No matter how bad it is for any of us, it simply isn’t true that there is no place for shame in a society, whether dystopic or Christian or any other kind. Though I don’t wish or pray for the experience for anyone, searching through the rubble for something good, I find I am grateful that my children have been able to see wicked people—who were also good to them—fall. My own children—all of them–will sin in their lives. They need to see how injurious it is to do the wrong thing. How it ruins people’s lives. How selfish it is.

In the course of 2022, which is mercifully wending its way to its demise, two people who my older children have looked up to in the latter parts of their teenage years became publicly discredited. In the first case, many months ago, the shaming that took place and subsequently made its way to the internet, at least at the time, appeared to be appropriate for the offense. The second’s Twitter litigation is mostly wrapped up, with no consensus reached on whether public shame was a necessary or useful development.
Viewing both of these occasions as a parent, it is not too much to say that I took it harder than my children, who are yet bright with optimism about the future and human potential. It was with trepidation that I talked to them both. They were shocked but, to my surprise, by no means unmoored. Pondering what might be the reason for this strange thing, it occurred to me that, though they can’t empathize with a person suffering public shame in the same way that a middle-aged person such as I might be able to (the young know nothing of suffering), yet my children have been given a good and useful gift. Being raised in a place that is best likened to a hospital for wicked people, they know in a heart kind of way that people are, in fact, wicked. They themselves are wicked—I can say without reservation for they are my children—but they are by no means unique. So is everyone else. All of us have together fallen short of the glory of God.
No parent ever makes this particular request, but when my children were very young, on more than one occasion, they were given the strange and difficult gift of seeing up close how wicked people can be. My desire to shield them from seeing human iniquity was not granted to me by God. At the time, I was most put out that the sins of the church came before their young eyes, and filled their delicate ears which, as a dear friend said about her child, “are always on.”
And yet, in consequence of early visions of human treachery, they (my two oldest children) are now able to see that God does not lose control of his church, however badly people behave themselves. Those early lessons properly oriented their expectations not only for their peers but for people who have authority over them, people to whom they owe honor. And so, in these two instances of people they know disappointing literally everyone, it seems they have been able to hang on with gratitude to the ways these two failures nevertheless treated them with love and humanity.
And yet, it should be—indeed must be said—both of these people were failures. For the community to see and acknowledge the failure means the certain shame and humiliation of the offender. And so I am brought once again to consider the place of shame in our social and cultural malaise. Brené Brown, the person whose writing kicked off my curiosity for the subject, posits that shame has no place in a good society. Men, for example, who have abused their wives should suffer no public shame, as some law in Texas apparently decrees. Why? Because, says Brown, a shamed person will not go home having learned a valuable lesson.
Read More
Related Posts:

On January 20, 2022, Richardson was fined $3,000 (plus lawyers’ fees). In response to this court ruling, Richardson wrote on his Twitter account: “Thank you for your prayers.  I have been overwhelmed at the outpouring of support in prayer that I have received in the last few days.  Praise God for a wonderful outcome: That I was allowed to address the court in Jesus’ name, and that I came away with a very small fine.”

In 2021, Pastor Steve Richardson of Faith Presbyterian Church in Tillsonburg, Ontario, was initially charged with two counts of exceeding the 10-person limit for church services that were conducted in the church building. Other charges were brought against Richardson for holding services outside. Each charge had a maximum sentence of one year imprisonment and a fine of up to $100,000, bringing the potential total to six years imprisonment and $600,000 in fines.
Read more here: Pastor Faces Six Years in Prison and $600,000 in Fines for Refusing to Turn People Away From His Church
Here is an update on Pastor Richardson’s case: On January 20, 2022, Richardson was fined $3,000 (plus lawyers’ fees). In response to this court ruling, Richardson wrote on his Twitter account: “Thank you for your prayers.  I have been overwhelmed at the outpouring of support in prayer that I have received in the last few days.  Praise God for a wonderful outcome: That I was allowed to address the court in Jesus’ name, and that I came away with a very small fine.”
