It is one thing for us to debate how parishioners should be treated when they are in violation of what is ac cepted as normative by the community of believers. We rightfully up the ante, however, when the offenders are clergy, and when their behavior violates the standards not only of the church, but also of the surrounding secular society, and borders on or actually constitutes an illegal act.
For example, how are we to treat our fellow clergy when they take advantage of the power and influence of their high and holy office to sexually exploit or simply be illicitly involved with those whom God and the church have placed in their care?
Few today would question that, under these circumstances, and contrary to anything that might have been done in the past, there is a great need for the truth to be told and disciplinary action to be taken. But is there any room for grace! Is there still room for grace when clergy exploit their parishioners or others sexually? If so, how much room is there, and when and how is this grace to be applied? These are important questions.
The series of articles this year in Ministry by Miroslav Kis (see this on this month's page 8, with more to come in September and November) has provided a base for anyone attempting to answer this question. Then in our May issue Dwight Nelson's "Requiem and Resurrection for a Fallen Brother" purposely provided us with the balancing element (grace) that must be part and parcel of our attitudes and actions toward the "fallen."
Pastor Nelson's article deals with the role of grace and communal forgiveness in restoring—not necessarily profession ally reinstating—a pastor who has become sexually involved with the wrong person. (See also the letters addressing this article, and Dr. Nelson's reply to them starting on page 3.) In general terms the approach of Miroslav Kis and Dwight Nelson represent two inextricably connected, co-mingling principles— truth and grace—that must always be present when we deal with any offender. The intimate, irreducible unity we create between these two living principles, that is, the way we bring them togeth er to interact as one in a given situation, is vitally important to the quality of our ministry to others, including our fellow clergy.
Truth means courageously telling it like it is to the guilty party. It means facing uncompromisingly the wrong that has been done so it can be seen for what it is and be rectified. Grace is looking with authentic love right into the eyes of the offending person, noting the destructiveness and offensiveness of their act and being palpably willing to see beyond it to the ideal of unstinting love, forgiveness, and communal (not necessarily professional) reinstatement. Grace is what inspires a guilty person with the courage to honestly and fully confess their wrongdoing and reform; a vitally important act in the process as a whole.
"For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ" (John 1:17, emphasis added). Here John is clearly implying that Moses and the law were not the ultimate revelation. The ultimate revelation is in the embodiment of grace and truth, truth and grace, which were inseparably fused into one in the divine-human per son of our Lord.
While we devote ourselves to ministering to those who have been hurt and even devastated by the awful action of a fellow clergy person, we have to embrace the fact that we are in a truly unique "business": that of being ready, regardless of what's politically correct, to minister effectively and holistically to anyone who is weeping over the horrors of their own fallenness.
We are called to thoughtfully and prayerfully enter consistently into the wise and demanding practice of employing both truth and grace as we deal with one another. This is the way of Jesus Christ. It's a matter of truth and grace . . . grace and truth.
