We have understood?

If one or the other churchman no longer understands the world, that doesn't have to be a catastrophe. However, if church decision-makers do not sufficiently understand the mechanisms of the information and media world, this is more than problematic for a company that primarily wants to proclaim a "Good News".

One can now argue at length about where the reasons for the failure of the research project on sexual abuse by priests lie. Even interested observers, however, are turning away, now that the blame is being sought and dirty laundry is being washed after the failure of a trusting collaboration that had been successfully launched. This is like married couples in a divorce war – fie devil!

Whether the director of the Criminological Research Institute of Lower Saxony Christian Pfeiffer accuses the church of censorship and destruction of files – or the latter accuses the former interior minister of self-righteousness and misuse of data. The trust once there is completely used up and in the public perception remains stuck: The church does not want to make completely clear table in things abuse nevertheless. Especially for the victims this is a devastating signal. Unfortunately, it is of little help when the churchmen emphasize that they want to continue to educate people and are only looking for a new project partner.

Transparency and openness

The laws of the information and media world simply regulate truth-finding differently today. In the past, it might have been possible to "approve" books and make sure that they were only true and worth reading with a papal "imprimatur". Today, a "pope of criminology and media" does not allow his mouth to be shut anymore. The ecclesiastical patrons, who at the time had their own professors, also knew that. Pfeiffer selected to win back lost trust. That was daring and courageous. Somewhere in the difficult detailed work between science and church, between data protection and clarification, courage then fell by the wayside. "Both sides are damaged!", stated Bishop Ackermann, who is responsible for the matter. He has a point. But for the church, the damage is far more severe. It was not the bishops, but a courageous Jesuit priest who, with the support of the media, even against opposition in his own ranks, started the ball rolling that had long since become the abuse millstone. Those who find themselves in a huge crisis of confidence, which they themselves have helped to create, must also have confidence in critical spirits. In addition, scientific results live from the fact that anyone can check them. Would Pfeiffer's research findings, whatever they may have been, have meant greater damage than has now been done?

When a shipwrecked man is up to his neck in water, and when he gratefully rejects the life raft he himself has summoned, pointing to the untrustworthy pirate captain, this does not necessarily have to be trust in God ..

Unsparing clarification needs courage and trust. Moreover, in an information and media society, transparency and openness must be ensured. Yes, one must give power out of the hands, in order to get at all new confidence given. Politicians and companies who do not relentlessly seek clarification after a painful loss of trust are finished, regardless of whether they themselves "no longer understand the world". The church is making efforts in the area of enlightenment – but unfortunately not really successful, that's how the public perceives it. The Christian at the basis has understood that many times. It pains him when his church is once again associated in public more with power and abuse than with good news. Just recently, Christians sang the familiar Advent hymn: "Announce to all in need, take courage and have faith – soon our God will come, gloriously we will behold him."Has one already lost sight of the trust, courage and hope of the just celebrated savior again? His word to the children of Abraham was: "Then you will know the truth and the truth will make you free!" (John 8:32).