I didn't feel it was right or proper to join the pack of publications and weblogs that are busily chewing the fat over this, now that his fat is in the fire. Lord knows there are plenty of people out there speaking out on this sad story. I didn't see what good would be accomplished by joining that chorus. Nevertheless, by posting this thread, we head into that territory anyway.

Christianity Today, interestingly, isn't writing about Deal's plight per se, but about those Catholic weblogs, including this one, that aren't writing about it. So now, like it or not, I guess we have a foot in both worlds.

I first met Deal in March of 1990 at a Catholic Answers Conference at which we both were speakers (I was on staff with Catholic Answers then). When our paths crossed later at other Catholic events, I found him to be congenial and erudite (two qualities that don't always go together), with a reputation as a man of action and ideas, committed to doing what he can to further the mission of the Catholic Church.

His expanding influence in conservative politics, leading up to George Bush's election in 2000, until now, seems to have followed the trajectory of his efforts to overturn Roe Vs. Wade and whatever else can be done to protect the lives of unborn children, who are menaced by America's pro-abortion extremist politicians and the abortion industrial complex they're factory repping.

He strikes me as a fundamentally good man trying to do good things for the Church. But even so, he has racked up a hefty supply of critics and enemies, some on his left and some on his right, some from within the Catholic Church and some in the secular world. This isn't surprising. Inevitably, when someone takes a public and impassioned stand on a controversial issue (and precious little in politics and religion is not moltenly controversial these days), people get their knives out. And when given the chance, many will use them.

Step One: Insert knife.

Step Two: Twist vigorously.

Step Three: Repeat Steps One and Two.

Deal has publicly professed his repentance and sorrow for sins he's committed, including the ones presently under the microscope. One can hear the gleeful cackling and self-satisfied harrumphing from some quarters of the peanut gallery as some relish the spectacle of a prominent Catholic getting his comeuppance. It's as obnoxious as it is predictable. But it's human nature, after all, right? Point the finger. Snicker and gape and crook your thumb over your shoulder at the poor fellow whose dirty laundry is cycloning wildly around him. Maybe even kick him while he's down, eh? We'll no doubt see some of that, too, from fellow Catholics.

But not everyone is getting their kicks from this. Some Catholic commentators are offering sober observations in hushed tones. Their restraint is admirable. There is nothing wrong with teaching and learning lessons from a cautionary tale such as this, but even so, it's a squeamish process.

I understand and largely agree with what a few of the more responsible Catholic commentators have said about this situation: Namely, that we should be consistent in our treatment of left-leaning Catholics whose foibles become known publicly; treating them the same way we treat right-leaning Catholics who get into trouble. A single standard for everyone. Yes, I agree with that. Butshouldn't The Standard be to avoid as far as is reasonably possible publically discussing and — let's be honest — even at times gossiping about, another person’s sins? At least not unless there is some serious and compelling reason to do so. What lasting benefit is there from all the prurient chattering about these things? None that I can see.

Honestly, I took no pleasure whatsoever in the reputation-implosion of men like Archbishop Weakland and Bishop O'Brien, when their sins were publicly revealed. And I take no pleasure nor feel any self-righteous vindication or satisfaction at the unending cascade of putrid revelations about loony left-wing priests getting caught with their pants down. How could any Christian be "pleased" at the revelation of another's sins? Each new horrifying “gotcha!” about a Catholic, regardless of where he may stand in the spectrum of “left” to “right,” is a heartache and a tragedy. And what deepens the tragedy is when Catholics and other Christians who know better, join the throng of gawking, mocking spectators. Some even stoop to pick up stones.

Whether one is throwing stones or just holding the cloaks of those who are, joining in on this gossipfest is contrary to Christ's command to "love one another," especially when the target is made to appear so unlovable by dredging up the humiliating details of sins that happened long ago. Like right now, for example, as Deal Hudson's endures his excruciating 15 minutes of added fame.

In my view, the best thing we can do is pray for Deal and his family. Spend at least as much time praying for him as you do commenting about him. May God have mercy on him and on all of us.

John 8:3-11 — The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst ^they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery.^ Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such. What do you say about her?” This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him.

Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground.^ And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.”

And once more he bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. But when they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the eldest, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus looked up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” ^She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and do not sin again.”