Richardson detailed more about his experiences on his blog:
I want to offer here a brief update regarding my court case.  I do so with a measure of trepidation.  I have heard some say that if I believe my cause is just I should just quietly accept the penalty.  Some might think my updates have been motivated by pride.  They may feel that what I have done – in keeping my church open – was wrong and that spreading the word about my charges is self-serving and arrogant.  I can say this with a fair degree of certainty. Such men do not know my heart.  If they did I expect they would find it worse even then they believe.  I am nowhere near the man I would like to be, and if there is anything praiseworthy in me it is by the grace of God.  The truth is I am probably far more proud than I know.  Though I want to eschew pride, and while I desire humility, pride seems strangely natural to sinful men.  But I also know what motivated me through 2020 and 2021; and I can say that at every step I acted in faith, with sincerity and with an eye to the glory of God.  I can only hope and pray that I have not gotten in the way of the honour and praise that belongs only to Him.
Many readers will know that I was charged 6 times for keeping the church open during lockdowns.  I had continued to worship through 2020, but it  was not until December of 2020 that the police began to really pay attention to us.  Each of the charges carried a maximum penalty of 1 year in prison and 100,000 dollars in fines.  Cumulatively I faced a maximum of 6 years and 600,000 dollars.
Initially I opted to contest the charges as being unconstitutional.  However, when my relationship with Faith Presbyterian Church was severed this became an impossibility.  After a great deal of discussion with my lawyers, with other pastors and with my wife I decided that it was best to plead guilty.  Though I had not broken God’s law, there was no question that I had broken provincial regulations.  And my lawyer told me my case was not winnable.  If I were to lose – which I was assured I would – it would set a bad precedent for other pastors who had a better chance at trial.  It was agreed that I would plead guilty on the condition that I be allowed to (briefly) address the court.  This was against the advice of my lawyers, as they understood that it would not likely help my case.  Still, I felt constrained by conscience and love for my Redeemer to speak for Him.   For me this was the most important thing.  Not that I be spared a severe penalty or even jail time, but that I should honour Christ.
Early this week my stomach was in knots.  The lawyers assured me that the fine would be small and that I would not face jail time.  Still I recognized there was a small possibility that my statement would anger the judge and that he (having the authority to decide on the sentence) could make things bad for me.  I am a family man and the thought of prison is not appealing to the flesh. Early on I had researched a local Ontario prison; so I had an idea of the kind of cell that would become home if I did have to do time.  And of course I could imagine the trial of prolonged separation from my wife and children. As unlikely as it was, the fact that James Coates and Tim Stephens had both spent time in jail, suggested to me (at least) that it wasn’t an impossibility.  I didn’t know what the judge might ask me, but I knew I could not agree to any kind of compromise.  If asked I would do it again.  The principles that governed my behaviour in 2020 and 2021 had not changed.
Then Wednesday came, and part way through the day it was as if I could sense the prayers of the saints.  I knew many were praying as I had heard from a number of them… but it seemed that the Lord was very near.  I felt a tremendous peace and even joy.  I was overcome with a sense of the worth of Jesus Christ.  He was worthy; and that is all that mattered.
This morning as I prepared for court I was filled with a desire to be allowed to suffer for Christ.  It was not a carnal martyr’s complex or anything like a fleshly desire for man’s praise.  I just felt an intense longing to be allowed to follow in His steps, to be counted worthy to suffer for Him and perhaps even to be given a prison ministry.  The thought filled me with joy.
I cannot tell you what a blessing it was to go to court (online) with my Bible open at 1 Peter 4:12-16, knowing that cause was just, and keenly aware of the prayers of the saints. Our God is faithful, and He is indeed a prayer hearing God!
When I appeared in court this morning the judge indicated that I would be allowed to give my statement after sentencing.  However, the crown had not seen what I had prepared to say and asked to see it.  When he and the judge looked at what I had prepared they decided that I should read it before sentencing.
Here is what I said:
Thank you sir.  I have always believed it is my duty as a Christian to honour civil authorities, to pray for them and to obey all their laws except where those laws come into conflict with God’s laws. I deeply desire to be on the right side of the law. But my allegiance belongs ultimately to my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
If I were to comply with regulations that limit the number of those who can gather for worship, prayer and fellowship, or regulations that would limit what goes on when we do, I would be derelict in my duties as a Christian pastor. That is something for which I would one day have to answer to God. I do not want to disobey my civil authorities, but I cannot and will not dishonour and disobey my King. He died to save me from my sins, and I love Him for it. I owe Him everything and I count it a joy to live and die in His service. 
