That makes a lot of sense, Guest; after all it is patently kinda absurd for a "spiritual" leader to be shielded for the most heinous of fleshly sins, while poppycocking about on issues such as adultery and abstinence. A commitment to sheilding them, I would offer, is tantamount to a commitment to betraying any glimmer of genuine purpose in the institution itself, since what is being so energetically protected is the betrayal of the deepest trust.

Of course this might mean a number of guys in pointy hats end up getting ten to life, but, hey, you take your chances when you opt for a life of crime, no matter how fancifully you pretend it isn't so.

Down deep, even the most violent criminals did what they did believing it was the right choice of the moment, given all factors. The problem was they had no perspective from which to weigh their factors against values or more enduring "truths". This perspective is one of the products of spiritual leadership. When the leaders themselves cannot or will not provide it, it is a clear symptom of deep distress in the premises, practices, and insights of the organization.

'Nuff said.

A