I just try to ignore these really stupid articles as much as I possibly can. I must confess that Sally Quinn was really stupid in those pieces. It is enough to make one scream.

In 1989, during my lapsed-Methodist days, I was turned away from a tour of the Cologne Cathedral because I was wearing khaki shorts.

I changed into long pants, returned, and enjoyed the tour.

Shorter Quinn:
“Those damn Catholics are, like, foreigners. And they look down on me! Me! Whatta bunch of primitives.”

My own dad was a bailiff and once kicked me out of the courtroom for wearing shorts.

As far as electing a pope quickly…well that just means we move to Sally’s next petulant stage where she complains about the Pope’s Catholicism. Or like someone else said: When white smoke comes out of the Vatican chimney, you know we have a new pope; when white smoke comes out of Andrew Sullivan’s head, you know that pope is Catholic.

At least Quinn isn’t a fallen-away or poorly-cathechized Christian. She describes herself as always having been an atheist. It would be nice if all of these op-ed authors would familiarize themselves with their topics. It’s okay to disagree, but to be a blithering idiot while doing it ought to be embarrassing.

I see Damian Thompson, an actual Catholic, is on board with my opinion that married priests should be permitted. That, at least, is something that could happen. Not terribly likely, but it’s possible.

Here is a link to the hilarious opening episode of Quinn’s disastrous episode of being a joint anchor with veteran newsman Hughes Rudd in 1973 for the CBS Morning News:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89TwxJg5wKY

Quinn had established a reputation among journalists of using her physical attractiveness for getting stories. CBS played this up as if she were a sex goddess who was going to send the CBS moring news ratings through the roof. As Quinn herself admitted afterwards she had no business being in front of a camera and CBS gave her zip training. The whole thing crashed and burned in a few months.

Quinn of course went on to fame and fortune by becoming Ben Bradlee’s mistress, wrecking his second marriage, and becoming his third wife.

Sorry for the mess. Gathering the cardinals from around the world and getting them organized takes awhile, especially in a church that does nearly nothing quickly.

Just hang on, and think of how good you’ll feel when the Sally Quinns of the world have found a new target at which to flap their gums…

The Sunday Mass dress code for churches in the Diocese of Rome does mention skirt length as well as coat and tie. I know as our parishioners are requested to follow the code and it is no big deal to me as I already did except when running super late to Mass. Dress codes will always have some subjectivity and variation in enforcement, so, even though I understand that everything is more difficult when traveling, it is obviously prudent not to get within a “half inch.”

I really really wish that some tourists would police themselves and read bilingual signs posted at the entrances of e.g. Mexican cathedrals. Their behavior — and that of their guides — is never edifying. I wonder why they are interested at all. When I found out that I would have to remove my shoes to visit a historical mosque in Yugoslavia, I simply chose not to enter. Easy.
__________________________

Married priests are permitted in the Eastern rites in the Catholic Church, of course, and even in the Latin Rite in the case of individual ex-Anglican and ex-Lutheran pastors as well as those in the Ordinariate. Please remember that married bishops are not permitted in Catholic or Orthodox churches, so looking at it that way, married priests are not unconditionally permitted anywhere.

We.don’t.work.on.other.people’s.schedules. We know the MCJ and crowd get this. But please deliver the message (again) to others, if you can stomach them.

And squelch the “maybe the next Pope will change…” talk. Yeesh.

Upstate – it’s just nice not to have to have TEC in the center of the news for a change.

I can’t thank FW Ken enough for steering me, in a comment to a previous post, towards that effusion by Sally Quinn. Oh, how I enjoyed myself commenting on that one over at GetReligion.

See, here’s the thing: Sally says this visit to the Vatican happened when she was in her twenties. Seeing as how she was born in 1941 (thanks, Wikipedia!), this means any time between 1961-70. Now, some of you may be old enough to remember 60s fashion, especially the hemlines. I found an image of a 60s-style shift dress (a fashionable item at the time) which was the nearest thing I could find to what she described (long-sleeved black dress) and I don’t know if she rocked up to the Vatican in one of these but as you can see, a half-inch in length one way or the other would make a lot of difference.

Besides, curse that stuffy old European formal etiquette! Why, if Sally were to meet the Queen of England, it’s Lizzie who should be the one curtsying to Sally, not the other way round!

I also appreciated her explanation of the doctrine of Purgatory and how the priesthood was invented, just simply made up (probably in the Middle Ages, when the evil Roman Church was inventing stuff left, right and centre), courtesy of Garry Wills’ latest book. She helpfully describes Professor Wills as a “devout Catholic” and that’s when I lost it right there.

Even better, she uses Hilary Mantel’s recent novels (two in a trilogy about Thomas Cromwell, whom Hilary admits she loves to bits and much prefers to that yucky St Thomas More) as historical evidence about how enlightened in matters of female equality Henry VIII was – she recommends we read them “to learn exactly how the Vatican used to operate and how Henry VIII broke away from the papacy in order to marry Anne Boleyn.”

