Of Clergy Immorality And Merciful Shariah Punishments

By Mohd Luttfi Abdul Khalid & Danial Ariff Shaari

Today, 13 March 2017 marks the Fourth Anniversary of Pope Francis’ election to the Roman Catholic Papacy (Bishop of Rome and leader of the Catholic Church) but it is overshadowed by serious allegations of sexual abuse and immorality among its clergy.

The alarming news was first reported by USA TODAY on 9th March, merely four days before the 4th anniversary of the Vatican papacy.(1)

Of all places or country to be rocked by allegations of sexual deviations, abuse and immoral activities, Italy was a surprise candidate, given its staunch Catholic population and the center of the Christians universe, Vatican City. And this is not an isolated incident, where a casual search on the internet would reveal more lurid details about the immoral and detestable behaviors practiced by the Catholic men of faith. Most of the times, these acts would go unpunished or simply lost in the labyrinth of legal process or simply concealed from public scrutiny.

Victims often see their chances of retribution or closure for the dark episode suffered throughout years of pain and sufferings becoming more remote. In many instances, death or old age overtakes them before justice is duly served on the perpetrators.

It is observed that the abovementioned news did not make it to the mainstream or to the liberal left pro-Opposition media. It was as if the scandal affected only the clergy but not the Catholics or Christianity itself. Undoubtedly, it will not make good marketing pitch or propaganda material to the current climate of Shariah-bashing and vilification of Islam and the Muslims in Malaysia. Certainly not to the evangelical work associated to the Catholics worldwide.

In the Malaysian context, the hype now is to subtly demonize the Islamic Shariah and spitefully portray an image of Islam or Muslims that are very extremist, vengeful, lacking in foresight, contemptuous of human rights and liberties, inconsiderate towards the non-Muslims and ready to spill blood.

The mode of operation perhaps has changed or improvised, but the spirit and substance are always constant throughout the ages.

Thus, it is not a difficult task to read, observe or conclude how politicians, especially from DAP, MCA, Gerakan, MIC and PKR try to sneak in their inherent mindset in their persistent efforts to crucify Islam, the Islamic Shariah and the Muslims’ perfectly legal and reasonable demand for the tabling and passing of the Private Bill called RUU 355. To the Islamophobic political parties and their politicians, RUU 355 is a most opportune leverage to orchestrate such an attack.

Every single aspect of the Islamic Shariah and its Deen will be “microscoped” and tainted with “bad blood” whenever necessary to derail the efforts to elevate the status of the Islamic Shariah (or some parts of it) even though it has no legal bearings or implication on the non-Muslims or affect their rights at all.

The recent incident about two Indonesian Buddhists in Acheh being punished (after they have willingly chosen to be subjected) under the provisions of Islamic Shariah is an expected yet classic example.(2) And the fact that Seputeh MP, Teresa Kok selectively chose this incident (without disclosing the full facts – thereby exposing her own laziness in the process) as another one of her insensitive mischievous attempt to disparage the Islamic Shariah or its implementation merely reinforces the argument and notion that the racist and chauvinistic DAP has a deep-seated animosity towards the merciful implementation of the Shariah.

Despite the consistent efforts of Penang Institute (and other similar minded groups, institutions or individuals) to crown itself as the new spokesman for Maqasid Shariah (thanks largely to the generous helping hand of some Muslim politicians and activists closely affiliated to the DAP’s agenda) and despite its large unlimited fundings and resources, the DAP-dominated opposition (which includes MCA, Gerakan and MIC), the civil rights groups, the liberal activists and even certain Islamic political party and NGO, the Muslim populace does not and will not buy the idea of Islamic Shariah and its teachings being dictated or elucidated by those who have forfeited and disqualified themselves (by commission or omission) from the very beginning.

It is the common Muslims’ belief that the punishments under the Shariah possess an underlying layer of Mercy (Rahmah) in whatever provisions it prescribes, including its penal law. The brilliant minds among the Muslim jurists (both “traditional” and “modern”) has presented what is now famously known as Maqasid al Shariah (loosely translated as the Purpose of Legislation – the narrative of which Penang Institute and its collaborators tried vainfully to hijack).

In layman understanding, Maqasid Al Shariah is the rational, wisdom and objectives behind the provisions of Islamic Law and the protection with which it provides whenever the Shariah becomes operative in any given time, space and geographical locations.

Briefly the Maqasid al Shariah comprises Five elements:

1. Protection of al-Din (Islam)

2. Protection of Life

3. Protection of Intellect or Faculty of Reason

4. Protection of Progeny or Offspring

5. Protection of Material Wealth

It can thus be seen that when Islam was revealed as Mercy for all mankind, it meant that ALL laws and regulations emanating from the Creator of mankind can never be cruel or barbaric.

For the protection of Al-Din, having faith (Islam) is necessary (Dharuri) while apostasy (including unIslamic ideologies) was prohibited.

For the protection of Life, murder was made a crime.

For the protection of Intellect and Faculty of Reason, drinking alcoholic beverages is punishable.

For the protection of Progeny or Offspring, the institution of marriage was mandated while adultery is a punishable offence.

For the protection of Material wealth, lawful occupation is highly enjoined while robbery and burglary are also punishable offences.

The Islamic Shariah is a unique set of legislation tempered with mercy and very much regardful of the well-being of mankind.

And since there is no clergyhood in Islam, NO ONE who professes to be a Muslim is exempted or immune from prosecution, whether he is a diplomat, Tuan Guru, Members of Parliament or Head of Islamic departments. The common farmer is as much subjected to the provisions of the Shariah (and the Malaysian legal system) as is the head of government. Any breach of such prohibitions will be responded with the force of the law. There is no special protection, privilege or immunity.

