Two moral issues, two different responses

The front page of the Sept. 29 Post-Gazette presented an interesting juxtaposition of news articles. The articles on Cardinal Donald Wuerl, “Wuerl’s Pittsburgh Colleagues Stunned by his Turn of Fate,” and U.S. Sen. Jeff Flake, “Trump Agrees to ‘Limited’ FBI Probe of Nominee Kavanaugh,” focused on issues concerning sexual abuse and allegations of sexual assault.

The similarity between the two men is that both Cardinal Wuerl and Mr. Flake have positions of authority. However, the similarity stops there.

The striking difference between Cardinal Wuerl and Mr. Flake is that Cardinal Wuerl serves a monarchy, initially based on the teachings of Christ. Cardinal Wuerl’s “government” demands obedience to the highest office, the pope. Rules promulgated by the Code of Canon Law are immutable. Obedience to the code maintains the institutional power of the Catholic Church.

On the other hand, Mr. Flake serves a democracy led by an elected official, the president. The government is based on the U.S. Constitution which is interpretable and amendable. Mr. Flake’s goal is the maintenance of rights guaranteed by the constitution.

When confronted with the abuse report, the Catholic Church went silent. Pope Francis urged silence and prayer. Bishop David Zubik declared a Year of Repentance to be practiced by those who did not commit any abuse and clergy who remained faithful to their vocation.

In contrast, when confronted in an elevator by a sexually assaulted woman, Mr. Flake exercised his moral conscience. Mr. Flake requested an FBI investigation regarding Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh as the vote moved from the Senate Judiciary Committee to the Senate floor.

Two men, two moral issues, two different responses. Mary Lou Mlecko

Downtown