I have never seen an episode of ABC TV’s The View.
Until Rosie O’Donnell got in trouble on it, I hadn’t even heard of the program, though it’s apparently been on for more than ten years.
From reading about the show and seeing clips of it, I have, however, come to hold a very low opinion of it.
What I have seen and read about the show leads me to the conclusion that it is shallow and bubble-headed and frequently shameful, embarrassing, and even disgusting. In other words, it swings between the two extremes of insipid, inconsequential fluff, often with prurient undertones, to completely idiotic attempts to take on serious subjects by a group of commentators who don’t have the first clue what they’re talking about.
Since the commentators are also all women, the show is clearly aimed at a female audience, and if I were a woman, I’d be insulted that ABC thinks this is the kind of junk that I’d be interested in.
The show also seems to deliberately stir up controversy in order to attract ratings by hiring sick puppies like Rosie O’Donnell and Whoopi Goldberg (note that it’s Barbara Walters in the clip who first introduces a disgusting suggestion, which Goldberg then amplifies and makes even worse; there’s plenty of sick puppyism to go around on this show).
So it comes as no surprise that, if this pack of intellectual mendicants (not in the good sense, in which Dominicans are intellectual mendicants) were to choose to take on the subject of Archbishop Raymond Burke’s statement that he would deny Rudy Giuliani Holy Communion that they’d make more errors than you could shake a stick at.
And they did.
Reading the following transcript of part of yesterday’s show (which sure sounds authentic, though I haven’t been able to verify that yet, so caveat emptor,though I have partial confirmation from another source) is like playing one of those "How many things can you find wrong in this picture?" games.
Man, is it painful!
ABC–and its owner, the Disney corporation–should be ashamed of itself that it’s putting out this kind of offensive and brainless twaddle.
Since the hosts of The View obviously don’t have a clue, ABC should get one and cancel the show.
Transcript below the fold (CHT to the reader who e-mailed).
WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Welcome back, welcome back, welcome back. I don’t know if you guys are aware of this, but, you know, often times when our politicians are running, you know, the Church gets a little aggravated with that because there’s quite a few of them have different pasts and sometimes the Church wants them to be more perfect.
JOY BEHAR: When you say “the Church” which church are you talking about?
GOLDBERG: Well, it’s, it’s all churches seem to have all kinds of problems with all kinds of candidates. But this particular problem comes when Archbishop Raymond Burke says no communication —
BEHAR: No communion, communion.
GOLDBERG: No communion for Giuliani.
BEHAR: Holy communion on Sunday.
GOLDBERG: Yes, holy communion, you know what holy communion is. For the Catholic Church, you go in on Sunday, you’ve confessed everything on Friday or Saturday, you’re clear, they give you the host, they say you’re cool.
BEHAR: Then you get drunk and go out and have fun.
GOLDBERG: Yeah, you’re done. But because of Rudy’s stance on abortion, he says he can not give him communion and he is persisting in a very serious sin. When asked if the Archbishop would deny those pro-death penalty, pre-emptive war, he says it’s a little more complicated in that case.
BEHAR: Because they’re adults and they’ve committed some crimes, they feel that, that’s a legitimate reason to kill someone.
ELISABETH HASSELBECK: I always had an issue with priests denying communion. I remember someone in my family went through a divorce. Unless she got her marriage anulled, she wasn’t allowed to receive communion. Her ex-husband wouldn’t give her an anullment. He wouldn’t show up for the anullment. So, then she was shamed, in other words, for not being —
BEHAR: Ex-communicated, yeah.
HASSELBECK: -pretty much not able to walk down and receive what is to be the most intimate, you know, part of the week with God and taking Jesus into your body.
BEHAR: What about Giuliani? He’s been divorced three times at least.
SHERRI SHEPHERD: Has he had communion prior to this? Have they been giving him– is this an everyday thing?
GOLDBERG: I assume in other churches he wasn’t having an issue or we would have heard about it.
BEHAR: Well, they don’t exactly interview you when you’re at the rail. The priest doesn’t say how many times have you been divorced? They don’t do that.
GOLDBERG: But if the archbishop is making that much noise, I assume that this is not the kind of story that would disappear. We would have heard something because it happened with John Kerry, didn’t it?
BEHAR: Well, you know, just, just speak to the anullment problem. I remember when the Beatles were around, that you could, that you could buy an anullment. People used to buy anullments.
GOLDBERG: Yes
BEHAR: You know, the Kennedys and people like that could buy anullments, so it meant really nothing.
HASSELBECK: Our family didn’t come from a lot of cash, so they weren’t buying an anullment.
