109504407339359361

WE HAPPY FEW READ IT . . . It was a historic day, 8/20/04, when Chi Trib finally reported on Vets v. Kerry � after Kerry brought it up. Claims by its public editor et al. that it�s a Republican paper ring hollow. In editorials, yes, and these are for the most part well thought and argued. But in news coverage, it�s a paper whose editors seem to wait for cues from Big Mama in NY (NY Times). I would call it a national wannabe newspaper.

So it was See Trib, see Trib run, See Trib run with Bush-National Guard story 9/9/04, complete with above-fold page-one pic and story.

As it ran with “Kerry lied” stories about medals and his �71 atrocity testimony in which he betrayed his band of brothers? (It didn’t.)

Next day, while blogosphere picked away at the Natl Guard story, a CBS-Dan Rather original, Trib ran a back-paper NYT story that half way down addressed the spurious-document question. It�s how a Republican paper plays stories, right? (Not.)

Meanwhile, a Chi Trib desk editor, Wm. B. Rood, jumped into the fray with his account of his and J. Kerry�s Viet Nam war exploits, defending K. from Republican critics. Big Sunday page one treatment. This after agonizing by him a newsie for whom neutrality on the day�s issues is the bedrock principle. It isn�t?
Chi Trib managing editor Jim O�Shea ran Rood�s account after his own agonizing. It�s not easy to come out of the closet.

Coming up in Chi Trib: a full account with comparable play � “beyond words,” as Trib ads promise � of the anti-Kerry side of the story! Bet?

GOING ON HALF EMPTY . . . On 8/20 Sun Times had this head about Republican senatorial candidate Alan Keyes at the state fair: “GOP Conservatives rally behind Keyes,” while Chi Trib for same story had “GOP Lukewarm toward Keyes.”

THE BEAUTY OF PRO-LIFE . . . Mary-Louise Kurey in Chi Trib letter to editor Saturday 9/4, responding to columnist Eric Zorn, says an Illinois law Z. had spoken of as protecting accidentally born abortion babies has been disallowed in courts.

She also suggests placing the accidental infant in the arms of a waiting adoptive parent. Her letter could have been an op-ed. She is the archdiocese�s point person for pro-life issues, a former beauty contest winner and looks it, and articulate. She or someone like her would make a good op-ed regular.

Wouldn’t that be something?

WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE . . . Alan Keyes is a “convicted” person, says former Gov. Jim Edgar, meaning he has (presumably strong) convictions. Convinced is the word. But somewhere in the haze of my memory is “convicted” used this way by preachers. Maybe Edgar heard it used that way in a Baptist church.

Its sole use in the King James version, in John 8.9, does not support its use for “convinced”: “And they which heard it, being convicted [usual sense] by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman [caught in adultery] standing in the midst.”

MORE LANGUAGE . . . Do grand juries hand up or hand down indictments? 9/9/04 Sun-Times story said “handed down.” What the heck is it?

MORE LANGUAGE, NATIONAL SCENE . . . From the nation at large comes the “foaming jerk” sobriquet devised by author-commentator Michelle Malkin for TV man Chris Matthews, hound of the Baskervilles revisited, who has something of a saliva, even spittle, problem. He got excited talking to her, and she narrowly missed catching some of the flying stuff in her face, she reports. The MSNBC worthy who followed Matthews, Keith Olbermann, commended him: “Never prouder of you, Chris.” She had alluded to what the “Unfit” book says of Kerry�s self-inflicted wound (allegedly incurred by aiming his launcher short in his first action and catching some shrapnel as it bounced back, for which he was chewed out by the boat�s senior officer).

This reverberated in the misty flats of Matthews�s mind as “he shot himself.” With this he pummeled Malkin, refusing to pay heed to her repeating “self-inflicted wound,” which to most is not the same things. “The unfair, unbalanced, and unhinged purveyors of journalism, or whatever it is they call what they do at MSNBC, should be ashamed,” fumed Malkin later.

