness, and try never to do it again. That sounds like these men fit that criteria. God created the Church for sinners, Holy mother Church had always opened her arms to sinners. There is such a level of stupidity in carrying zero tolerance to that depth, that we may end in a dark age in the church. What's next? Public confession and year long penances?
And here's a reply that ended up on the Catholicwritersconference FB page:
Val Allen God holds the "trump" card and is ultimately the one who forgives. The Church takes this stance as much to protect the employee as to protect the church. If an employee had some silly accident…tripped and pushed someone…media found out there was a past record… I'm sure you get my point. In our suffering, there is much to be learned. It is time for the Church to strengthen the front lines and rise to defend the Godly morals and righteousness that made us who we are. It isn't about forgiveness and really not about safety. It is about being under the media microscope and Satan riding on the wave!
Then, to sum up what you are saying, ultimately, it is all about lawyers. We shall "forgive" as long as it is "safe". This is the reason I posted what I did.
Coming to this late as I catch up on a zillion things. Larry, I think it is important to distinguish "forgiveness" from "opening myself up to another attack", or "leading someone back into temptation".
–> I can completely forgive you for socking me in the jaw, and still choose to keep two arms lengths between us for future conversation. (To ALL: hypothetical scenario, Larry hasn't gotten that mad at me yet.)
In the two situations you describe, though, it appears common sense has been abandoned. It is reasonable to err on the side of caution when the facts cannot be known and the evidence points towards a hazard.
But no, cultivating a climate of fear and suspicion, where no one can ever be proven innocent or worthy, that is not the answer.
Clear thinking, and getting to know each other, is a better way. We are fallen, but we aren't all *that* fallen.
Unfortunately, these days our lives are often so compartmentalized that getting to know each other is kinda difficult.