I was amazed when I was finished to hear the judge say “thank you very much.”  He then proceeded with his own statement and the sentencing. After a bit of a preamble the prosecutor was advised that my statement indicated I would do it again and that the crown might want to use it in the future if needed.  That, he said, was up to them.  He then explained that I would have to pay $3000.00 (plus costs & surcharges).
I see this as a tremendous answer to prayer.  Certainly the court was wrong.  They were lenient (for which I am thankful), but their decision to sentence me for gathering God’s people for worship was both a violation of the Charter and an egregious sin against God.  Still, I recognize that God has overruled this for good.  He has mercifully spared me and my family what might have been a very severe sentence.  For this we are deeply grateful.  He is good, and He is most worthy!
I have been praying for those in court today. For other defendants and lawyers, for the crown and for the judge. Let us pray that Christ may have His reward. But let us also pray for our authorities both civil and ecclesiastical. Let us remember that ours is a gospel of grace. We have glad tidings of great joy and the feet which carry such good news are counted beautiful. Remember that the Saviour who came, came for sinners. He did not come for the righteous but the unrighteous. In the last 2 years we have seen injustice on the part of civil rulers and compromise on the part of pastors (and elders). But God’s grace is greater than our sins, and these too may be forgiven. Let us be praying that God would come down and that repentance and revival would spread across the nation.

Generally, from then to now, Protestants resist concurrence with this, and when confronted with undeniable evidence, attempt to moderate it. Protestants read this article and think to themselves that I have an anger problem, or that I was abused and have a grudge or something. I don’t, and have no personal sexual history of abuse by a priest or a nun.

On February 28, 2022 Aquila Report an article appeared by Joseph Sciambra which outlined his frustration and disappointment with Roman Catholic Bishops. Apparently, he received “his worst opposition” from them in his efforts to “save Gays from Sin.” He tells us that Roman Catholic priests had encouraged him down this sexual path personally as well, in his youth.
When I read his article, I was somewhat shocked. I was shocked that he was shocked at this behaviour by RC priests. Let me explain.
About 20 years ago a history of my family was put together that went back almost 400 years. When a family-tree goes back that far, you have a lot of relatives. The book includes almost everyone, and its thickness shows it.
I point this out to say this: Everyone was Roman Catholic. Everyone. When the Lord brought me to faith in Christ, at 13-years-old, I didn’t even know what a Protestant was. I asked the priest one day, and he simply responded, “You don’t want to know.” I didn’t know I had become one. I just read the Bible, and came to faith that Christ died to take away all my sins, that I should read the Bible to know Him better. But, from that day forward I was ostracized from my family, without explanation. As the oldest grandson, I was expected to become a priest. My grandfather was furious.
Because of this background I think I can respond to Joseph Sciambra’s shock with insight I know few Protestants can. My goal being, first, to speak to Joseph. But also, indirectly, to the large swath of Protestants who are unaware of real Roman Catholicism in this matter; not the view the priest piously attempts to present in “dialoguing” with others. I want to confirm the Roman Catholicism that you hear hints of but ignore.
Welcome to Reality
Joe, you suffer, and seem to be recovering from, what more and more Roman Catholics are recovering from, especially since the 1970s. In the last 25-50 years there has been a virtual tidal wave of exodus from Romanism. Official Rome is not changing, no matter what it says. People are changing; access to information is changing. The courts are changing, slowly, when dealing with the formerly taboo subject of prosecuting the immorality of RC priests. Rome has been conniving to create a secular society in historically Protestant nations, and that society is turning on it.
What you are seeing, Joseph, is the truth; a reality which has existed for a very long time.
