Zero Tolerance absurdities

There’s been much argument against my (reluctant) defense of the irritating and evidently clueless Fr. Jaeger, but nothing that really answers the basic questions, “Since when is being stupid a crime?” and “Is it really just to destroy a man’s entire career for something as trivial as his highly ambiguous offense?” Sorry, but if he’s a Dignity priest that doesn’t cut it. Nor does the fact that the archdiocese settled. Nor does the fact that they kept an eye on him (proving thereby that he hasn’t done anything). Nor does the notion that it “suggests” something. Not one of these things would be sufficient to prove anything. So it seems to basically come down to “I dislike him because of something he did a long time ago” and “He’s heterodox”. And on this flimsy basis, a man’s life is to be destroyed?

Orthodox Catholics had better be particularly wary of enshrining this way of enacting the Policy in practice, because it will come back to bite them on the butt. It will basically transform the policy into a tool for getting rid of priests the bishop doesn’t like on the flimsiest of “He made me uncomfortable” grounds (and heaping everlasting disgrace on them to boot) when their real crime was “being orthodox” or failing to get with the bishop’s program of Weaklandizing the Church in their diocese.