BEHAR: Well, that’s my point. So, I mean, it’s not exactly the most moral position.
GOLDBERG: It’s very strange that when, when the Catholic god, you know, because there are so many different gods. I’ll refer to the Catholic god at the moment. It seems that the Catholic god always says judge lest ye be judged. And always says if I-
BEHAR: They always say that.
GOLDBERG: If you come to me, I’m the only one who can forgive you. It doesn’t matter what everyone else says. And yet a priest, the mouth piece to God, would say you can’t —
BEHAR: There are amendments. Unless you do this. Unless you do that. (hand gesturing)
SHEPHERD: The priest has absolute say, because I don’t know about Catholicism –
BEHAR: No the Pope does.
SHEPHERD: The Pope, okay.
HASSELBECK: No, the Pope does. The bishops are an extension of his, his abilities to say yeah or nay to certain things. There are a lot of rules in the Catholic, you know, Church.
SHEPHERD: So if he says I don’t believe in abortion anymore, then he can take communion?
BEHAR: Well, the thing about is that Rudy Giuliani hasn’t necessarily had an abortion himself. His wi- you know what I mean? His wife hasn’t had one. I don’t know if she has or not. He’s not saying I’m going to get it or you should get it or you shouldn’t get it. He’s saying people should have the right to choose whether they want this or not. And that’s his position is. The Church doesn’t have that position.
[Applause]
SHEPHERD: But did they deny him for leaving his wife or cheating on his wife and marrying another woman?
BEHAR: No, no, no.
SHEPHERD: Why don’t they deny him for that? Is that not a sin any more to leave your wife? Excuse my anger, but is that not a, not a —
BEHAR: It is a sin. But he wasn’t running for president at the time, so there wasn’t an issue.
HASSELBECK: I seems this archbishop needs a little pub. You know what I mean? He wanted a little publicity. He though slamming Giuliani would get him into the limelight.
BEHAR: You think that’s it?
HASSELBECK: Yeah, they’re all about it.
BEHAR: What about the vows of modesty? Don’t they take that also?
HASSELBECK: Some don’t. You should see the jewelry they wear. They’re, you know.
SHEPHERD: Blinging! Bling, bling!
GOLDBERG: I just find it very interesting that, that, you know, it’s like closing churches. I don’t understand people who close churches because there’s so many, you know, folks that go to church. You know, it’s really a big deal for a lot of people. How can you live at the Vatican and say we have to close these churches because there’s not enough money when we could, like, sell some stuff?
BEHAR: Well, the Catholic Church is, is in debt now for paying off a lot of the pedophile cases and they have to close all these churches.
GOLDBERG: There’s a lot of stuff they could be selling.
HASSELBECK: And they were handing out communion to all those men who were molesting all the boys out there and they didn’t have a problem giving them communion.
BEHAR: We were all raised Catholic here, so this is not some anti-Catholic rant that we’re on. This is just factual information.
GOLDBERG: No, I’m a little bit on a rant. No you’re right.
BEHAR: You can rant. But I was raised — I had communion every Sunday. I received my communion, my confirmation, all nine yards. My daughter’s been baptized, just in case, you know?
GOLDBERG: You are so funny.
BEHAR: And so this is just- these are facts about the Church right now that people have to either live with or reject.
HASSELBECK: That’s one area. That’s the Catholic Church. There are many other divisions of Christianity.
SHEPHERD: If you’re a Christian, you can do communion if you sin.
GOLDBERG: Not in the Catholic Church.
I wish I could be amazed at how dim these statements were, how utterly maliciously and thoughtlessly they have been uttered.
But then, most of the people frequently appearing on television are nincompoops.
I was on the verge of rolling on the floor laughing – this was simply hilarious.
Rule #1 to choose what to watch on TV: don’t.
Since the hosts of The View obviously don’t have a clue, ABC should get one and cancel the show.
Jimmy, this sounds like it was semi-staged as in Behar prompting Goldberg. It’s intentionally done, just as you said, for the ratings.
Like Nihil, I lol in a few places at the cluelessness.
In a way, it’s a reflection of what people think of the Church. Both sheer ignorance such as Goldberg and not thoroughly understanding like Hasselbeck with the ever complicated marriage/divorce.
What interested me was Joy Behar, who I didn’t realize is a lapsed Catholic. I looked her up at imdb.com and she was born in 1942, which means that she came of age prior to Vatican II. It just reinforces for me that it wasn’t just post-counciliar that had poorly catechized people.
That’s one small step for woman, one giant leap for bubbleheadkind! The “show” has become a spoof of itself — a “view” from an observation deck the elevator no longer reaches, and when it comes to the Church, just bats in the belfry.
