The Excommunication of Deacon Scott Peyton

Scott Peyton, the man who is the Father of a victim of molestation by the sex abuser priest Father Michael Guidry, announced on December 4, 2023, via an email to Bishop Douglas Deshotel that after enduring and witnessing years of habitual abuse of victims by the bishop’s episcopal hands, he was leaving the Catholic Church and would no longer serve the Diocese of Lafayette as a Deacon. (Scott and his family currently attend a local Anglican Church which does not have a decades long reputation for abusing children and covering up for pedophilic clergy.) Bishop Deshotel initially responded to that email the following day, assuring Scott that “Sacramentally, you are a Deacon,” though he was “sad” to hear of his decision.

• 

• 

• 

• 

About three months later, on March 12, 2024, the Diocese of Lafayette posted a picture of Deacon Scott Peyton on their Facebook as part of a routine request for prayers for Lafayette Diocesan clergy. But then in a letter received by Scott Peyton dated March 13, 2024, Bishop Deshotel informed Deacon Peyton that he had decided to excommunicate him from the Catholic Church, a severe decree of punishment usually reserved for grave public sinners, and forbade him from practicing as a Deacon. In what seems to amount to a “you can’t quit, you’re fired,” this excommunication has invoked a considerable amount of interest both locally and nationally. KADN broke the story, and The Guardian has published a report along with The New York Times and other major news outlets arranging for interviews with Scott Peyton for publication in the coming days.

The post of Deacon Scott with requests for prayer has since been removed from the Diocesan Facebook page.

To better understand the full context of this dramatic occurrence within the Peytons’ journey through the hell created for them by the Diocese of Lafayette, the SSPD will soon publish a thoroughly comprehensive analysis of the past six years of the Guidry Saga.

Questions

Since excommunications in the Catholic Church are fairly rare, especially in the present day, there are inevitable questions one may ask concerning this particular ruling, especially in a climate where the Catholic Church allows many scandalous public figures to remain in communion in spite of blatant actions against their faith. The spiritual reasoning of excommunication is purportedly to encourage a person guilty of a grievous offense to reevaluate his actions and take steps towards reconciliation.

1) In the case of the excommunication of Scott Peyton, is reconciliation the true motivation of Bishop Deshotel? If so, how is it “medicinal” to formally exclude Scott from the Catholic Church when he had already stated his intention to leave the Church for one that better aligns itself with the teachings of Jesus Christ? Many people have left the Church and not received formal excommunications even if they were in fact excommunicated “latae sententiae.”  What then is the reason for this action in this specific case?

2) In the aftermath of their abuse, the Peyton family was forced to seek justice through the civil court system, later petitioning to keep Guidry in prison when he came up for potential parole, and furthermore, they founded a non-profit organization, Tentmakers, to assist other victims of clerical sexual abuse and their families. Recently, (after Scott’s initial email to the bishop) the Tentmakers released an episode of their podcast “Resilience in the Shadows,” which featured Mr. James Adams who described his abhorrent treatment by Archbishop Aymond. Shortly thereafter, the excommunication was levied. Was this excommunication in any way a vindictive decision aimed against the Peyton family?

3) Considering that canon law does not suggest that an official decree of excommunication is necessary in an instance such as this, and considering that excommunicating a victim’s father while the victim’s abuser remains in full communion is monumentally disastrous for public optics, it begs the question of how such a ridiculous decision could be made, though it surely is not the first time the Diocese has done something as self-destructive as this. Is it Bishop Deshotel himself making these decisions, or is it one of the many duplicitous clergymen with whom he surrounds himself in the chancery? Is it sheer incompetence, or is it a holdover from a different age that makes the Catholic Church think it still has cultural relevance enough to act with such blatant impunity against those it may consider enemies?

4) Why did Bishop Deshotel initially highlight that Scott Peyton would always be considered a deacon (with no indication of a follow-up unlike what was later suggested in the excommunication letter), and then furthermore allow his name to continue in the Deacons’ prayer roster, only to then excommunicate him?

5) Were the likes of St. Athanasius, St. John of the Cross, and St. Joan of Arc truly separated from communion with God when they followed their consciences and faced condemnation by corrupt clergymen?

6) Even if it were in fact wrong, as some Catholics suggest, that Scott Peyton has left the Roman Church, how could Bishop Deshotel in good conscience be so uncharitable towards the Peyton family by unnecessarily declaring excommunication while Fr. Guidry, a child molester, remains within the Church? If Bishop Deshotel truly mourns Scott’s leaving the Church, why did the bishop not act more like the Good Shepherd and leave the ninety-nine to find the one? Why did the bishop and the Diocese of Lafayette heap nothing but abuse upon the entire Peyton family ever since they came forward with the abuse six years ago? Does Bishop Deshotel truly care about the Peyton family, or is his loyalty purely and undivided to the institution?

7) The question must be asked of any conscientious human – With whom are you in communion? Do you commune with the protectors of pedophiles such as Bishop Douglas Deshotel, Bishop Michael Jarrell, Archbishop Gregory Aymond, Msgr. Curtis Mallet, and other clerical leaders of their ilk? Or are you in communion with the poor souls who have been tortured at their hands? With whom would Jesus stand now and on the last day? 

There are those who find themselves alarmed by this excommunication, fearing for the soul of the one removed from the Roman Church, which says that outside of itself, there is no salvation. Yet, when one has tasted of the freedom offered in the cup of Christ, that being the symbol of his death, how can one fear the chastisements of men? And that which many might view as the end is actually only the beginning. So it is that, while many fear the human condemnation of excommunication as some sort of sentencing to hell, the Christian holds firm knowing that death is not the end, and laughs with St. Paul, asking, “Death, where is your victory and sting?”

In the confidence of this hope, those who receive excommunication from crooked and corrupt criminal clergy, may do so with peace, and even maintain the Christian hope that indeed even Bishop Deshotel and his brood of vipers may also be purified as gold in fire, and in time be saved by the power of the cross on which the perfect One hung and for which He came so as to renew all things.

As for the members of the Society of St. Peter Damian, we stand in unapologetic Communion with Scott Peyton. We stand in Communion with Scott, his son Oliver, the entire Peyton family, and indeed with everyone who has suffered evil at the hands of the godless wolves in shepherds’ clothing.

Pro ovibus contra lupos,

• Quinn Hebert
• Peter Youngblood
• Timothy Joseph Trosclair
• Jonathan Harris
• Nickolas Mark Trosclair
• Joseph Reed

and the Society of St. Peter Damian