A Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, as nice as it may sound, is not a Catholic teaching. It is a proposition about which Christians equally opposed to gay “marriage” can disagree. And “questionable” views on state-sponsored torture are precisely that - questionable. It doesn’t mean that Cheney is a perfect speaker for a Catholic University or that Reilly could have opposed him. But it means far less than what Feuerherd is trying to force the readers to conclude: that Obama, the politician with the most impeccable pro-abortion track record to become President in the history of the U.S., is doctrinally comparable to Cheney, and that Reilly is hypocritical for not reacting against Cheney as he is doing now with Obama.
Feuerherd then delivers a low-blow masterpiece:
Here’s what is really going on. Ayatollah Reilly searches for hot button issues on Catholic campuses -- anything that has to do with gays gets them excited, as do performances of “The Vagina Monologues” and, of course, pro-choice speakers (few of whom actually even discuss abortion in their presentations) – that will energize their base of donors and activists. Then they highlight these offenses on the Web and through direct mail to generate revenue.
It is good work if you can get it: for his efforts Reilly (according to a 2007 financial disclosure report) drew a nearly six-figure salary.
Is he saying that Reilly is some kind of religious con artist concerned only with making an easy living? That is a serious accusation, which not only is completely unsubstantiated, but implies a moral judgment about Reilly’s intentions.
The Reporter’s statement for fiscal year 2006, which ended on June 30, 2007, reports that then editor Tom Roberts made $82,343. It is reasonable to think that Feuerherd is at least, two years later, making something around that figure. Wouldn't it be fair to say that he is also drawing “a nearly six-figure salary”? And doesn't that place Feuerherd under the same suspicion of being a con?
There is no problem with Feuerherd trying to hold Catholics accountable, but he should certainly start with some housekeeping. In an interview with “The Tower,” the paper of the Catholic University of America, Feuerherd said he would “try to carry out NCR’s mission, which is to provide knowledgeable news and analysis of the Catholic Church, especially in the United States.”
His first salvos don’t seem to fit his commitment to that mission, a fact that NCR readers didn't miss, as evidenced by the first two comments posted right under Feuerherd’s online article:
Rarely have I read a mean spirited article in NCR. Sadly this is one. Also this characterization of Persian religion is also offensive. An apology should be made by NCR. Catholics would be offended if Persians were to characterize the Pope in the same manner. Please pray for all concerned. Grace and peace with prayers always in Christ...
Thank you, Anonymous, for this comment. This article has too many problems to waste time listing them all. Its mean spirit is the worst one. Hear, hear. A sincere apology is in order!
It might be too early to say “bye, bye” to the Reporter, especially considering that it still counts on the towering professionalism of reporters like John Allen Jr.
(Column continues below)
Subscribe to our daily newsletter
But Feuerherd seems to be headed in the wrong direction, and should he become complacent, he might drive his Chevy to the levee and find that the levee was dry…
--Alejandro Bermudez