People from the outside looking in will always have a distorted “View” of what they see.
From what I hear, ratings have gone up now that Ms. Goldberg is with them. ABC is only interested in their bottom line – and there’s no way they’ll cancel the show as it is right now.
Their view of the Church only shows how much more work God needs to do through us in revealing the truth, mercy, love, joy, peace and presence of His Son, Our Blessed Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
St. Faustina, pray for us.
Behar comments are an indication of how it wasn’t the changes of Vatican II that was responsible for the decline in numbers of church attendees. No, many like Behar rejected the core teachings of the Church on abortion, marriage, and contraception.
ABC like most MSM is not interested in presenting the true Catholic view. They will never allow their secular, anti-religious world view to be challenged by someone on air. HASSELBECK is a Protestant Christian and has spoken out against abortion. Once. Walters slapped her down and she never opened her mouth again about it. Walters is the producer of the show.
Unfortunately, the only way they will let a Catholic priest onto “The View” in order to express the Church’s “view” would be if that priest were, in fact, a priestess. (They might make an exception if the priest were gay or wrote a book that is open to the gay lifestyle.)
I’m dumber for having read that.
Woopie should have stuck to Star Trek the Next Generation!
This is awful!
I second LCB. I think I just forgot how to do fractions.
As a secondary note: does anyone know who would be the appropriate person to contact to express displeasure at this?
Maybe it was a mistake to give women the vote?
That, right there, is “The View” of the Church that informed Catholics have to face every day. I already knew that the laborers are few, but this leads me to believe that the harvest isn’t even ready. *sigh*
I just checked out CatholicLeague.com to see what Bill Donohue had to say about all of this. He sugests that we all email the shows producer Bill Geddie at billgeddie@abc.com and suggest he buy all these ex Catholics a Catechisim.
I’m affraid that wouldn’t help. This show is notorious for Cathloic bashing. It’s going to take more than just complaining to get this to stop.
Does anyone have any ideas?
At least most Protestant detractors of the Church have well-reasoned, fact-based arguments and can be reasoned with and will engage in a useful conversation that leads to greater understanding.
But it seems the biggest, most vocal and damaging critics to the Catholic Church are… Catholics!
You know, I am by no means a conservative but I have stopped watching ABC, NBC, CNN, for commentary on the news(that’s what “the view” essentially is)and instead watch fox news where they don’t say inane things like they do on the view and other programs. It’s no wonder these networks are suffering low rating while fox is at an all time high, tripling the rating of these pinheads.
Bahar: We were all raised Catholic here, so this is not some anti-Catholic rant that we’re on. This is just factual information.
Facts according to whom, Joy? The Cracker Jack box joke book? Please, give me a break. Morons, every last one of them.
–Ann
The worst part is, they are in their own little plastic bubble where they are immune from criticism or even fact-checking. You know they’ll only accept the positive fan mail (ew) and won’t even look at the negative mail, or the mail that tries to set them straight. No way in heck will they ever allow someone who is an actual authority on the Catholic faith to rebut their ridiculous statements. They won’t look at any responsive blog entries or forum posts or anything that might shatter their obstinantely held illusions.
This quote has never seemed to true as it does today: “There are not over a hundred people…who hate the Roman Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church.” — Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
If the Catholic church really was like what those ladies had portrayed it to be, I’d hate it too.
I couldn’t even bring myself to laugh at this. It is just terribly sad and frustrating that people watch this and they think these people are right. I don’t even know how to comment on this transcript because it is just so shocking that people could actually talk like idiots about something like this and still be on t.v., influencing people.
However, they did bring up a good point about Giuliani’s divorce and how he was not denied Communion over his three divorces but he is now because his stance on abortion.
My only explanation for this was because he was not making his marital stance public whereas he is making his stance on abortion public.
My mom has “the View” on in the kitchen someitmes and I hear bits and pieces of this trash and it makes me sick. “The View” makes me sick.
I think you’re right. If Guilani had published a newspaper article or issued a press release saying, “I never intend to get an annulment of my first two marriages, and my current wife and I have sex regardless,” then I could see them denying him communion for that reason. But no priest/bishop can no FOR SURE what a man’s marital status is (i.e., if he’s living as brother and sister with his wife) unless he makes it public — which to my knowledge he hasn’t.
Guiliani has, however, made his views on abortion public via statements, press releases, etc. so it’s no longer a private matter.
My gut response to this is, “It must be a parody.”
But apparently it is possible to know that little about the Church.
St. Francis, pray for us.
