Paedophile priests, ISKCON, and sentimentalized compassion


A Catholic blog caught my eye this morning: Here

The writer suggests that the scandals in the Irish church could be partially attributed to the fact that Catholic priests were dealt with as ‘victims of their impulses’ and therefore deserving compassionate treatment. For this reason none of them were handed over to civil authorities.

Compassion is an extremely important quality, especially for those involved in cultivating a more spiritual life. And it’s true that, in general, we all tend to judge each other harshly, and with prejudice, so the general instruction for all aspiring spiritualists of any religious tradition might be: ‘Be more compassionate – and don’t judge others prematurely.’

But the ancient Greeks said that even virtues, when overly applied (and in the wrong circumstances) can become vices, and do a lot of harm. Compassion is one of the virtues, and its a great virtue; indeed, the great Pandava, Maharaja Yudhisthira, said that applied compassion – mercy – is the king of all the virtues. However, there is a time for compassionate action to become transformed to measures of discipline, so that a person may ultimately improve themselves, and that others may be protected. Not everyone in a group or society can be the recipient of compassion at all times and in all circumstances. Any society – even one based primarily on compassionate dealings – can only properly function when there is justice and discipline. If there is no discipline then continued compassion itself will serve to unbalance that society.

Srila Prabhupada tells the true story of a young man who was never disciplined throughout his childhood and who grew up a quite wayward fellow. He fell into bad company, was arrested by the police for a serious crime, and was about to be sentenced to a term in prison. He was asked if he had anything further to say, and motioned that he would like to speak to his aunt who had raised him. When he leaned over to whisper in her ear, instead of speaking to her he bit off a piece of her ear lobe. As she screamed and the blood ran down her cheek, he called out: “That’s for never disciplining me when I was a child! Now look at the result of your kindness!”

A Catholic priest applies God’s compassionate nature in his dealings with others, and particularly in the Rite of Reconciliation, where the confessions of the supplicant must be dealt with by his representation of the divine compassion of God. Its natural that within the very social institution of compassionate priesthood, that the dealing between priests should reflect the nature of the service they extend to others.

But there does come a time for discipline; which is only compassion applied in a different way. Forgiveness must be there, but that is never a substitute in any society for social discipline.

The whole affair becomes further complicated and problematic due to a Christian theological point which is often used to explain bad behaviour in the lives of otherwise good people: ‘evil influences’. Whether the individual actually believes in the Devil – and many priests these days do not – the notion that bad behaviour arises from forces external to the person can easily turn a perpetrator into a ‘victim’ of outside evil influences. Evil then becomes objectified and externalized.

For the Vaishnavas it is theologically impossible, in the ultimate sense, to talk of a Devil. We don’t have one, at least one that makes it his duty to force good people to commit evil deeds. External influences – yes; and demonic universal forces – yes. But ultimately the responsibility for the action lies with the actor. And the karma-phala – the fruit of actions – will accrue to the actor. Vaishnava theology puts any blame fairly and squarely with the individual, with the family, friends and mental disposition a product of former actions.

ISKCON has seen evil committed within its ranks, and unfortunately is no stranger to the pestilence of paedophile priests. And we, also like the Catholic Church, did not respond to the problem fast enough or in the appropriate way. We also tended to treat our priestly perpetrators as the ‘victims’ and preferred that their rectification be made in private, before God, without the involvement of civil authority. We, like the Catholic Church, could not countenance the embarrassment that the very people put on Earth to represent the Godhead were guilty of such heinous actions. We concluded that any localized incident of child abuse was a temporary aberration that could never – would never – possibly occur again. So nobody talked about it – and nobody saw certain patterns emerging. We will be paying for the consequences of those errors for years to come.

But we don’t have a Devil to blame, so how did we have so much compassion for our own priests that went astray? One reason might be that we are not entirely free from the sentimentalization of western society that has been growing for some decades now. It is quite fashionable in our ‘post-modern’ world to describe someone who resorts to criminal behaviour as a ‘victim’ of their upbringing; or of the educational system; or of their poor mental health; or that they were ‘victimized’ by falling into the wrong company at a crucial point in their life. Now all they need is love and understanding – and compassion – to reverse the process. It makes for everyone in western society understanding themselves as being a victim of someone or something else; and that there is always somebody to blame for their inadequacies.

Our theological loophole – the one that is most often misunderstood and regularly misused – is the verse in the Bhagavad-gita (9.30) where Shri Krishna says that: “Even if one commits the most abominable action, if he is engaged in devotional service he is to be considered saintly….” In his purport to this verse, Srila Prabhupada quotes a verse from the Nrsimha Purana (bhagavati ca harav ananya-ceta..) which explains that just as the spots on the moon do not impede the moonlight, similarly occasional accidental falls from the path of a saintly character do not make a devotee abominable.

