When Jesus met up with them, the disciples were earnestly talking about local events: the collapse of a tower in Siloam, the slaughter ordered by Pilate. They told Jesus about them; gave Him the news.

Trying to deal with these events—one seemingly accidental and the other the work of an oppressive government— led these men to deal with them by guessing that the Hand of the Lord was in them, that the victims got what they deserved.Both parties. Dealing with the arbitrary aspects of life, particularly in the tragic, solutions are hard come by. God is the answer, or the ultimate one in any case. Invoking human guilt follows easily enough; God would hardly punish the upright. To bring that up only worsens the matter.

But Jesus won’t buy it. In fact, He denies this answer by bringing up other cases where this view was of no use. One would think, therefore, that this would have guided Christian thought in coming generations: that reading a God of reprisal into it when tragedy strikes, is uncalled for and not correct. Yet, it is still a common view. Maybe not spoken, but assumed.

Lincoln, in his Second Inaugural, lays the causes of the Civil War in God’s lap as His answer to the sin of slavery. More recently, some evangelists tried to tie the tragedy of 9/11 to God’s punishment for our sins. That they had to withdraw the statements does not mean they did not try or did not really feel that way. In the latter case more immediate causes were at hand and made divine intervention uncalled for in the immediate context.

We have similar talk in reference to the clerical troubles of the last few years. God punishes His Church for sins done: God is angry at our failings. And at our efforts to cover them. —Who knows? Or who can read the Mind of God? Or better: does not my own sin have its own sequel? Good cannot follow it. You reap what you sow. It’s in the nature of things.

And now, on the edge of further disclosure of child abuse rampant in our society, yet hidden, covered, denied? Or ignored. That 4% of the clergy were involved is one thing. Another is, how many others? Surveys to date are at least alarming. Perhaps one point about the revelation of some priests is the key to worse revelations on a wide scale in family life.

It is sin that no one speaks about, talks about, preaches on, or instructs. It is a phenomenon that lacks our explanation, has no defense. But the revelation is due.

And is this the work of God? The pay for our sins? The verdict against our land, our people, our families, our faith? Easily said. Better say: your own sins catch up with you sooner or later. God need not do it. But here comes the bad part. Patience and hope. No ruthless remedies. No drastic action.

“Let me care for it another year and we’ll see.” Now we are talking God.  Try yet again.

But such positive action will never follow denial. If you do not see the tree in need of encouragement, you are no help. Then a very certain action in the face of failure is to see it, cope with it, do something about it. Not to play soothsayer reading the Mind of God, but to be the shrewd human who knows that sin will never develop a good fig tree, any more than neglect.

We see the situation and know that, given more hope and grace, we can heal and be healed. Deo adjuvante: “With God’s help.”  Amen.