In the words of the competition judge to Adam Sandler’s title character in the movie, Billy Madison, after Billy Madison had responded to a question with an answer that sounded superficially reasonable but lacked any substance,
“Mr. Madison, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I’ve ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response was there anything that could even be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”
ROFL – that was my thought as I read this – Billy Madison was the hero to these “ladies”. I wonder if Hasselback (I think she’s the one who said – we’re all Catholics here) realizes that Whoopy is Jewish. (I’m pretty sure she claims to be Jewish)
I too feel that I am now dumber for having read this.
Jacque said: This show is notorious for Cathloic bashing.
Bill said: ROFL – that was my thought as I read this – Billy Madison was the hero to these “ladies”. I wonder if Hasselback (I think she’s the one who said – we’re all Catholics here) realizes that Whoopy is Jewish. (I’m pretty sure she claims to be Jewish)
Ironically enough, it’s Elizabeth Hasselback, the beautiful bombshell that most people consider an ‘airhead’, who quite often tends to defend Catholic morals from what I’ve heard.
Exasperated laughing & crying aside, I think JoAnna (Oct 5, 8:26) has made the most important point so far – this is how the Church is understood by many who are otherwise well-educated, and includes those apparently raised Catholic . . .
It makes me ask myself, what, if anything, can be done?
I cannot believe the level of ignorance of these women–and to broadcast their utter idiocy on national television! I am embarrassed for them, really. But what’s ludicrous is apparently they are too stupid to even realize they should be embarrassed!
But, as funny as some may find seeing these women make utter fools of themselves on national television to be, it is not funny at all how ABC offends Catholics — but to an even deeper degree, how this type of programming utterly offends women! By its choice of consistantly broadcasting only low-brow females of the most base and ignorant type on this show (as well as on its other “news” and talk shows), they subtly imply that this is the creme-de-la-creme of womankind, which is to say there are no intelligent women. It is an insult of the highest degree and a form of blatant discrimination.
Where are the women’s rights groups when you need them?
We were all raised Catholic here, so this is not some anti-Catholic rant that we’re on. This is just factual information.
Is there anything more damaging to the communication of truth than un-catechized anti-Catholic ex-Catholics?
Um, you say that this is “The Nattering Nabobs of Know-Nothingism,” call it “painful,” and yet you expose us to this ignorant diatribe some more, therefore, giving them more exposure.
But, you are right. This IS painful to watch and hear.
“Is there anything more damaging to the communication of truth than un-catechized anti-Catholic ex-Catholics?”
I don’t know, ask Hitler, Luther, and “Madonna.”
Steph:
If it’s not exposed, it can’t be corrected.
I don’t know, ask Hitler, Luther, and “Madonna.”
Dr. Eric,
You just had to be witty, huh? ;^)
“However, they did bring up a good point about Giuliani’s divorce and how he was not denied Communion over his three divorces but he is now because his stance on abortion.”
Tony,
I’m an RCIA director, and believe me, I can’t count the times our Priest has told couples that they cannot recieve communion until they get the proper annulments taken care of. He is also very careful to let them know that annunments are not a “sure thing”. I would say that about 1/2 these people do as asksed and the other half just go to another parish where no one knows them and continue on as before.
Being a convert myself, I think that the Americian Bishops have failed us in not standing up for what Holy Mother Church teaches. It can’t all be put on our Priests. One of the things I tell the RCIA every year is that…We can only insturct them in the basics of Christianity, the rest is up to them. They must follow through and learn what they are professing to believe. I have only been Catholic for 2 years, but I attended RCIA for 3years in a row waiting to find out if I would recieve an annulment or not. In that period of time I tried to learn all I could. I’m still learning. This Church is so rich in knowledge, I don’t think I’ll live long enough to learn it all, but I’m going to die trying.
Now since I went of on that tangent, I think it wise that we all pray for our wayward Catholic family, no matter how much we dislike them. We are comanded to love them.
Jacque
The only real solution to the problem of the Heresy of the View, or the problem of women feminist liberals everywhere is to cryogenically freeze them and keep them away from society for millions of years Sio they cannot influence us with thier mindnumbing garbage. Hmmmm Perhaps a modern freezing crusade could help! I shall orgnize it! The fight is on! Down with the view!Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahaaha
I remember someone in my family went through a divorce. Unless she got her marriage anulled, she wasn’t allowed to receive communion.
Dear me. I wonder what the truth was.
Probably that she went through another marriage ceremony after the divorce, but that’s not exactly a piece of trivia.
I vowed to never watch thew View again after Wednesday, when Whoopi insisted that Elisabeth show respect for women who have had abortions. Not that I feel we should be disrespectful to them, mind you, it’s just that Catholics, other Christians, and many other groups are frequently bashed on this show, but for women who have had abortions, Whoopi insists on respect.
