Great timing on this piece, forwarded by a friend of a friend. Just yesterday I posted this cryptic note which probably few understood: “I’m not a Donatist. But I’m not not a Donatist. (Let the reader understand.)” The Bonhoeffer analogy seems additionally fitting because he was a dialectical thinker, and the issue of clerical character, istm, must be addressed dialectically. That is, keeping the two poles of God’s agency and clerical character in dialogical tension.
Excellent Ben. I’ve seen this lax attitude you are describing many times over my 50 + years ordained and I remain concerned how Bishops have benefited from it even today. And hence as you have documented in Canada, have a stake in keeping the denials in place.
What I need to underscore is the evidence of the shattered lives of the victims of clerical abuse whose relationship with God, the church, and others in authority are often forever harmed.
Sadly, better accountability in the US has not been led by us clergy but by the Church Insurance Company’s pushback over having to pay the claims that resulted not just by the perpetrator but by those in authority who are complacent for the reasons you have so well described.
I take great comfort in the "ex opere operantes" principle, but that it is used to excuse immorality, is diabolical. In Supplemental Eucharistic Prayer #3 ((written, I believe by Dr. John Webster (May his memory be eternal) and Dr. Alan Hayes)), it says "we praise you, Merciful Father, not as we ought but as we are able." I like that.
Great timing on this piece, forwarded by a friend of a friend. Just yesterday I posted this cryptic note which probably few understood: “I’m not a Donatist. But I’m not not a Donatist. (Let the reader understand.)” The Bonhoeffer analogy seems additionally fitting because he was a dialectical thinker, and the issue of clerical character, istm, must be addressed dialectically. That is, keeping the two poles of God’s agency and clerical character in dialogical tension.
https://substack.com/@onceaweek/note/c-132902884?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=16589c
Thank you so much!
Excellent Ben. I’ve seen this lax attitude you are describing many times over my 50 + years ordained and I remain concerned how Bishops have benefited from it even today. And hence as you have documented in Canada, have a stake in keeping the denials in place.
What I need to underscore is the evidence of the shattered lives of the victims of clerical abuse whose relationship with God, the church, and others in authority are often forever harmed.
Sadly, better accountability in the US has not been led by us clergy but by the Church Insurance Company’s pushback over having to pay the claims that resulted not just by the perpetrator but by those in authority who are complacent for the reasons you have so well described.
I take great comfort in the "ex opere operantes" principle, but that it is used to excuse immorality, is diabolical. In Supplemental Eucharistic Prayer #3 ((written, I believe by Dr. John Webster (May his memory be eternal) and Dr. Alan Hayes)), it says "we praise you, Merciful Father, not as we ought but as we are able." I like that.