Dear Catholics: I Am Heartily Sorry, etc.

Actually, I'm not sorry at all, but I suppose an explanation is in order.

Last week, I wrote a piece with the somewhat provocative title "The Jesus-Eating Cult of Rick Santorum." The purpose was to take Santorum to task for his persistent and opportunistic attacks on the faith of others, in particular his dog whistle references to President Obama's "phony ideology" and his assertion that it is impossible to be a Christian and liberal. My criticism took the form of a ridiculously over-the-top broadside against Roman Catholicism, a demonstration of the type of vicious religious ignorance and intolerance I too often see coming from too many so-called Christians, especially Santorum.

Apparently, a lot of Catholics are willing to accept that other people believe they are cannibals. (Bill Donahue, the official fake spokesman for the Church through his League of Extraordinary Catholics or whatever it's called, quoted that section in his weekly hissy fit today.) I had thought that the gratuitous references to NAMBLA, or tying the Church to terrorism based on their behavior during the Inquisitions, would have been a tip-off.

I won't say that Catholics need to lighten up or learn to take a joke, because the piece wasn't intended to be light-hearted or funny. It was satire, meaning... well, you can look that up. (It was probably a mistake to put it in the Comedy section; the editors wanted readers to know it was not to be taken literally.)

It's traditional at this point for me to half-apologize, to say that I'm sorry if anybody was offended, but I really don't mind if anybody was offended. I hope they will now think twice before they question the faith of progressive Christians, or Mormons or Muslims. I doubt they will.

 

 

 

Follow Larry Doyle on Twitter: www.twitter.com/thelarrydoyle

Comments

[Conpeppering]

02:15 PM on 03/15/2012

I find your lack of faith disturbing.

[SarahCollinsHonenberger]

02:31 PM on 03/11/2012

Mr. Doyle, which category do you claim Mr. Obama is in? Muslim? Liberal Christian? "Other Christian"? Which category is it that doesn't attend any community of believers, doesn't believe an oath to the US Constitution matters, changes his 'affiliation of record' when he runs for office, and sits through sermons of hate without questioning that religious leader? 'Other Christians' would rather have a Roman Catholic (heaven forbid, someone who believes a connection to God is worth nurturing) leading us than someone who believes there is no place for God in this world. Pedophiles are not restricted to the Roman Catholic religion. Lutherans, Baptists, Jews, and Muslims have taken advantage of their weaker community members for years. They just didn't take a vow not to be sexually active. It hardly excuses the misuse of authority and trust. You should apologize. To your parents who must be very disappointed in a son, a 'Christian,' who refuses to acknowledge only God knows the right path. No human has that kind of insight, least of all a 'humor' columnist who attacks those whose faith he can't understand and chooses to ridicule. Fear and intimidation were discarded by Christians, Roman Catholic or otherwise, centuries ago. It remains to be seen if we Christians and Jews can prevail with Muslims who refuse to allow individuals to connect to God in their own way. Your writing doesn't further the goal of world peace. You ought to apologize, whether editors ask it or not. Shame on you.

[Chris Woronchuk]

05:22 PM on 03/06/2012

Dear Larry, I thought your article on Santorum was just so completely over the top! Outrageous even that it could not have been interpreted in any other way than clever tongue and check satire. I laughed until my sides ached. The entire article was worthy of the George Carlin stamp of approval. One more reason not to vote for a right wing conservative jesus freak, they have no sense of humor what so ever. Someone once said God invented humor to ridicule the enemies of the faith and I can not think of a bigger enemy of the faith than Rick Santorum, even the spell check flags his name as wrong, what does that tell you?

[mrld20]

03:04 PM on 03/06/2012

Don't apologize you've got freedom of speech and the press on your side!

[Nardwilly]

12:14 AM on 03/04/2012

I read your article after hearing Ari Flesicher mention it on Adeerson 360 Friday night. I did not realize it was in the comedy session. The real give away was "cannabilistic reverie..." for me, but I can be a little slow catching satire. I gave Ari some credit for criticizing Limbaugh. I know realize he is just as disingenous as he ever was. It should not have been light hearted because the things RS says about non conservative Catholics is as meanspirited and ignorant as your satire of Catholic dogma. Your satire was crude, but at some points quite accurate.