“Democrat Party water boys in the media are in full desperation mode,” she continued. “I have now witnessed firsthand and up close (Matthews’ spittle nearly hit me in the face) how the pressure from alternative media sources � the blogosphere, conservative Internet forums, talk radio, Regnery Publishing, FOX News, etc. � is driving these people absolutely batty.”

WHAT WAS SHE UP TO? . . . Olbermann suggested she was following orders from the Swift Boat Vets to “steer the Kerry-Shot-Himself flotsam into the mainstream media,” but she had been booked for the show to push a book of her own about internment of Japanese in WW2 and racial profiling in general. But Matthews�s producer, Dominic Bellone, had told her they wanted first to talk about Swift Vets� accusations. (She never did get to talk about her book.) Olbermann, meet Bellone. You two work in the same shop, you should get to know each other.

It was later that the irrepressible Matthews, caught up in his street-theater shtick in Herald Square, asked Zell Miller if he really meant spitballs, as Miller had just said in his stirring, provocative speech, in which he accused Kerry of voting against a string of weapons. Miller tried to explain metaphorical language to the hopped-up Matthews, but Matthews was having too much fun with fellow Democrats outside the Garden. Shortly after that, Miller raised the duel-in-the-sun idea, wishing they were both back in Georgia, where men fought it out.

IDEA ALERT . . . Well it is fun, when you get down to it, though not for the likes of Malkin and Miller. It�s not as much fun, however, as if Matthews and the irrepressible Bill O’Reilly were to do a show together, flipping for home field, and not in Herald Square. Matthews, who has about one-fifth the viewers if that many as O’Reilly, would be wise for rating�s sake to appear in O’Reilly�s home court.

Wherever it was held, it would be quite something � a series of interruptions interrupted by interruptions. You don�t have to be Irish � a Jewish friend told me his family specialized in fingers waved in each other�s faces � but I do know some commented on the noise my three brothers and I used to make while conversing with each other, and each of us pleads or pleaded guilty to being Irish. Be that as it may, a O’Reilly vs. Matthews card would be a sellout.

DOWD SPEAKS . . . Also from elsewhere, call-in radio host Brian Lehrer on WNYC in NYC on 9/2/04 [had a tip from the producer] told Maureen Dowd she had looked into Bush’s soul � what Z. Miller said he had done � in her NYT columns. She denied it but right off began to tell what Bush was thinking.

All in all, Dowd made a good on-air interview, being an entertaining speaker, though a prisoner of metaphor and utterly liberal. She is also apparently unaware of her biases, rather her contradictions, as what I mentioned earlier, about not looking into souls. She does that all the time, and extrapolates wildly, sees White House as Addams mansion, etc., which is entertaining, I admit.

On the open-minded side, she sees Bushies as more credible in their threat to destroy terrorists than Edwards, for instance, but finds them “scary.” Lehrer did not ask if there’s a connection between making credible threats and being scary.

She finds Bushies vicious � Kerry knew Bush would try to “rip his throat out” � but mentions Clinton aide Carville without reference to his well-known tactics. She endorses all suspicions of homophobia, as in Arnold�s conceivably self-mocking convention-speech girlie-boy references. Listening to her gives a very good look at what’s said at parties I’m not invited to. Not to say I’m invited to any.

She�s full of “subtext” readings, stuff she just knows, that�s all. She refers to “don’t put me on couch” complaints by Bush pere but claims her analysis of the younger Bush � starting the whole damn Iraq war in part to one-up his father, for instance � is what anyone would conclude.

Anyone at one of those parties anyhow � like those of an earlier generation that film critic Pauline Kael attended (and Roger Ebert surely attends today), where nobody voted for Nixon the year he took all but Massachusetts. It�s fun being a liberal.

YET MORE OUTSIDE CHI . . . Barely noticed by main streamers was the AP story out of West Allis WI reporting boos from Bush-supporters at hearing Bush tell of Clinton�s heart trouble. When the boos evaporated in the wake of numerous witnesses� outraged complaints, AP pulled the story. But it had gone out to clients and ran in a number of places. The blogosphere doused the story and along the way took aim at a Knight-Ridder story out of Washington by science writer Seth Borenstein, whose head was sought on the platter following that of a reporter named Hays of AP, the West Allis perp.