…when Whoopi insisted that Elisabeth show respect for women who have had abortions.
In spite of her ‘airhead’ reputation, I still respect Elisabeth for standing up for her Catholic convictions unlike some other folks.
Not everyone was taught the Faith properly prior to V.2, but unfortunately, even though many of us were fortunate in receiving excellent instruction we have failed to retain what we learned. I know quite a few people who were raised in very solid Catholic families and who went to wonderful Catholic schools, but it seems they remember very little and, instead, have absorbed the ignorance of the world around them. Once people stop going to church, they become very “dull” about spiritual matters. It is almost a revelation to them to be reminded what the Church teaches – and the fact that they used to know and believe it!
I thought that Elizabeth Hasselbeck is a Protestant. Maybe she was just raised in a nominal Catholic home.
(whining): “But, but… Catholicism is *hard*…”
Like Jimmy, I haven’t watched The View. The few references to it I’ve seen have not exactly piqued my interest. Now I don’t think you could pay me to watch it. What a bunch of twaddle!
I thought that Elizabeth Hasselbeck is a Protestant.
I don’t watch the view; but according to folks I know who watch it, Elisabeth is a conservative Catholic who holds to traditional family values (and, yes, she is a Republican).
Maybe she was just raised in a nominal Catholic home.
Huh?
I’m sorry, but from the Hasslebeck doesn’t look like she was defending the Church much. She was bashing it along with the rest of them. And not very intelligently.
–Ann
And not very intelligently.
I believe that’s the reason for her popular ‘airhead’ reputation.
Okay, I admit — I may be cutting her slack because I’m a sucka for babes. ;^)
(…apologies for the non-pc comment…)
You know Mrs Hassleback is leaving soon to have her child. I say we bring on a good female Catholic commentator like Laura Ingrahm, oh wait they wouldn’t for two reasons 1)She wouldn’t waist her time and 2)She would make them all look like morons.
“Hasselbeck was born Elisabeth Grace Filarski in Cranston, Rhode Island, the daughter of Elisabeth DelPadre, a teacher at Catholic schools and lawyer, and Kenneth Filarski, an architect. As a child, she lived in Providence and Cranston, Rhode Island. As a child, Hasselbeck went to St. Mary School in Cranston. She graduated from St. Mary Academy – Bay View in Riverside, Rhode Island in 1995.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elisabeth_Hasselbeck
I’m a sucka
I pity the fool.
Hey Jimmy,
God Bless them. While I think they do need a more truthful portrayal of the Catholic Church and other organizations, I think we should try just that much harder to talk hopefully and in the least have only moderate derogatory descriptions and such…Sorry, Jimmy, I was just a little affected by some of your word choices.
Could you write a commentary on it, maybe even an article for This Rock? That would be an interesting topic(The View or just media in general misportraying the Catholic Church and other identities).
When I heard some of the comments from the View, I kinda wondered what I would do if I was in the audience or if I had the chance to say something.
Anyway, I’m off… Pax tecum
-TheApologist
Eisabeth Hasselbeck went to that fine Jesuit institution, Boston College…
Well, now we know what “The View” stands for: “Very Ignorant Empty-headed Women”
As a women I find their amazing ignorance about the Church insulting. As the saying goes, “It takes more to discuss religion than a mouth.”
What distresses me is that many people will believe what these women said as being an accurate representation of Catholic teaching.
However, they did bring up a good point about Giuliani’s divorce and how he was not denied Communion over his three divorces but he is now because his stance on abortion.
My only explanation for this was because he was not making his marital stance public whereas he is making his stance on abortion public.
This is tangent to the conversation, but isn’t a civil remarriage a public statement that they’re mimicking all aspects of marriage with each other despite being valid married to other spouses. Unless the couple makes a statement that they are living as brother and sister shouldn’t we assume otherwise.
Here’s an amateur take on it from a Theology of the Body perspective:
Women are assaulted in our society from every direction: Their bodies are dishonored and disgraced through pornography. Their main purpose of child bearing humiliated and murdered with abortion. Then, their intellectual position is abused and made mockery of by putting these know-nothing dingbats up as some sort of ‘intelligent discussion’ or debate with some sort of substance. Millions of women watch this every day and their psyche has to be affected by it somehow. Maybe they think that this is ‘smart’ and hold themselves down to this level.
The sad part is that we men, who are supposed to guide and lead and support women are failing them and making mockery of them. From porn companies, owned by men, to this show — owned, executed, and produced by… men.
