I am surprised at the negative reaction this occasioned, which actually all the more shows it was needed. This was not in reply to anything, just a new topic of something I have had for quite some time, and really like it. In general, I do see people need help with understanding the virtue of charity better. Why was the first question in response whether it was posted at SGG? Why the fixation against SGG in almost everything? I have no idea whether the SGG bulletin even reprinted that.
Yes, it is a good question whether one likes it. Why? Because one should like it. If one may not personally care to follow that example it does not necessarily mean he also condemns that example, so it is a good question whether one likes the original post or not. It represents in a most Catholic way the effects of original sin, our fallen inclination to think the worst, even about a priest, based on nothing but a simply observation. Only two examples really were necessary, but more simply drove the point home more.
The original post is purely hypothetical, and was not addressed to any one. First, it relates a fact about a priest, and then mentions an extreme that fallen human nature may rashly judge in response. Very realistic. I love it because it reminds me well of thinking the best. It wards off sarcasm and cynicism in thinking negative things about others. Yes, for individuals it is humble to consider the worst in ourselves, while it is humble to consider the best in others in regard to moral fault.
Unfortunately, I see that SJB and gladius_veritatis are replying, but just to let everyone know, since my words have been deleted with that Ode thread, I had put SJB and gladius_veritatis on ignore, so, I will not be responding to their comments. Their insults in ordinary discussion are really too much.