The critiques have been focussed on the guy's curious omission of any talk about God in his account of why he became a priest in the first place, a point which is odd. But maybe not so odd.
I would also note that his implication that the only priests who are actually punished for their celibacy violations are homosexuals who act out with adults - is just plain wrong, and the truth is actually the exact opposite.
Anyway, the most interesting suggestion has come my way.
While this piece, at first glance, seems to be some sort of indictment of the Archdiocese of Boston (kicking the guy out, saying there was no place for him in ministry), a closer reading suggests something different. For if you read the piece, you will note that each one of the bishops mentioned: Banks, McCormack and Law - does something interesting. They each do his job. They uphold their professed standards, they follow their policies, a scene which is in direct contradiction to the evidence revealed by personnel files. The person who unpacked the piece this way said straight out, "It's almost as if the guy was paid by the Archdiocese to tell this story..."