Kuwait Times

Published Date: July 16, 2007
By Shamael Al-Sharikh, Staff columnist

It is not unusual for Muslims to have a bad reputation these days. Thanks to terrorist groups such as Bin Laden's Al-Qaeda and Hezbollah, we are the majority on the most wanted lists of several countries, including Muslim countries. It is unusual, however, for other faiths to have a bad reputation and Christianity, specifically Roman Catholicism, has recently dealt with incidents that have tarnished its reputation.

The first incident took place in Los Angeles. The archdiocese of Los Angeles paid a $660 million settlement to 508 victims who claim that they had been sexually abused by Roman Catholic priests as children. The settlement is by far the largest one made in the history of the illicit scandals that have plagued the Roman Catholic church in the past years.

Along with financial compensation for the victims, the archdiocese has had to release documents that showed how priests evaded being questioned about their crimes against children. These documents showed priests that took sick leaves during questioning while others resorted to hiding behind therapy to avoid it all together. These documents revealed that many of the priests were allowed to practice preaching, even after the first few victims came out in public, which caused a major embarrassment for the chu
rch.

The second incident took place in Asuncion, Paraguay. A Roman Catholic Bishop- turned presidential candidate, is causing problems with the Vatican. Fernando Lugo resigned as a bishop in December 2006 to run for president of Paraguay in the April 2008 elections. Lugo's campaign is socialist-oriented as his platform is based on finding solutions for poor farmers and workers who work in the soybean and cotton fields of wealthy landowners. He was exposed to this poverty working as a bishop in the impoverished
San Pedro region of Paraguay.

Ideally, Lugo's platform goes perfectly in line with Christianity's doctrine of helping the poor and it makes perfect sense that a former bishop would run on a socialist-like platform. However, this is not the case.

The Vatican has refused to accept Lugo's resignation from his post as a bishop because it is a "for life" commitment. For a bishop to resign his post is for him to risk excommunication from the church altogether. Furthermore, Pope Benedict XVI has publicly stated that politics is not the domain of the clergy and that Christianity's goal is not to free the poor from injustice. If Lugo's resignation is not accepted by the church, this means that he maintains his position as bishop which also means that his c
andidacy is illegal because Paraguay has a ban on clergy running for office.

There are other controversial issues within the Catholic church such as the ban on abortion and family planning, but these are shared by other faiths as well. The fact that priests cannot marry and thus take out their frustrations on the children of the parish is strictly a Catholic issue. In addition, the fact that a bishop who wants to help the poor, risks excommunication from the church is also strictly a Catholic issue.

The problem however, is not the Catholic church per say, but rather the powerful individuals in it who refuse to modernize it. Just as Islam has men who want to keep our faith in the days in the middle ages, so too does Catholicism. It's these men that are the root of people being disillusioned with God and his monotheist faiths, and it's these people who would do their faiths well by either modernizing it, or at least by staying out of the public's eye with their irrational dogmas.

Why can't a priest get married? Why is it that almost every sect in the world allows members of the clergy to seek partnership, when the Catholic church does not? Moreover, why can't a priest run for office? I am an ardent believer in the separation of church/mosque and the state, but in the case of Fernando Lugo, he is not bringing the church into politics, but quite the contrary.

He is leaving the clergy. The reason he is leaving this institution is to help the poor and needy of his country. This is in line with both his political beliefs and his Christian beliefs. For did not the bible in Proverbs 14:31 state "Those who oppress the poor insult their Maker, but those who help the poor honor him"?

I take no comfort in knowing that we Muslims are no longer the only faith whose religious scholars embarrass them with their draconian thinking. In fact, I am saddened to see that draconian thinking is continuing its stronghold on Muslim and Christian religious institutions. It is indeed a sad state of affairs for both faiths.

Email: shamael@kuwaittimes.net