Everything you need to know about this article about Sydney, Australia’s Cardinal Pell is found in the headline: “Pell’s conservatism adds fuel to the fire of Catholic disharmony.”
See, it’s “conservatism” that’s always the problem. If it wasn’t that pesky desire to live the Catholic faith as it is, everyone would get along so much better, wouldn’t they? Why doesn’t the headline say, “Parishioners’ liberalism adds fuel to the fire ...”?
Apparently, op-ed writer Paul Collins’ problems with Pell are: (1) Pell is founding too many Catholic colleges: “That will mean four Catholic universities in greater Sydney, which is surely enough for anyone.” Does he have a problem with Catholic higher education? Or is it that the new colleges founded by Pell offer an orthodox education, in contrast to the already existing colleges.
“Many Catholics think the church as a whole should adopt…”
I’m sorry, but since when did “many Catholics” decide to abolish the heirarchy, apostolic Tradition, and dogma, and decide to tell the Church what they think?
As someone born in ‘68 and educated in public schools and Monday-night CCD, I’m honestly befuddled what was so awful about Latin, facing the altar, and parochial school. Was Vatican II really worth what we’ve become? Was the Church really in need of “reform” in the first place?
Perhaps we should reconsider the common practice of having children do the readings at mass.
Chris,
“IIP>209.91.58.188
2004-08-03 20:06:05
2004-08-04 00:06:05
One of my favorite graphs from this column:
Shameless in its exploitation of children. And shameless in its hypocrisy. The Democratic candidate for president, John Kerry, used the same “f-word” in a public interview in Rolling Stone magazine—a far more serious matter than using it privately.
The other thing I thought of? The little 12 year old lady is damned lucky to be alive. A “choice” survivor, so to speak.
Anyway, inspired by the noble principles as set forth by the Heinz Heiress, I hereby invite the tween pundit to—ahem—SHOVE IT.