I’m a man. I recently converted to Catholicism and I realize just how much I had been failing my family as a man and as a leader and fulfilling my role. I support the Bishop in this thing against Guliani and every other ‘Catholic’ politician who can’t seem to figure out whether they really want to be Catholics or not. In fact, I think the Eucharist is very poorly defended in this day and may God bless and protect those who fight it unpopularly and to their detriment.
s/’fight it’/’fight for it’/g
I’m sorry, but from the Hasslebeck doesn’t look like she was defending the Church much. She was bashing it along with the rest of them. And not very intelligently.
That is exactly my point. Why she does stand up for more general Christian principles on the show, and is the token Bush supporter, she seems to bash the Catholic Church as much as any other. I have not been able to determine if she has formally left the Catholic Church but I also cannot find any information about whether she is a practicing Catholic today. She sounds more anti than pro.
“…when you’re at the rail.”
Goes to show you how long it’s been since Joy was in a church.
I used to admire for Hasselbeck for sticking to her guns as the lone conservative on the panel. But she’s as bad as the rest of them on this issue.
Thanks be to God we’re all so much smarter than them.
Reminds me of this comic: http://www.sluggy.com/daily.php?date=060309
Warning: Severe depiction of sophomoric jerks on the airwaves
Thanks be to God that we have His light to guide us. Try it sometime, J.
There’s a lot of stuff they could be selling.
Said the women who probably make more in a week than the Pope has been paid in his life!!!!!!!!!!!!
“Thanks be to God we’re all so much smarter than them.”
Not at all. We just don’t get on TV and start spouting off mean-spirited nonsense about which we know nothing.
Than they.
Heh.
Than they.
Actual, “than them” is right since “than” can be used either as a conjunction or a preposition. If a preposition, “than them,” if a conjunction, “than they are.”
Actual?
This is an outrage. If these comments were applied to Judaism or Protestantism or Islam there would be public outrage. Catholics should demand that this propoganda be addressed and corrected immediately. So typical of the media to disparage the Church.
s/’fight it’/’fight for it’/g
chad, that’s great. You don’t see many global search and replaces written like that anymore, unfortunately.
NimWits no doubt.
This sums up what the secularists think and know of the True Church of Christ.
Nothing.
Sad.
For one day, our Church will be flooded by these same very lost souls, as we all know, on that same fateful day, when we shall proclaim with joy and exaltation; “Salvation comes from our God, Who is seated on the Throne, and from the Lamb.”
This was so incredibly stupid that it now tops the Monty Python’s Quest for the Holy Grail conversation about how to try witches.
If superstition is properly understood as misplaced belief then their understanding of the Church is pure superstition.
Elizabeth Hasselbeck attended Boston College. you’d think she would have a better grasp of Catholicism. and no, I do not intend this to be a shot at the Jesuit educational system in america. just a fact. Catholic universities must be faithful to Catholic teaching. thats all i have to say..
I wish I could laugh at the sheer ridiculousness of this, but it’s actually quite tragic. The sad fact is that “The View” is probably the primary source of “information” about the Catholic Church for millions of people in America, and those people are being led astray by the ignorance and prejudice of a few inappropriately influential women.
Actual, “than them” is right since “than” can be used either as a conjunction or a preposition. If a preposition, “than them,” if a conjunction, “than they are.”
Should definitely be “they,” as in “Thank God we’re all so much smarter than they [are].” Thank God I don’t have the opportunity to spread my ignorance abroad on publically broadcast airwaves, and that I’m free of financial or peer pressure to do so.
Incoherent rambling regarding the Catholic faith. It is obvious that none of these women understand what the Catholic Church teaches or care to even learn and reflect its teaching’s properly.
Great Catholic Blog!
I watched “The View” a couple of times when it first apppeared. The interesting guests had very little speaking time. Instead, I had to listen to the insipid ramblings of the hosts. A few years ago, one of my Canadian friends watched it and said it was like a train wreck. She’d never seen any women act so stupid in public. (Which is saying a lot, since she worked in clubs and coffeehouses in Toronto.)
Sadly, the women who watch “The View” seem to be the ones who emulated the fashions and mindsets of “Melrose Place”, “Ally McBeal” and “Sex and the City”. They like junk, even when it showcases the worst of their sex.
While this particular production of the Moron Tabernacle Choir goes far past the pale of arrant stupidity, I would also like to point out that I’ve also heard some real theological/catechistical howlers from O’Reilly and Hannity (who claims to have been once a seminiarian, yet!) over on Fox. On the other hand, those two have never held the Church up to public scorn and ridicule.
Thanks be to God that we have His light to guide us. Try it sometime, J.
