The question of course is was Maciel the monster some say he was. Frankly, I do not know. There is unfortunately enough true allegations involving Catholic clergy and failure of Church leadership to make one proceed with caution.
But not all allegations are true. The fact that Richard Neuhaus defended him does not make Neuhaus a monster (unless of course Neuhaus intentionally disregarded the truth).
As journalism goes, attacking the dead is usually an easy target. They tend not to fight back or move much.
I do not know what the truth is about Maciel. Did he abuse young boys? That would obviously be a very serious sin. Did he have a mistress and child. Again a breaking of vows to be sure and a sin, although less of one than abusing minors.
But that Neuhaus defended Maciel (his friend) does not make Neuhaus evil. And that is the problem I have with Sullivan on this.
Sullivan on Neuhaus
The question of course is was Maciel the monster some say he was. Frankly, I do not know. There is unfortunately enough true allegations involving Catholic clergy and failure of Church leadership to make one proceed with caution.
But not all allegations are true. The fact that Richard Neuhaus defended him does not make Neuhaus a monster (unless of course Neuhaus intentionally disregarded the truth).
As journalism goes, attacking the dead is usually an easy target. They tend not to fight back or move much.
The Andrew Sullivan’s Rushmore-esque Prototype
http://blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2009/02/marcial-maciel-a-devil-in-prie.html
I do not know what the truth is about Maciel. Did he abuse young boys? That would obviously be a very serious sin. Did he have a mistress and child. Again a breaking of vows to be sure and a sin, although less of one than abusing minors.
But that Neuhaus defended Maciel (his friend) does not make Neuhaus evil. And that is the problem I have with Sullivan on this.