You say the RC priests encouraged you in this life-style. Of course, they did. The vast majority of them are homosexual. Not all, but the vast majority. My cousin went away to be a priest at their school in Toronto. He formerly lived as the son of a dairy farmer. Fairly isolated. But there he learned something, and the result was that about 90% of his class left after two years. They formed a homosexual “church” in the city. The priests in my home parish, in the RC High School, many of the nuns, the chaplain in my son’s school were all homosexual (at best). The town where I first served as a (Protestant) pastor was an isolated community, and was the hub for the priests to meet on Sunday nights. A carpenter told me he walked in on the scene one Monday morning (he had left some tools there on Friday from a job). Liquor bottles were not the only thing that were scattered all over the floor and furniture, naked. More than 20 years later a RC priest, when he heard I had once been a pastor in that town, unashamedly said to me, “We used to have such parties in that town, years ago!” Yes, they did.
The president of the Philippines, Duterte, after he became president began to talk about his experiences growing up in a RC school; “Me, and all the boys in my grade, in the grade before me, and in the one after me, were all abused by the priests.”
Now Joe, I could go on about this. If you are following the news, even a little bit, you know what I am talking about. Last year in France alone, 330,000 cases of abused children were brought to light, and 3,000 priests were accused. In Australia, South America, Canada (the Residential Schools), the USA, Central America, Ireland and Africa, the same stories keep coming up in large numbers.
But for some reason, Roman Catholicism is able to present itself as this organization which is concerned about family and piety; about Christianity. For some reason people believe what they say, regardless of what they actually do. How is it that Rome can still maintain the myth that it is concerned with even a whisper of godliness?
When I was in seminary, one of the most conservative Protestant seminaries I knew of, I walked into the lounge where a somewhat large group of students were engaged in a fairly heated debate. In the middle of the room were two students, arguing with about 30 other seminary students.
The argument was about Rome’s ethical honesty, especially in this area. The two in the middle were not backing down, and they were heatedly trying to get through to the rest about the duplicity of Rome. At first, I did not get involved, so that I could be sure I understood the debate.
Finally, I spoke up. I simply asked a couple questions for clarity’s sake. I asked the students around the outside if any of them were raised RC. None were. The two in the middle said they were raised RC. I asked my second question: How is it that those who were not raised RC think they know more about Romanism that those who were raised within it?
It did not end the debate, but it did make something clear; it is truly bewildering that Romanism can have the history it does and still be considered in any way, Christian. If any other organization, institution or religion had a history 10% as bad as they do, maybe 1% as bad, they would be opposed by the whole world. But Rome gets away with it. How? It is a mystery religion.
This, Joe, is the reality, and multitudes are blinded by it. Rome’s Inquisition made it “drunk with the blood of the saints” (Rev.17:6). Its capitol is filled with the idols of so many pagan religions, especially Babylon and Egypt. Yet so many Protestants feel that criticizing her is taboo. So many seem, as the Bible says, “intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries.” (Rev.17:2) When God allowed the Apostle John to look at her in the future, this is what he wrote; “When I saw her, I was greatly astonished.” (Rev.17:6)
Nothing New
The behaviour you witnessed by the Bishops, Joe, is not even close to a recent phenomenon. My family’s history can attest to that. Over a 400-year period there have been plenty priests and Nuns, and many cover-ups.
But simply looking at Rome’s history shows that this has been going on throughout it’s second thousand-year reign as the Holy Roman Empire (800-1806). Look at the lives of just the Popes. Luther visited Rome in the early 16th century, only to discover that it was a virtual cesspool of immorality. The Pope of the time, Leo X, received a huge birthday cake—out of which sprang a bunch of naked little boys (his present?). Many of the Popes have been accused of the same preferences.
John Calvin was one of the godliest men to ever live. In the Institutes of the Christian Religion, written almost 500 years ago, he wrote some brief lines about the complete immorality of the bishops and priests;
There is scarcely a bishop, and not one in a hundred parish priests, who, if his conduct were to be judged according to the ancient canons [of the Early Church], would be the subject of either excommunication or at least to deposition from office. I seem to be saying something unbelievable…but this is entirely so. (IV.V.14)
Of the morality of Rome’s leadership, he writes;
Yet because they themselves, together with their household, with almost the whole college of cardinals, and with the whole flock of the clergy, have been prostituted to all wickedness, filthiness, and uncleanness, and to all kinds of crimes and misdeeds, so that they resemble monsters rather than men…” (IV.VIII.29)
When it comes to the monasteries Calvin is as discrete as he could be;
This is clear: that no order of men is more polluted by all sorts of foul vices; nowhere do factions, hatreds, party zeal, and intrigue burn more fiercely. Indeed, in a few monasteries men live chastely, if one must call it chastity where lust is suppressed to the point of not being openly infamous. Yet you will scarcely find one in ten which is not a brothel rather than a sanctuary of chastity. (IV.XIII.15)
You see, Rome’s second thousand-year-reign perpetuated its first (509-476 A.D.) thousand-year reign’s immorality. Of the Roman Empire’s first 15 Emperors, 14 were Gay.