Bill, it is obvious from your spiteful comment directed toward me, that you presume to have more light guiding you than you do.
Spiteful? You must be using a definition of the word with which Mr. Webster and I are not familiar.
Speaking of incoherent rambling, the Seahawks got crushed by the Steelers, 21-0 this afternoon. Matt “Elisabeth’s brother-in-law” Hasselbeck was the losing quarterback. A whole football game and he couldn’t get the Seahawks onto the scoreboard. Not even a field goal. I guess everybody can just take that for whatever it is worth.
You *can* receive Communion if you are only civilly divorced. You cannot receive Communion if you are civilly divorced and REMARRIED, however, without having the first marriage annulled.
Peace, Michelle
You *can* receive Communion if you are only civilly divorced. You cannot receive Communion if you are civilly divorced and REMARRIED, however, without having the first marriage annulled.
Michelle,
You CANNOT receive Communion if you are only civilly divorced and yet are having relations with another woman.
That’s ADULTERY.
Therefore, anybody who commits such an act CANNOT receive Communion.
Esau: Michelle’s statement “if you are only civilly divorced” rather clearly implies no greater obstacle than the divorce. Obviously it goes without saying that anyone who is having relations with anyone to whom they are not married cannot receive communion; there is no need to stipulate another woman in order to point out that this constitutes grave sin.
To do so is just as unnecessary as responding to a person who says “You can receive Communion if your first marriage was annulled and you are remarried lawfully in the Church” by saying “You CANNOT receive Communion if your first marriage was annulled and you are remarried lawfully in the Church and yet you are having an affair with your secretary.”
This touches on a point that I have tried in the past to hint at as gently as possible, and I would write it to you privately if I could: You are too quick, Esau, to take exception to what people haven’t said by expanding the discussion to points that no one raised or disputed. It comes across as criticizing or correcting people for not having rejected errors that were not under discussion.
If you feel there is another point that needs to be made, that’s fine, but you need to learn to do it in a way that doesn’t come across as criticism when the other person hasn’t said anything wrong.
If you want to write to me privately c/o my Decent Films contact page, I would be happy to provide specifics.
Spite:
a malicious, usually petty, desire to harm, annoy, frustrate, or humiliate another person; bitter ill will; malice.
Spiteful:
full of spite or malice; showing spite; malicious; malevolent; venomous: a spiteful child
“Thanks be to God that we have His light to guide us. Try it sometime, J.”
The last sentence can easily taken to mean that the writer has God’s light, and others here don’t. Bad faith, hence spiteful. That could be a misinterpretation, but since no effort was made to clarify, it is not unreasonable to assume that a dig against another was intended.
SDG:
This is what was written:
You *can* receive Communion if you are only civilly divorced. You cannot receive Communion if you are civilly divorced and REMARRIED, however, without having the first marriage annulled.
This is why I believed the matter required further clarification.
What I care about is the right rendering of the Church’s teachings and how statements like these might be miscontrued by other individuals.
If you believe that it’s not worth clarifying statements like these dealing with the church’s teachings; that’s fine.
However, I personally feel with all the misinterpretations of the church’s teachings and the ignorance of some folks concerning these matters, I believe it’s worth the clarification.
Just as John E. felt that your post required clarification as regards your post, I felt these comments required such also.
If you are personally offended, then okay — you’re offended and I’m sorry you feel that way.
But as regards folks out there who sincerely are sincerely trying to discover the Church’s teachings, your pride being hurt means little to me.
I look after them because I, too, was like those folks.
This is a matter of looking after others and NOT one of Pride.
“That could be a misinterpretation…”
Sure was.
SDG:
After taking a 2nd look at what I wrote above, I feel that, itself, require clarification.
For what it’s worth, I know folks who actually believed that to get a civil divorce was enough and, therefore, one could actually receive Communion.
That said, in the end, this is not a matter of you and me here; but about OTHERS — as I had mentioned, those who are sincerely seeking what the Church actually teaches and, incidentally, what Scripture actually teaches.
This is why I feel such clarifications are in order.
It’s NOT about what you’ve made it out to be — as some sort of retort against the commentator; but about providing CLARIFICATION for the sake of others.
“Bill, it is obvious from your spiteful comment directed toward me, that you presume to have more light guiding you than you do.”
J, Thanks be to God you’re so much holier than we.
Esau,
Just making a suggestion. Why not add your comment/clarification in the future with out directing it to the previous poster in this case, Michelle.
Since we all care about the lurkers that might come across Jimmy’s blog, charity should be our priority.
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J
Inocencio:
Since we all care about the lurkers that might come across Jimmy’s blog, charity should be our priority.
