Monsignor Frank J. Hendrick of Pinehurst writes:
The March 3 column by Dusty Rhoades concerning Pope Benedict Emeritus causes pain to me and your Catholic subscribers.
Mr. Rhoades has a right to write such and present it for publication.
However, I feel that your position as guardians of the press would
protect your readership from the harm that ensues.
I am not suggesting that you engage in censorship when facts are
presented for publication, yet I suggest that you engage in civility and
gentility when such is demanded.
So, he's not suggesting that they engage in censorship, but they should have spiked my column for "civility and gentility's" sake. Got it.
Monsignor Jeffrey A. Ingham of St. Anthony of Padua Catholic Church writes:
I am not surprised that someone would write such a piece, but I am surprised that you would publish it.
You know what this means, right? If this kind of condemnation by the Church picks up speed, I'm on a one-way express elevator to Dan Brown level controversy, followed by Dan Brown level money. Yippeee!
3 comments:
I thought it was funny. I'm not Catholic. So, you know, maybe the Monsignor would also have been offended by my suggestion that the new pope introduce himself with, "Put on your red shoes and dance the blues!"
I didn't see anything uncivil about it. Of course, my definition of "civility" may have become somewhat skewed in recent years; these days I'm inclined to think of a discussion as "civil" whenever it fails to include words like "traitor", "-nazi", "bitch", "faggot", "slut", "nigger", etc.
Speaking as a "cradle Episcopalian" married to a Catholic who converted to my faith when we married and with whom I am now worshipping at a Methodist Church (go figure), I'm always surprised at how easy it is to be offended by what was obviously some very mild satire, but fail to be in any way offended by an enormous bureaucratic effort stretching back over several decades to protect pedophiles.
/Just observing, Lord, not judging.
--DiscoDollyDeb
Post a Comment