Hypocrisy or Scandal

Rochefoucauld (as everyone knows) said, "Hypocrisy is the tribute paid by vice to virtue", and a good thing too. The wickedness of hypocrisy is not in pretending to be good, a good thing in itself, for by pretending to be what we are not, we may become what we are pretending to be.

The wickedness lies in knowing the good and preferring, if only for the time it takes to commit a sinful act, the evil.

Modern thinkers, or whatever they call themselves, for as long as most of us can remember, or longer, have been decrying hypocrisy (quite rightly) but for the wrong reasons. "If you are a transvestite," they say, "don't hide it. Parade down Oxford Street in your preferred outfit. Be proud. Whatever it is, don't deny it and keep it private. Glory in it - 'come out of the closet' ".

What an inspiring battle-cry!

If a teacher has difficulty in keeping his eyes off girls (or boys) in his class, should he tell them so?

Is a father who secretly drinks far too much forbidden to warn his children about the dangers of alcoholism?

If a devout and good priest succumbs to sexual temptation, what is better, to seek forgiveness, make all possible restitution, and shut up, or publish his confession in the Daily Cloaca and make his fall seem normal and therefore natural, natural and therefore good? This is the sin of scandal.

Should a public figure who is drawn to, and sometimes indulges in, some perversity which he does his best to avoid, publicly acknowledge his lapses, with the risk of making them seem respectable? If an M.P. secretly uses cocaine, is he therefore debarred from voting in Parliament for a bill to make drug use less easy?

We are all bad. We should all condemn what is bad, while trying not to succumb to it. Failure on our part does not deny us the right to continue the pursuit of virtue and condemn vice.