That’s just it —
My clarification was not actually an attack on Michelle herself but, rather, merely a clarification on what she said for the benefit of others.
Just making a suggestion. Why not add your comment/clarification in the future with out directing it to the previous poster in this case, Michelle.
That is a sound idea.
“Bill, it is obvious from your spiteful comment directed toward me, that you presume to have more light guiding you than you do.”
Excuse me?
Are you talking about the same bill912 who many times humbly admitted his own personal failings publically in the past on this blog as well as demonstrate a firm resolution to try his best to follow Christ and carry his cross?
Looks like the only spite here is the one coming from your person.
Please, please, don’t talk so harshly about somebody you apparantly don’t know all too well.
Take my word for it, my friend: I am not just telling you how I made it out, I’m telling you how your post(s) come across to others.
If it helps at all, I can tell you from personal experience that I’ve had to learn lessons in this regard myself, and in my life I have been surprised more than once at the discrepancies between what I intended and how I came across — not just one or two people, but most people. Experiences like that have taught me to make corrections in my communication style to avoid coming across in ways that I didn’t intend (not that I claim to have Arrived, but certainly I’ve improved quite a bit). From my own experience, I can tell you that just because you intend one thing doesn’t mean that’s how you come across to others, and sometimes it’s not the others’ fault.
The fact is, your post above comes across as if you’re correcting Michelle on a point about which she had misspoken — which she didn’t. Whether or not you intended it, that’s how it reads. If you don’t want to come across like that in the future, you need to be aware of how your language sounds and find ways of communicating without coming across in ways you don’t intend.
Exactly, thanks, Inocencio.
Esau, you could even have quoted Michelle and then added something like:
“Good point, Michelle. Contrary to what the Nattering Nabobs said, just being divorced does NOT mean that one is in sin and does not bar anyone from communion! What bars one from communion is a sinful relationship with another party to whom one is not married. Remarrying without an annulment is a form of civilly recognized adultery. Of course, adultery is always a sin, with or without remarriage! Even if you don’t remarry, if you are sleeping with someone else, you are still barred from communion.”
That would have acknowledged the relevance and aptness of Michelle’s point and added your point without seeming to correct her on a point regarding which she hadn’t misspoken.
SDG:
Thanks for the feedback.
I greatly appreciate it!
Although there appears to be some misinterpretation as to the intention and purpose of my clarification; I appreciate your comments.
SDG:
By the way, thanks for providing such constructive feedback as to alert me to another perspective.
This greatly helps to bring a whole other level of awareness in this regard on written comments such as those here on the blog.
It appears so much easier to convey such things in person but when it comes to conveying things in a similar manner on places so seemingly black and white as these here blogs; it seems like an entirely different matter altogether.
Thanks and God Bless You, Brutha!
“Thanks be to God we’re all so much smarter than them.”
“Than they.”
Actual(ly), “than them” is right since “than” can be used either as a conjunction or a preposition. If a preposition, “than them,” if a conjunction, “than they are.”
Buzzztt.
Statements of comparison using verbs of being always take the nomnative case because the sentence always assumes comparison in the same case. E.g.:
— We are all so much smarter than they (are smart).
— I am so much more a nerd than he (is a nerd).
— We will be so much more silly than he (is silly), if we continue talking about grammar.
Esau: Iron sharpens iron. We’re all here to help each other.
Connan: I knew I would be vindicated.
P.S. The grammatical point is essential because in some sentences case completely changes the meaning of the sentence. “I love you more than he” means something completely different from “I love you more than him.” (“I love you more than he [loves you]” vs. “I love you more than [I love] him.”)
So, from now on: “Watch them grammar!”
Statements of comparison using verbs of being always take the nomnative [sic] case
Not “always.”
Bill, what’re the Grandmas’ doing?
i hate hasselback and she isn’t catholic…she’s protestant…i hope she doesn’t come back
i agreed with whoopie correcting elizabeth and she did it in a respectful manner that silenced her. i was impressed with the way whoopi handled her. i hope she gets elizabeth off the show because she is ignorant dumb blonde who is inconsiderate of others. she is like a stupid high school girl who doesn’t know anything and says stupid things. she hasn’t matured intellectually.
And this, my friends, is reasons #8756876 why priests CANNOT squander their Sunday sermons with pious platitudes and cute stories.
For whatever reason, it has been decided that 5 minutes of meandering reflection or some short commentary on Scripture is about all that is acceptable in a lot of parishes.
If priests don’t take the oppportunity at Mass to offer explination of Catholic thought on a regular basis sources such as these blowhards will be what informs entirely too many Catholics.