Due to the lack of space, these Five elements will not be thoroughly explored here. Suffice to say, the Islamic Shariah and its implementation was never about trampling of rights, prejudicial or selective prosecution, ultra vires or infused with vengeful motives.

The latest shocking news by the USA TODAY revealed 2 priests who have been suspended and removed from their church territorial unit in Naples and Padua. The priest in Naples committed gay orgies and paid online partners for sex while the one in Padua offered his lovers in prostitution and hosted sex parties for his fellow priests.

Child sexual abuse committed by Christian priests has long been a dark and sad story. A 2010 news on BBC compiled a series of hundreds of complaints regarding child sexual abuse reportedly happening across the world as early as 1950s involving Catholic Church in countries like Belgium, Ireland, United States, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Netherlands, Malta and Spain.(3)

Even if the police investigated the abuse claims, they were to no avail. The police refused to press for charges and police raid of the churches seeking for evidence was held to be illegal. Accusations were leveled against Church authorities in Europe and North and South America all the way to the former Pope Benedict XVI for their ‘culture of secrecy’ and reluctance to take strong actions against the abusers.

Marie Collins, a prominent member of a commission advising Pope Francis on ways to protect the minors from sexual abuse by the clergy, has reportedly alleged that her resignation on March 1, 2017 was a response to the Vatican’s hierarchical ‘cultural resistance’ to implement the commission’s recommendations.(4) The lack of action she claimed reflects an appalling paradox as the whole abuse scandals are being handled “with fine words in public and contrary actions behind closed doors”.

A New York legislation seeking to loosen one of the strictest statutes of limitations on child sexual abuse cases has invited criticism from the Roman Catholic Church.(5) Bridie Farrell leads the advocacy in favour of the bill claiming on March 5, 2017 that ‘the institutions of the abusers’ are protected by the present law which only allows the victims of child sexual abuse to bring either a criminal or civil action against their alleged abusers before they turn 23 years old. It is a short period of time for the victims to come forward and be brave to sue for the monstrosity, without even knowing whether they would succeed.

Compare the Islamic Shariah to the shocking incidents involving the Catholic Church described above. Gone has the moral compass and the illusion of love that is supposed to protect the well-being of the adherents. When an institution or organised religion has been invaded by unbridled desires and suppression of human nature, the wall of protection crumbles and its inhabitants exposed to danger. Protectors then turn into predators.

This is what DAP’s Teresa Kok miserably failed to understand when she shared a news report about two Buddhists in Acheh who were punished under the region’s Shariah laws. She conveniently left out the part where the offenders who were convicted for cockfighting exercised their rights by preferring caning (according to Shariah laws) over imprisonment under Indonesia’s criminal laws. The punishment under Islamic Shariah was fairly lighter (on non-Muslims) than that prescribed on Muslims for the same offence.

What is more interesting to note is why did the two non-Muslim offenders opted for to be punished under the Shariah? The truth is that the Shariah legislation is bearable and more compassionate to the offenders compared to the punishments under the criminal legislation. Not to mention, the Acehnese Buddhists choose to voluntarily submit themselves to the law of the region out of respect, a true definition of loyal and law-abiding citizens.

This aspect of the beauty of the Islamic Shariah is lost upon the minds of the frenzied detractors, such as Bebas, Sisters in Islam, Islamic Renaissance Front and Islamophobic individuals such as Zaid Ibrahim, Siti Kassim, Boo Su-Lyn, Farouk A. Peru, Zurairi AR and others.

Interestingly, Tuan Haji Karim Omar in his blog has highlighted that some DAP leaders, MPs and ADUNs are staunch Evangelists.(6)

“One of the most distinguishing factors is their evangelical Christianity.”

So, apart from this, DAP is basically a racist political party. Their entire leadership structure is almost made up of Chinese individuals. Any Malay faces are merely for window-dressing purposes and they serve no valuable function except perhaps to be fielded in the coming 14th General Elections to garner Malay votes.

It is thus not strange to observe that whenever they (DAP) attack the government, UMNO is always the target, but not Barisan Nasional, conveniently or purposely omitting the mention of BN component parties – MCA, Gerakan dan MIC. Why point your guns to your comrades working in tandem (from within and without) to oust UMNO from the seat of power in Putrajaya?

It is not surprising to see chauvinism and evangelism becoming intimate bedfellows and sharing a common objective when they witness a looming potential and opportunity for PAS and UMNO to work together for the common interests of the Muslim community.

In the unrelenting, aggressive and well-orchestrated campaign to demonize the Islamic Shariah and block the possibility that the Private Bill RUU 355 will turn in favour of the Muslims, the DAP, the liberals and all their collaborators and comrades seem to forget that they have unwittingly exposed their true nature as being dishonest and hypocritical.

The Vatican should have a more comprehensive RUU 355 to protect the morality and virtues of church goers. We are very sure that none of the DAP Christian Members of Parliament would oppose such laws.

For the record, the RUU 355 is meant for the Muslims only.

Get that into your heads!

Refer:
(1) http://ift.tt/2mDQ0gJ
(2) http://ift.tt/2mDTeRF
(3) http://ift.tt/1H1jZHe
(4) http://ift.tt/2lV9noq
(5) http://ift.tt/2lV7bNK
(6) http://ift.tt/2lUWriF

The post Of Clergy Immorality And Merciful Shariah Punishments appeared first on Portal Islam dan Melayu.

Sumber