Andrei Cornea, Dilema.ro: The Legend of the Cherubim in Dispute and the Case of Viorel Pașca

A Haggadic legend believes that among the two golden cherubim placed on the Ark of the Covenant in the Temple of Jerusalem, one was of the Law, while the other was of Compassion. When they were facing each other, in the world, the Law and Compassion complemented each other and things went well. But often the cherubim, quarreling, stood back to back, and then either the Law was applied mechanically, forgetting Compassion, or it intervened against the Law, and the world went badly.

I was reminded of this legend while witnessing the scandal and controversies surrounding the case of the philanthropist without authorization from Bihor (Viorel Pașca) who has received, hosted, fed (and sometimes even buried) thousands of homeless people for over a decade – the sick, the elderly, the disabled – whom the state institutions responsible for protecting vulnerable individuals sent to him, either because they could not find another option or because they no longer wanted to deal with those unfortunate ones. Now the man is under investigation by DIICOT, accused of having formed an "organized criminal group" that allegedly abused vulnerable individuals. The feeling I have (I am not at all the only one) is that the prosecutor's office has been drawn into a politically orchestrated action and that the way it has been acted upon in practice (massive deployment of forces, dismantling of Pașca's "colony") has been completely disproportionate and counterproductive both for uncovering the truth and for finding a humane solution for the individuals under the philanthropist's care.

So let Pașca be a hero of Compassion, who saves people in need whom society and the state marginalize, neglect, and are unable to protect (as a good part of public opinion already believes), or is he a criminal who abuses, in defiance of the Law, the suffering of others and extracts who knows what personal benefits (as the prosecutor's office is now trying to demonstrate and some investigative journalists support)? It is premature for me to pronounce, although the first alternative seems more plausible to me. But let’s simplify the case: let’s assume we have a case of authentic philanthropy, yet outside the law for various reasons – excessive bureaucracy, negligence, convenience. In other words, Pașca can be simultaneously an ethical hero and a legal offender: he has repeatedly and consistently violated the law by not authorizing his organization, but he has also protected and saved the lives of thousands of people for many years.

How can this conflict between Law and Compassion be resolved, saving of course Compassion and its recipients, but without dramatically invalidating either the Law, which any civilized society must take into account? The conflict could be resolved, but not with gendarmes and arrests, but with intelligence – through a skillful interpretation of the Law, of any relevant regulation. The goal must be to integrate individual acts of charity into the institutional-legal domain, transforming private "banditry" into a recognized charitable organization – both protected and verified by law. But, I repeat, for this a certain interpretative intelligence is required. Here is a beautiful and historical example. It is said that, at the death of Molière, the Church, enraged at the great comedian because of Tartuffe especially, refused to grant him the right to be buried in a cemetery, on the grounds that an unrepentant blasphemer cannot be buried in consecrated ground. His daughter appealed to King Louis XIV. He summoned the Archbishop of Paris and asked him to show compassion for the great deceased. He refused, invoking canon law. Then the king asked him: "How deep is the consecrated ground in a cemetery?" "Up to three feet, Your Majesty." "Well then," said the king, "dig a grave deeper than three feet." And so it was, and Molière could be buried. The law was not violated, but only circumvented through a skillful interpretation in favor of Compassion – indeed, we would say, also in favor of the glory of French letters.

For the two cherubim to start looking at each other, after a time of showing their backs to each other, the treatment requires an injection of intelligence. And, of course, the will to apply it. Are we asking too much from our own, aren’t we?

https://www.dilema.ro/situatiunea/heruvimii-certati