LETTER OF THE DAY - Miller on a tightrope
Published:Wednesday | June 30, 2010 | 12:00 AM
The Editor, Sir:
It is always advisable and appropriate to present a balanced perspective on any issue that is the subject of discussion and reflection. This applies to the current fiasco involving the Reverend Merrick 'Al' Miller. I believe that Rev Miller had good and admirable intentions. It seems he actually wanted Christopher 'Dudus' Coke's life to be preserved, which was expected of him as a pastor. This is one side of the issue.
The reality is that a pastor should not be biased in his attempts at facilitating redemption. He must stand above the fray of partisanship and refuse to take sides with respect to persons to whom he seeks to reach with the love and forgiveness of Christ. For this proactive pastoral redemptive approach, I commend Rev Miller.
Nevertheless, I must state that he was apparently wrong, legally, to attempt to take a known fugitive to another destination other than to a police station. This is the other side of the issue. He was walking a legal tightrope and he fell. Actually, the rope was shaken by the police and both he and Dudus fell off.
It seems that, from a legal point of view, the pastor erred. His apparently erring move was reflective of his humanness. They say that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The well-experienced man of the cloth should have brought his wisdom to bear on offering pastoral guidance to Mr Coke. Humility is required in the aftermath of this colossal pastoral blunder.
Interestingly, Rev Miller has claimed that he was doing 'the right thing'. He has declared that his conscience is in the clear because of his conviction that he must always do the right thing. He implies that the right thing to do is more important than the legal or lawful thing to do. His position on the matter throws into sharp focus the age-old philosophical contention between the morality or ethicality of an action and the legality of that action. Many have argued that that which is legal is not necessarily moral and that that which is moral is not necessarily legal.
What I found saddening about the incident in which Mr Coke was apprehended by the police was the absence of the application of basic common sense and simple rationalisation in the face of the expedient. In a real sense, I do write with the benefit of hindsight and I am mindful of this fact. However, it is quite clear to me that Rev Miller should not have tried to bypass the legal system in Jamaica because he was placed in a predicament by an allegedly dangerous wanted man.
The ethics of the pastoral vocation should have guided his heart and his hands as he drove. I do not embrace the call for a protocol for pastors to consider and utilise in dealing with alleged criminals who seek their assistance. To me, what is required is adequate pastoral education and, in some instances, re-education, and the application of basic common sense.
I am, etc.,
Rev Earlmont Williams