Should We Defend Ourselves against Defamation and Slander?

Dr. Hitchcock, take note! Slander is
a serious sin against the 8th
Commandment that requires repair.

  The post following this introduction is an email I received from friend and Wanderer journalist Dexter Duggan. Dexter wrote to me responding to yesterday's Sunday meditation on slander and righteous anger. He's experienced slander first hand from a Catholic historian who, by all common sense standards, should be an ally. Some readers may recall my posts relating the story of Dexter's abuse by Dr. James Hitchcock in his book, Abortion, Religious Freedom, and Catholic Politics. (See here and here.)

Indeed, Dexter knows what it is to be falsely accused, slandered, and vilified. He knows what it is to have your reputation continuously damaged by falsehoods published in a book used on Catholic college campuses across the country. He knows what it is to be defamed over and over on EWTN and in Catholic interview shows promoting the slanderous book. Hitchcock's refusal to correct the mistakes and defamation reflects more on him than on Dexter. And what it says about him is anything but complimentary to a man professing to be a faithful Catholic.

What possessed Dr. Hitchcock to attack Dexter and The Wanderer in the first place is beyond me. That he refuses to correct his errors and apologize for the slander certainly doesn't demonstrate a humble Catholic mind and heart (that the Lord "will not spurn"). It shows a pride and arrogance that is rather frightening to see in an aged man on the cusp of eternity.

I've known Dexter for years. We met shortly after a group of us founded the Catholic Media Coalition in 2002. We've had long conversations at several of our meetings and many email exchanges. I know him to be a faithful son of the Church and a wonderful Catholic gentleman in the fullest sense of that word. He's kind, courteous, and wise. And so I print this lament from a friend and colleague "blessed" because he is among those who "hunger and thirst for justice." He will, indeed, be satisfied, if not in this life then in the next. As for Dr. Hitchcock...Beware unrepented wrongs taken into eternity. I'm offering my rosary today for both you and Dexter.

And now I'll let Dexter speak for himself.

Dexter Duggan's response to yesterday's post on Slander and Righteous Anger

   Just read your long righteous anger column, and your attitude toward abortion. Understood! Many leaders of the U.S. Catholic Church itself often seem so indulgent of evil, lest they have to confront it and displease left-wing media workers and Democrat friends. So of course you have understood my feeling of injustice about Dr. James Hitchcock falsely accusing me of the awful deeds of promoting pro-abortion politicians and of me trying to draw pro-lifers away from their focus. Then his refusing to make any correction even though he knows by now that he was wrong, even if somehow his elderly mind believed he was correct when he wrote his book. Keeping this book on university shelves so that students can read of my supposed iniquity. 

     And then there were top officials at EWTN refusing to correct their promotion and direct sale of his book, and mostly just ignoring my certified letters. These are Michael Warsaw, EWTN's chairman and CEO, and President Doug Keck, as well as Fr. Mitch Pacwa, S.J., and producer Jason Addington. Their attitude seems to be that Dr. Hitchcock is their friend and I am an embarrassing irritant. Of eight letters I sent, only Warsaw replied, only once, to brush me off. He said that if I had a complaint about the book, I should contact the publisher -- even though it was his own network that spread the book's malice.

     Not long ago The Wanderer carried the example of a man who wrecked his friend's car then asked for forgiveness. The friend said, Of course I forgive you. Now pay for the repairs.

Of course I forgive Dr. Hitchcock. Now let him repair my reputation he damaged.

     A canonist in Dr. Hitchcock's own archdiocese whom I'd written in hopes of help replied to me that Dr. Hitchcock indeed had sullied his reputation, so I should just forgive him and move on. I replied that if one cared for Dr. Hitchcock's spiritual welfare, that person would urge Hitchcock to make amends now rather than wait for the Judgment Seat with his defamatory deed unrepented. The canonist did not reply.

Slander on steroids!

     It's interesting about the prayerful Catholics who say just to ignore the defamation in the Hitchcock book Abortion, Religious Freedom and Catholic Politics, or accept this as suffering for Christ, even though your column illustration shows what Christ thought about injustice that could be remedied. The attorneys for the book publisher, Taylor & Francis, also try to brush off my criticism with their insults or lassitude as they try to hide how that publisher gravely embarrassed itself.

     Does the father of a family passively accept a serious illness as suffering with Christ even though the illness could be cured, rather than have him die and abandon his wife and children?

     If, say, Alan Sears were falsely accused of repeated adultery by Dr. Hitchcock, should he passively accept this defamation, ruining himself and ADF in the public eye while he said he was just suffering with Christ, or should he fight to correct it?

     Dr. Hitchcock's thesis is that The Wanderer doesn't regard abortion as a critical issue, then he makes up tales, such as against me as one of its writers, to support his cultivation of injustice. I read a review of the Hitchcock book by John Francis Burke, a prof at Trinity University in San Antonio. Burke didn't think the book was well-written, but he accepted Dr. Hitchcock's claim that we "Catholic Right" writers had given up on trying to reverse Roe vs. Wade and had moved on to other issues. When I emailed Dr. Burke that this was false, he brushed me off. So when he, too, could have helped to correct the injustice, he walked over to the other side of the road.

     There is suffering that should be accepted, and suffering that, if accepted, only promotes injustice or even wickedness.

     When Job was accused by his friends, he didn't say you're right, I am justly punished by God today. Job didn't say that, even if canonists and EWTN said his suffering didn't matter, and they walked to the other side of the road.

     I have an image of the Divine Mercy I go over to when Dr. Hitchcock's continued injustice comes to mind. Conferring Divine Mercy is correct, but I never hear Jesus saying, It is good that Dr. Hitchcock brought you suffering through his unrepented ill deeds.

      Thanks for your column meditation, Mary Ann.