But I have also personally sat before Srila Prabhupada when he used a comparable illustration in another way. He was perturbed by an illegality committed by his disciples and wanted to convey to us that we should not break the law in the name of Krishna. He said that if you have a white sheet with some black spots on it, everyone will look at the spots; and that if an ordinary man does something wrong then people may not talk, but that if a man who is supposed to be saintly does something wrong – then everyone will notice and talk about it.

So Bhagavad-gita 9.30 does not mean that a devotee of Krishna can do no wrong. In anticipation of our misuse of this verse Srila Prabhupada concludes: “…No one should take advantage of this verse and commit nonsense and think that he is still a devotee…”

ISKCON is a Society, but it is not separate from society in general. We have our internal rules but we do not have a process of law which runs separate from civil law. We don’t have our Vaishnava equivalent of the Islamic sharia. We are a branch of society, not something apart. If a devotee breaks the law then he must accept the consequences, the same as any member of society. God will forgive him, of course, but along with that state of grace may come social disgrace – and that’s good for the soul too.

Advertisements

5 Comments

Filed under Christianity, Devotees, Journal, Religion

5 responses to “Paedophile priests, ISKCON, and sentimentalized compassion

  1. So well put, Prabhu!

    These tendencies thrive in an atmosphere of secrecy. Protect the names of the abused, but publicly expose the names of the abusers so that others with the same predatorial inclinations can see the consequences. That will help protect the vulnerable members of society far more than any contrived ideas of what it means to be compassionate.

    There seems to be an increasingly strong tendency across the globe to confuse compassion with leniency. To support the idea of punishing or publicly embarrassing a criminal can easily get you labeled as calloused and “inhumane”. I see it the other way around though. By fairly and carefully administering punishment to those who are proven to be guilty we protect them and we protect society.

    This may seem like simple logic, but it is logic that doesn’t seem to penetrate the way a lot of legislation is interpreted and applied these days. So for this reason I thought it worth contributing.

    Your servant, Ekendra Dasa

  2. acarya dasa

    Interesting and well written article. A practical rule I would apply in dispensation of compassion (especially in the case of abusers) is that compassion must first be felt for victims or possible future victims. In other words, the first element of compassion is to make sure that the evil act, whatever it may be, does not happen again (either through legal action, counseling, punishment, various forms of restrictions, etc.). This will save both the (potential) victims and the perpetrators from further suffering

  3. DavidC

    I would say we do have an equivalent of “the devil”:

    Arjuna said: O descendant of Vṛṣṇi, by what is one impelled to sinful acts, even unwillingly, as if engaged by force?

    The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: It is lust only, Arjuna, which is born of contact with the material mode of passion and later transformed into wrath, and which is the all-devouring sinful enemy of this world.

    (BG 3.36 and 3.37)

    HOWEVER, this should be balanced with:

    Thus knowing oneself to be transcendental to the material senses, mind and intelligence, O mighty-armed Arjuna, one should steady the mind by deliberate spiritual intelligence [Kṛṣṇa consciousness] and thus — by spiritual strength — conquer this insatiable enemy known as lust.

    (BG 3.43).

  4. dhira bhakta das

    Compassion and understanding are something as a victim of abuse is hard and I say this as a victim of abuse by a member of a religious group in position and viewed by many as an exemplary member of society.

    Many refused to believe with the ultimatum being given to me that either I dropped the case or be dis-fellowshipped, and so this was what happened and as the only people I knew were in the same religion I basically lost everything.

    Initially I was resentful not only of the abuser but of the religious group that in my mind had protected him, and yes I got angry, angry and frustrated.

    Over time and with growing understanding I had two realizations:

    The religious group were not at fault; it is difficult to understand especially in the firm belief that there is some guiding principle we all sign up to and profess to follow.

    The perpetrator of the abuse was also a victim just like me, a victim of uncontrollable desire.

    In all religious groups, and even in my own nursing profession, the response to abuse has been slow, and for some time one of denial; moving the perpetrator to one area or another until the facts leak out or become too overwhelming or the victim like me has the courage to come forward; then action is taken retrospectively.

    For me, learning to forgive all concerned has been a long and painful journey.

    For ISKCON and other religious groups this has also been a long and painful journey with a responsibility to care for both perpetrator and victim of abuse; compassion is needed along with support for both as long as all due process required by the state is followed.

  5. Carlos Solis

    http://news.iskcon.org/node/3259/2010-11-15/new_gurukuli_memoir_of_abuse_a_powerful_reminder_for_further_vigilance

    This is very brave action from a person that experinced power abuse and how he has coped and faced this terrible incident. One can never tell if someone is living a moment where the action has its original roots or if its a reaction of an action in other lifetimes. If being forgiving is something very important, protection should also be considered by actually educating the simple maths of how sexuality works without turning it into a tabu or a confusing situation of
    could only affect vulnerable people, in many cases children and women. I really admire the author of this book beyond being a real man i woudl like to refer as self confidence and maturity to address an issue like this publicly and I really wish him the best to overcome any misfit and have a so called normal life, better even to have open the pandora box to create awareness among societies.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s