[loveofmylife]

09:27 AM on 03/03/2012

I have to say that, despite some raunchiness, I concur with Doyle's criticism of catholic church and its followers. For the first time ever I am happy to call myself EX-CATHOLIC.

[QueenoftheSilverDollar]

12:29 AM on 03/03/2012

If the RCC hierarchy can condemn those who don't conform to their version of the "Truth," why can't they accept the fact that people are going to condemn THEM once in a while? What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[TeriPettit]

01:30 PM on 03/04/2012

It wasn't a condemnation. It was a PRETEND condemnation, to show that condemnations of ANY religion are offensive and wrong. Basically, to show that what's bad for the goose is bad for the gander.

[pixiepetal]

11:25 PM on 03/02/2012

I am a Roman Catholic; I have been my entire life, and even chose to go to a Jesuit university for college. I have had both of my children baptized and do my best to attend church as often as I can, although lately it's been a battle of conscience considering the fact that not only am I Catholic, but also a staunch Democrat and supporter of our well-meaning president. Having read your article, I would like to be able to say that I am shocked at the negative response you have received. It was immediately clear to me that your were deliberately being provacative to prove your point about Santorum's own unchristian behavior and comments. Anyone who sees your article as a genuine attack on Catholics has clearly missed the entire purpose of your article, and could benefit from a college course on satire. Unfortunately, I cannot say I am shocked, because I have recently become sadly used to such ignorance in the U.S. I find it saddening that you even had to post the above explanation, because it simply highlights the ignorance that is so rampant across the nation, and justifies Obama's wish to further the higher education of our youth. I for one found your article both apt and amusing (the vagina comment killed me) and while the reference to Kennedy made me gasp a bit , I'll let it go this once. Keep doing what you're doing.

[prdidopooh]

11:41 PM on 03/02/2012

Well said.

[Matt Scholand]

10:05 PM on 03/02/2012

"question the faith" You realize we have actual dogmatic conflicts right? Civil and thoughtful disagreements and discussions are just fine and we'll continue to engage in them.

[Seamus OMalley]

03:22 PM on 03/02/2012

Larry, you're not funny or clever.

[FatherTime2]

05:32 AM on 03/02/2012

Didn't like my comment so you delete it. Now I see.

[Shaun Mc Michael]

11:47 PM on 03/01/2012

As a matter of fact, the early Christians were charged with Cannibalism, because of the Eucharist. IF they didn't believe they were truly eating the Divine Body and Blood in the Eucharist, they would have said so. AND Rome, though Corrupt at that time, still danced on a somewhat decent side. Meaning, no admittance of yes this is HIS flesh and blood, meant, no cannibalism, meaning no conviction.

[garyd11]

10:42 PM on 03/01/2012

Dear Larry:

Would you kindly prove your point and genuiness to your readers by writing the same kind of "satirical" article about the Muslim faith? . . . . . . Yeah, didn't think so! What the matter, not so brave with that religion?

[James Haun]

11:44 AM on 03/02/2012

this has been a common retort by those offended by Larry's piece and it is patently incorrect. A catholic, santorum, has called others' faith into question - not a muslim. so, why would another piece be needed from the muslim perspective? they have done nothing wrong, but yet you still want to paint the whole muslim worldview with the radical brush. does westboro baptist church speak for all of christianity? with statements like yours, you prove mr. doyle's point in spades.

[mackjaz]

07:19 PM on 03/01/2012

Welcome to all the first-time Catholic posters here! It gets pretty boring around here without some new blood.

Be advised... the standards here are higher than Yahoo message boards or other anonymous sites. Be prepared to back up your claims.

[Bob 267888]

01:38 PM on 03/01/2012

This is why I find it hard to take Political Correctness or the Huffington Post seriously. On the one hand, ESPN is demonized for an unfortunate use of a comment that an editor should have caught. Nevermind that is was commonly used phrase used in a commonly accepted manner, which suggests that it was not done with evil intent. We are told that tolerance requires us to ignore intent, fire the guys who used the phrase, and then strick it from our vocabulary. On the other hand, the Huffington Post prints an editorial that blatantly attacks Catholics. It does not really apologize, but gives a self serving explanation as to why we should not be offended, talking down to the reader as if we are school children. Now we are told to look at the intent. Got to love the hypocrisy.

[peterochocinco]

07:01 PM on 03/03/2012

agreed