I twitted Borenstein, whom I do not know, in an email, and he explained credibly how he had slipped the AP report into a story about Clinton, on deadline. He goofed, and knew it, “a rushed reporter stupidly � and in error � using an AP story in half a sentence and not crediting AP.”

NEWSIES IN GENERAL . . . Tony Blair compared dealing with the media to living with “a demented tenant.” You don�t know “whether to charm them or knock them over the head,” as noted by Steve Richards, chief political commentator of UK�s Independent, reviewing a new Blair biography in Times Literary Supplement.
Or as Jacques Barzun observed in From Dawn to Decadence, “to public figures [the media resembles] a dog of uncertain temper, pacified by fresh news.”

BACK ON THE HOME FRONT . . . Sun-Times Labor Day page one had big pic of beautiful beach-volleyballer’s Speedo-covered butt, which was also very interesting. In same edition, sports columnist Mariotti refers to Cubs� “fragile team psyche,” which is maybe a sports version of Maureen Dowd analyzing Bush?

108843054666854661

Just came off a failed experiment in flying Republican ideas past 100 or so newsies in an E-mail grouping. Advice: don’t do it. A) They are not interested. B) Some of them object strenuously to the ideas themselves – it’s not what they are used to hearing and their minds are made up.

So on to the wild world of the blog, as I told another member of the group, where sensitivities are not so finely attuned to the tried and true even if false. Charge!

Open letter

Here is the entire “open letter” by Chicago priests complaining about Vatican statements vs. gays & lesbians, with names of writers not reported by Sun-Times 12/21, as found on web site of St. Mary of Celle parish, Berwyn. Link found on site of gay newspaper Windy City Times, which names the priests in its 12/24 story.

(Deep mystery remains: why did Sun-Times omit the priests’ names?)

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE HIERARCHY OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH
REGARDING THE PASTORAL CARE OF GAY AND LESBIAN PERSONS

As Catholic pastors, we have become increasingly disturbed by the tone and, in some cases, content of documents and statements from the Vatican, bishops’ conferences and individual bishops on issues categorized under the heading of “homosexual” or “gay/lesbian.” We respect the teaching authority of the Church. Because of this, we find particularly troubling the increase in the use of violent and abusive language directed at any human person. Such language is inappropriate. This is especially so when addressing members of the community of the faithful. These divisive and exclusionary statements from the Church are contrary to sound pastoral practice.

The life journey in faith is unique and sacred, including the personal integration of sexuality and spirituality. Condemnations leveled at sincere Catholics attempting to make sense out of their journey are inappropriate and pastorally destructive.

As priests and pastors we are speaking out to make clear that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters are all members of God’s family, brothers and sisters in the Lord Jesus and deserving of the same dignity and respect owed any human being. Recognition of the inalienable dignity of the human person is the only path toward justice and reconciliation. We affirm the goodness of all homosexual persons. We root ourselves in the U.S. Bishops’ statement “Always Our Children.” Additionally, we re-affirm the understanding of the goodness of the human person as put forth throughout the papacy of Pope John Paul II. Further, we want to state clearly that ministering to and with our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters is mutually beneficial, as is all ministerial activity. Pre-judging where any believer’s journey will take them is inappropriate. Walking with them, as we do with our heterosexual brothers and sisters, is the appropriate Christian response.

In the recent past, individual bishops, bishops’ conferences and the Vatican have assumed a tone of such violence and abusiveness toward these sons and daughters of the Church, we can no longer remain silent. Has any other group of people within the Body of Christ been so assaulted and violated by such mean-spirited language? Examples from the most recent Vatican document show all too clearly the demonization of these children of God, referring to homosexuality as a “troubling moral and social phenomenon,” “a serious depravity,” “the spread of the phenomenon,” “approval or legalization of evil,” “grave detriment to the common good,” “harmful to the proper development of human society,” “intrinsically disordered.” Does anyone consider this vile and toxic language invitational?