What you, Joe, as a Roman Catholic, need to come to grips with is that you, like myself, were born into something unimaginably morally corrupt. And it has been for over 2,500 years.
The Modern Promoter
Joe, what you need to understand, and what the vast majority of Protestants need to put together, is that what Rome promoted in your life, is what they do perpetually, and in the society in general. The morality of the priests—sexually promiscuous but never marrying, which is the other meaning of the word “celibate” in Latin—is their true moral emblem. The priesthood is their ultimate moral ideal, and they wanted you to acquiesce.
Calvin supposed above that this seems, “something unbelievable”. Generally, from then to now, Protestants resist concurrence with this, and when confronted with undeniable evidence, attempt to moderate it. Protestants read this article and think to themselves that I have an anger problem, or that I was abused and have a grudge or something. I don’t, and have no personal sexual history of abuse by a priest or a nun. Neither did Calvin. His generation simply cited the prediction in 2Thess.2 as having become true.
But I know history, have seen others around me be abused, and I know enough of what is going on in the world today to know that what I have written here is not even the full tip of the iceberg.
The week before I sent this article in, I was having lunch with a group of Pastors. One surprised us by pointing out that he was a former RC priest. When asked why he left, he said he “did not want to be a hypocrite.” “What do you mean?” someone asked. A rather shy man, he stated that he was not comfortable with the sexual practices of the profession. He went on to say that, while it is not applicable to all, the vast majority are homosexual, involved with minors (trips to Africa, or Cuba, he said), have mistresses—or all of the above.
I have seen enough to know for certain that the modern crisis with regard to the LGTBQ agenda is being blown along by winds emanating out of Romanism (Did you know that the letters they intend to join to this acronym is MAP? = Minor Attracted Persons). In my circles I have seen this agenda promoted by them, over and over again. Rome’s priests are always the cheerleaders for being “understanding” toward this cause, openly and behind the scenes. They have convinced others to join them, painting the sidewalks multicolor.
Canada’s RC PM is trying to make it against the law to speak against the practice, carrying up to a five-year jail term! He is calling Canadians to “ally” against those who are “Homophobic”; who believe in patriarchy (meaning; a biblical family). The RC owned Canadian MSM cannot support him enough. Here, our RC President (supported by a host of other “good Catholics”; Pelosi, Schumer, Fouchi etc. etc.) is trying to enforce the introduction of it to every grade level in school. Obama, a devotee of the Pope, had rainbow spotlights on the Whitehouse. Finally, our military officers are having to regularly take courses which attempt to desensitize them, and this is going on in Canada, too.
Do you remember in June 2016 when the Pope made his apology to the Gay community? In fact, he said that “all Christians” should apologize to them. Why would he do this? He was telling them where to find a home and ally.
Until recently, Rome has always played both sides of the fence here: both condemning it and practicing it. They do this all the time. They say they believe in the Trinity, and yet say that they worship the same god as Islam—which condemns the doctrine of the Trinity! (See their catechism) This is just one example.
So, you can see, Joe, that your assumption that this is merely naïveté about what it means to be “Gay” within Roman leadership, is just that. They are its cheerleaders. Not the Laity, usually; it’s the priests and up. It is their conversion strategy for the Democracies.
Therefore, the best thing you can do is look for a Bible-believing church in your area, and go there. You will have to be careful though—be sure it accepts Reformed theology—and doesn’t just have it in its name. You will discover that some historically Bible-believing churches, such as the Reformed Church in America (RCA), Christian Reformed Church (CRC) and United Church of Christ (UCC), have also been “dialoguing” with Roman priests since Vatican II, and now their denominations are tumultuously reeling with this issue; just like you.
Charles d’Espeville is a Minister in the Reformed Church in America.
Related Posts: