Replies

Because of his access to media records, Dreher, out of sheer curiousity, checked out the priest, only to discover that he had been banished from his former diocese, as a result of priestly sex abuse. Dreher suddenly found himself in a conundrum. On the one hand, he thought so highly of this priest's orthodoxy; on the other, he was totally scandalized by the priest's history. As a journalist, after much internal deliberation, he decided to 'out' the priest in an editorial.

Lets think about this a moment.

The Priest has (possibly) committed a dreadful sin in his past (can't say for certain unless he owned up to it). He has presumably repented and moved on with his life in a positive direction in tune with the will of Christ (Dreher notes that he was a wonderful priest in Dallas), and been forgiven by God and his spiritual superiors (the Bishops).

Now Dreher the Scandalized comes along and is, "Shocked, shocked" to find old sins amongst the members of the Church. What's more, he feels a need to trumpet them to the world, to make sure that everyone else is aware of another man's secret sins. (In my old Moral Theology Manual, the exposure to public view of the secret sins of others, especially sins for which they have been forgiven and done penance, is noted as a serious mortal sin.)

Dreher was obviously never a Catholic. A Donatist possibly. Maybe a Hussite or Wycliffite. Perhaps a Jansenist. But definitely not a Catholic.

A Catholic would understand that the members of the Church are sinners striving to be saints, and that the reason for the confessionals in the Church is because man is in need of repentance, not because varnished wood doors with latin inscriptions over them look pretty and enhance the aestheitc experience of worship.

Christ came to forgive sinners and perfect them, not gather the perfect and confirm their spiritual superiority.

This priest seems to me to be like the Tax Collector, while Dreher looks like the Pharisee.

Rod needs to take a long hard look in the mirror.

A Catholic would understand that the members of the Church are sinners striving to be saints, and that the reason for the confessionals in the Church is because man is in need of repentance, not because varnished wood doors with latin inscriptions over them look pretty and enhance the aestheitc experience of worship.

I think the problem is that the priests in question were never striving to be saints, but rather were unapologetic homosexuals who used the church as the tool to further their perverted ends. They may have worn the collars but in fact I hardly think they were Catholics, let alone priests.

In my old Moral Theology Manual, the exposure to public view of the secret sins of others, especially sins for which they have been forgiven and done penance, is noted as a serious mortal sin.

You bring up a good point. I wonder if Dreher spoke to the priest before he published the details of the priest's past.