The Catholic Church has paid out tens of millions of dollars in settlements for the past sins of its priests, and rightly so. Some dioceses in the United States have faced financial hardships as a result, with church-owned properties being sold and churches being closed and combined with neighboring parishes, in order to raise the money. It’s been reported widely, and no Catholic is unaware of their Church’s shame.

Church higher ups were aware and did nothing. Offending priests were simply shuffled off to some other parish or diocese. In Boston, Bernard Cardinal Law, one of the worst of the shuffling higher ups, was shuffled off to Rome to help him avoid subpoenas and a look at his ever growing girth.

Every parishioner of every church has paid a financial price for these transgressions, whether they realize it or not, as settlement funds came out of weekly collection baskets, too. It’s probably safe to say that every priest still celebrating mass in the United States is most likely, kind of in a sort of safe way, not one of “them.” At least, we all hope so, and I suspect the Holy See prays every day that is the case.

The Church has stepped up and removed the guilty priests, unless local district attorneys got to them first. No Catholic knowingly had to sit in a pew listening to a sermon from a priest known to have committed such heinous offenses. No Catholic had to face the choice of leaving a parish of such a priest, even though those questions might still linger in the minds of many.

These are the differences that set the Catholic church’s dilemma apart from the Reverend Wright matter. There are others, but these are the ones most worth mentioning. I suppose I could mention, too, that none of the priests caught out of their surplices and cassocks stood at the pulpit attempting to defend their actions, but some might call that a low blow. So, I won’t.

But I will note the major distinction, a distinction with a difference, between the two matters. The Catholic church ultimately removed priests from pulpits. Catholics didn’t have to choose to leave their parishes after that.

Barack Obama is running for president of the United States. Reverend Wright “God-damned” the United States, and worse. Obama knew that, yet he chose to remain a member of that congregation. “Joe” and “Jane” Catholic in the United States never had to make that choice: neither is running for president, and neither had to listen to a priest promote pedophilia.

No one has suggested that Obama should stop going to church, or leave the denomination, or at least I haven’t heard anyone do so. Many have suggested he should have changed congregations, though, something very different. Yet, today, I heard some defending the Reverend Wright by chastising Catholics for not leaving the Catholic church over the priest scandal, the duel standard gambit. In point of fact, though, the arguments are not the same, and represent nothing more than flailing at an easy target, never mind the merits.

It’s much like the Reverend Wright making fun of the way Presidents Kennedy and Johnson spoke. One’s accent (Boston and Texan, respectively) is entirely different than the bad grammar and made up words that are “ebonics.” No less an African-American community leader than Bill Cosby has spoken very well and effectively on that subject, and I can’t hold a candle to his eloquence or gravitas. I listened to Wright’s speeches over the weekend, as well as his interview with Bill Moyers, and note he opted for English and not “ebonics.”

Problem for Obama and his campaign? I would say so. It’s a bigger problem, though, in its impact on relations both racial and religious in this country. The campaign eventually will end, but the discussion will be ongoing. I suspect there’s a book deal in Wright’s future, too, so his part in it will be with us long after the campaign ends.

I’ll bet his editor will insist on good grammar and syntax, and the use of real words, too.