I came across this article in yesterday's Straits Times. It was
about a doctor who was accused by one of his clinic assistants of molest.While the general rule for crimes is "innocent unless proven guilty", for such "crimes of passion", it seems to be the reverse, ie "guilty unless proven innocent".
Whatever the case, the accused is always named and shamed while the guilty gets away scot-free.
In this particular incident, although the doctor was acquitted because of inconsistencies in his assistant's testimony, his name appears in the article in full.
On the other hand, the only thing that is mentioned about the assistant is that she is a 31-year old.
Some may ask, where is the justice? After all, the doctor's reputation has been stained while the assistant is none the worse. His photo appears in the papers for all the world to see, but she remains incognito.
But a deeper spiritual truth dawned upon me as I reflected upon this. Jesus Christ, the second person in the Godhead was named and shamed 2,000 years even though He was perfectly innocent. On the other hand, we the guilty and un-named are able to get away scot-free because of His complete and perfect work on the cross.
Hallelujah!
2 comments:
Hi Mal
Amen to the spiritual truth!
However, a note of caution: in the legal courts, "not guilty" is not equivalent to "innocent". It just means that there is insufficient evidence to prove guilt rather than a declaration of no guilt.
Having said that, I can also empathize with the person who is wrongly accused but whose reputation is nonetheless irreparably stained.
He was shamed so we needn't be named as guilty! That's a good slogan.
Post a Comment