Saturday, May 7, 2011

heinous crimes: Zero Tolerance and Complete Transparency (NOT)

Try a Refreshing Approach: Zero Tolerance and Complete Transparency STOP DRAGGING THE CHURCH THROUGH MUD.

Why is it that the church seems content to conceal within its ranks the most heinous crimes? How is it that they could possibly find it ethically, morally or legally appropriate to deal with crimes under some sacred seal of the church?

Wouldn't a zero tolerance be the best shield against deformation law suits? Isn't the protection of  children and the flock a moral imperative? What creates actual liability to the Church? Relocation; ongoing at infinitum investigations; the standard protocol of allowing abusive and destructive clerics to simply retire as if that is corrective action, therapeutic or justice; dismissing misconduct as mutual and consensual; demonizing the abused as 'troubled'; failing to immediately suspend cleric with compensation if necessary until allegations are address in doing so the priest no longer has a platform or bully-pulpit to sway public opinion or intimidate; suspension would openly acknowledge that the hierarch is concerned and seriously attending to the allegation otherwise an endorsement or a vouching for the cleric is perceived. Laity generally would perceive inaction as exoneration as surely the bishop would never allow such things to continue. What about the church harboring a perpetrator as opening a real legal can of worms. That would seem better reason to call State Authorities and the FBI then a few email leaks. THE CHURCH IS CALLED TO HEAL NOT TO SIMPLY DO NO HARM (which also seems to be beyond its ability).

The deranged actions of an individual who is removed, suspended, sanctioned, exposed and simultaneously turned over to the states attorneys office or child protective services for its independent investigation would amputate the cancer and exonerate and over time reduce the liability of the broader church. I wish the church at the OCA would stop functioning as a corperation and start behaving like churchmen. It should seem obvious even to the oblivious, that  due diligence, not a cavalier anemic systemic "deny, deny, deny" approach  "protecting at all cost  clerics' defending their eccentric proclivities  and serving portfolios investments.

The OCA should begin to listen more to its conscience then to their lawyer. The OCA has been bent on concealing rather then corrective action. Where are all the moral men said to have committed themselves to leading children and adults to the Church to Christ. It would seem that more credence is given to the boys club then to any victim. I would say that we should start speaking in terms of alleged perpetrator and not alleged victim.

No comments: