Dear Brian,

You bring up a good question. It is difficult to analyze this as an exact science. Even the Catechism doesn't go into the fine detail needed to make the distinctions you ask about.

I tend to believe that we should never publicly denounce a particular person's wrong behavior, but should continuously, publicly denounce the behavior itself. In other words, continuously and publicly denounce adultery as a behavior, but not Senator X for committing adultery. Those particular condemnations are better left to the man's family, his conscience, and God.

On the other hand, we live in a democracy where someone's behavior could be a reason for not voting for him or for even impeaching him. But even here, it is best to focus on the behavior and the person's propensity for it, as being fit or unfit for holding office, rather than condemning the person involved or bringing it up in order to cause titillation or high ratings.

Another thing to realize is that most of the time we are privy to only partial and distorted claims and allegations through the media, and don't really know the whole story enough in order to make any responsible judgment. There are usually authorities whose role it is to get the facts and discover the truth. Allow them to do their job, and we should mind our business and do ours.

One of the most common sins I have noticed in my decades of living is the tendency for so many to condemn someone without knowing all the facts. Withholding judgment, personally and especially publicly, is the only responsible thing to do in these cases.

Our role as Christians is to love our neighbor, not to judge them; to condemn behaviors but not persons. Publicly pointing out where you disagree with someone or think they are wrong,
is legitimate debate if the goal is the uncovering of truth, but one must never attack the person in the process.

My two cents.

Peace,

Paul