Victims?

Recently, Dennis Prager wrote a column offering his answer to why some people elect to do evil things. He suggested nine other possibilities, ranging from the devil to several mental disorders. Then, he presented his answer which I quote here:

10. Victimhood. A lifelong study of good and evil has led to me conclude that the greatest single cause of evil is people perceiving of themselves or their group as victims. Nazism arose from Germans' sense of victimhood -- as a result of the Versailles Treaty, of the "stab in the back" that led to Germany's loss in World War I and of a world Jewish conspiracy. Communism was predicated on workers regarding themselves as victims of the bourgeoisie. Much of Islamic evil today emanates from a belief that the Muslim world has been victimized by Christians and Jews. Many prisoners, including those imprisoned for horrible crimes, regard themselves as victims of society or of their upbringing. The list of those attributing their evil acts to their being victims is as long as the list of evildoers. (1)

Now Dr. Prager suggests this explains why various, “liberals” seek to set up various ethnic or economic groups to think of themselves as victims. Let us consider the other side of the street.

This week in another part of the world, Dr. Virtue writes:

The final line in the sand will be drawn for beleaguered orthodox parishes and dioceses in The Episcopal Church, many of whom face nasty legal challenges over ownership of their properties by liberal bishops. The jettisoning of the biblical, traditional Anglican expression of the Christian Faith, which has led thousands of orthodox Anglicans to leave the Episcopal Church, will ratchet up to a higher level following the failed Sept. 30 deadline set by the Primates in Dar es Salaam for TEC to mend their Episcopal nets.(2)

Now an observer seeing that the ‘orthodox’ parishes or diocese are ‘beleaguered’ might feel that the parishes should be able, or are in fact required, to defend themselves. And, there in lies a motive for various defensive tactics. But, are there parishes or diocises, that are under siege by the national church?

The record is clear, albeit the ‘orthodox’ pay no attention to it. Every single lawsuit against a parish has two characteristics. First, the parish members (and generally clergy) have attempted to take physical property belonging to the church from it to what they think of as a more Christian place. As they do not own the property, but rather hold it in trust for the Episcopal Church, they fail when sued. Second, the actions against them are initiated not by the national church, but by the diocese. Now if being prevented from committing theft is an act of persecution, then I suppose the ideas Dr. Virtue expresses, that they are under siege makes sense.

Later in his article Dr.Virtue also states that these parishes are being denied ‘orthodox oversight.” Two things should be said. First no one is guaranteed a bishop who agrees with them. Second, the bishops do in fact offer a process, DEPO designed to permit congregations that are not happy with the views of their bishops to find options. Most refuse to use this process.

It is my observation that the refusals are all of a piece. If they accept the offer of DEPO, they have to admit their ordinary is still the bishop. So, they refuse, then claiming that they are victims. So, what I see among the, ‘orthodox’ is a rush to be victims. Does a bishop exercise her fiduciary responsibility to claim property that belongs to the church, clearly by preventing theft, she has ‘persecuted’ the parish. In fact of course a parish cannot exist aside from its bishop, so there is a major non-starter in this approach, but it is used none-the-less.

Other forms of ‘victim-ness’ are claimed. When a priest or deacon seeks to leave the jurisdiction of the bishop, they are required to have permission. The standing required to exercise apostolic priesthood or diaconate requires a relationship with a licensing bishop. Only the bishop can release the license to another bishop. But, if one is leaving because one considers the bishop inadequately holy, and one is attempting to steal church property as part of one’s exit strategy it is unlikely that such a release to another bishop will be forthcoming.

The ‘orthodox’ however have not been severely handicapped. They have bishops who are as hostile to the Episcopal Church as they and these men (mostly from Central Africa) have been as willing as they to ignore the requirements. In fact, leaving TEC for a foreign bishop has become so common among these folks it has a name: discovering one’s African roots.

Remember however, the ‘orthodox’ are seeking victim status to justify themselves. These clergy do not request release. In one way that make sense, as I cannot imagine what the central African bishops would do if they actually got a transfer! In any case, however, they also do not resign. There is, of course, a formal process for resigning from ordained ministry in TEC. Ask yourself how a man (they are almost all males) who has refused to obey the bishop, who claims he is now under the jurisdiction of someone in Nigeria, and who is involved in litigation against his bishop trying to take property he does not own, can claim to be an Episcopal priest? And yet, each time the bishops act to remove these men from the list of active ordained persons, Dr. Virtue and others react and obsess over the ‘persecution’ of the ‘orthodox.’

Back to Dr. Prager. He suggests that once one claims to be a victim, one can defend evil actions as defensive. And here we have ‘victims’ who steal, or at least try to steal. Victims who routinely slander, calling faithful Episcopalians heathens, apostates, heretics, sodomites, among the nicer names used. These victims, some of them, shadow attend conferences ghostwriting deliberate slurs into resolutions and advising African archbishops on how to bully others. “Victims” who have produced recently, three bishops whose function is to attack the church in America. They have no mission in the regions (provinces) which consecrated them. How a priest can desire to be consecrated to attack his own church is beyond me, but in the pursuit of victim--hood, no inconsistency, no evil matters.

Now you may have noticed that I have not touched on the issues that divide the, "orthodox" from TEC. In a real sense they do not matter. In fact, it is my view that they are mostly smoke designed to obscure the need to use something to create victims and thereby, opportunities for otherwise rather ordinary clergy to become bishops.



******************************************************
Prager, Dr. Denis “Why Do People Do Evil? “ 4 September 2007 on Townhall.com:http://www.townhall.com/content/ea7ef8cb-2a96-4d6b-b5b6-1580fcf0d2b8
Virtue, Dr. David “COUNTDOWN FOR THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH'S HOUSE OF BISHOPS” 3 September 2007 on Virtueonline: http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6611