For many gay and lesbian Catholics, this most recent series of attacks has forced them, out of self-respect and self-love, to withdraw from active participation in the Church and question how they can remain members of a Church they experience as abusive. It is not possible to minister to and with the needs of our homosexual brothers and sisters with language of this tone as a foundation.

The Catholic Church is most catholic when it is inclusive and embracing, and least reflective of the gospel of Jesus when it is exclusive and rigid. For this reason, we also want to affirm the many pastoral and positive statements by certain bishops and bishops’ conferences (e.g. “Always Our Children”).

The Church’s theology, including her moral teaching, is always in dialogue with the broader lived experience of her members, which shapes and rearticulates the ancient deposit of faith. We encourage a new atmosphere of openness to dialogue which includes the lived experience of many Catholic members. We recognize the blessings of countless homosexuals in a variety of relationships. We believe their experiences must be listened to respectfully.

While we do not know the reasons for the increasingly violent and abusive language, we deplore it as ministers of the gospel of Jesus Christ and ask that it stop immediately. Furthermore, we request that all those in official positions of teaching authority in the Church refrain from any more statements directed AT the gay and lesbian members of the Body of Christ, and instead begin an earnest dialogue WITH those same members of the Body of Christ.

For our part, we pledge to treat all who seek to continue their faith journey with us with respect and dignity, regardless of their sexual orientation.

We join the countless men and women, heterosexual and homosexual, who seek justice, mercy and compassion in and through the Catholic Church.

We extend an invitation all who share our concern to duplicate this letter, sign it, and send it to their pastor, local bishop, National Bishop’s Conference or the Vatican.

(Parish names are listed for identification purposes only.)

Rev. David Baldwin
St. Benedict the African-East
Chicago, IL

Rev. Daniel Cassidy
St. Mark
Chicago, IL

Rev. Dennis Condon
St. Marcelline
Schaumburg, IL

Rev. Lloyd Cunningham, S.V.D.
Catholic Theological Union
Chicago, IL

Rev. Nicholas Desmond
St. Aloysius
Chicago, IL

Rev. Brian Fischer
St. Gregory the Great
Chicago, IL

Rev. Donald Headley
St. Mary of the Woods
Chicago, IL

Rev. Robert P. Heinz
St. Alphonsus Liguori
Prospect Heights, IL

Rev. Michael Herman
St. Sylvester
Chicago, IL

Rev. Thomas Hickey
St. Clement
Chicago, IL

Rev. John Hoffman
St. Teresa of Avila
Chicago, IL

Rev. Richard Homa
Sacred Heart
Palos Hills, IL

Rev. Terry Johnson
St. Francis Xavier
LaGrange, IL

Rev. Patrick Lee
Immaculate Conception
Chicago, IL

Rev. Robert McLaughlin
Mary Seat of Wisdom
Park Ridge, IL

Rev. Dennis O’Neill
St. Martha
Morton Grove, IL

Rev. Thomas Pelton
Maternity BVM
Chicago, IL

Rev. Richard Prendergast
St. Mary of Celle
Berwyn, IL

Rev. Michael Shanahan
St. Mark
Chicago, IL

Rev. William J. Stenzel
St. Francis Xavier
LaGrange, IL

Rev. Patrick Tucker
St. Bernardine
Forest Park, IL

Rev. Daniel Whiteside
St. Catherine of Siena/St. Lucy
Oak Park, IL

Rev. Bart Winters
St. Gregory the Great
Chicago, IL

MARRIED PRIESTS, MARRIED PRIESTS READ ALL ABOUT I…

MARRIED PRIESTS, MARRIED PRIESTS

READ ALL ABOUT IT!! . . . Wed. October 29, 2003, Chi papers pick up on Assn. of Chi Priests survey showing 90% of respondents want married-priest issue on table in coming RC bishops’ meeting, Art Golab in S-T with reportage, Carol Marin in Trib with op-ed about that and female priests. Pay your money, take your choice: reportage or opinion-with-reportage. There’s a market for both.

The respondents are quite a minority of priests, 193 of 360 ACP members, of 1,600-plus priests in all in Chi archdiocese; so bps can safely ignore them, it says here in this opinion-plus-reportage offering for which you pay no money.