Let’s not mention the unfortunate aftermath, where Henry got tired of Anne, got Cromwell to bring charges of adultery, incest, witchcraft (accused of making the king fall in love with her by using magic) and treason to get her head chopped off and have their young daughter Elizabeth declared illegitimate.

But the cream of the whole thing is definitely in the first three paragraphs, where Mystic Sal peers into the future where St. Peter’s will be a theme park and be a kind of religious Disneyland where actors will dress up and pretend to be the Pope and the clergy – a fate that will befall them because of the omens from fifty years ago, when functionaries turned Sally away for inappropriate attire. How very dare they, as my sister describes the family dog going into a frenzy of barking at pedestrians and cyclists who have the gall to pass by their house on the street outside.

Oh, Sally.

It could be worse. Suppose we elected Popes the same way we elect Presidents?

On the other hand:

The majority of those surveyed said the next Pope should maintain traditional Catholic positions, while 46 percent said he should “move in new directions.” Weekly Mass attendees were most likely to favor tradition, with 63 percent saying the next Pope should maintain traditional teaching.

http://tinyurl.com/alghkgn

Rebecca has a good review of that CNA article, highlighting the salient points:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/publiccatholic/2013/02/pew-survey-catholics-want-the-next-pope-to-maintain-traditional-teachings/

Naah. I disagree. The more the Vatican drags this out, the more silly media-heads explode.

Catholics don’t donate enough to the parish to afford married clergy. It costs a lot more to support a family than priests currently get in take home pay. Plus, it’s no guarantee to reduce problems. When I was a musician in the former Episcopal Church, I knew far too many clergy wives who were totally unsuitable and a real liability. Plus, I knew a number of clergy who abandoned wife and children to shack up with a fetching priestess. Talk about scandal!! My previous comment disappeared, so please excuse if this is redundant.

I disagree. The more the Vatican drags this out, the more silly media-heads explode.

Good point. Those most irrelevant are usually the most shrill. I seem to remember a part in Lewis’ The Great Divorce where the more the guy whined, the more he shriveled. Would love to find an excerpt of that.

[...] and bigotry, so it is hard to pick out just one or two things. (Chris Johnson gets the ball rolling here). After the obligatory invoking of the abuse crisis in order to seize moral high ground, we get a [...]

Hmmm… Don’t have a dog in this hunt, as they say, but Wouldn’t it be fun to see some talking heads explode if the Vatican were to install a truely conservative Pope?

I wonder if Tomás de Torquemada is still available.

So many enemies of the Church whose ambition is to see her dead proffering so much advice on how it can save itself in the modern world, by redefining itself as part of the secular state. Of course they have “the right to make fools of themselves” (pace Secretary of State Kerry) but we do not have to listen.

And in terms of what these people want the Catholic Church to change in its teaching (e.g. women priests, contraception, abortion, euthanasia, divorce and re-marriage etc etc) who ever is elected will be a CONSERVATIVE pope. The Church does not change with the weather vane. So let the heads explode when the “prophets” realise they have been ignored.

I wish they made some sort of shock collar for journalists that would buzz the hell out of them any time they tried to write crap like this.

Does anyone read what they write before publishing it? Bother to check facts or assertions for veracity? I could write a better piece of opinion journalism 18 beers in…

Let’s face it. They didn’t like Benedict; I doubt very seriously they will like the next one any better. I suspect that the new Pope will be a properly conservative churchman. I hope he is as good a theologian as Benedict was. That was a real plus in my book.

So I will be praying for the Holy Spirit to guide and direct the Cardinals in Conclave to elect a true Shepherd for the flock.

Dear Chris,

While you wait…. http://youtu.be/CrzfbbgJu8M

I wince when I read someone as boundlessly ignorant as Quinn or Wills. Mostly because I was once as ignorant, so it sounds awfully familiar. Kind of like me. I got over a fair amount of it, though. It’s sad to see grownups who make their living writing sounding as clueless as I did 30 years ago. I’m sure I have many miles to go, but luckily I have a smaller audience for my misunderstanding of Christianity and good teachers. What shortcomings the Catholics have are nothing compared to the shrill bloviating of non believers who have free advice for them. Quinn describes Wills as a devout Catholic! Wow. Washington Post, I know I don’t need to subscribe. Are all your writers as lame as she is?

Not long before, I had spent a weekend at Williamsburg, and I remember thinking that perhaps one day the Washington Post would be like that same historic village. There would be actors dressed as ink stained sycophant shills for the Democratic Party and one actress playing Sally Quinn in flowing robes…..alas still an inch too short….waving from the balcony, remembering an institution as it once existed.

[...] here to read the [...]

What a vain, foolish, ignorant and self centered hag she is. I think it best if we leave the Papal selection up to her entirely, don’t you?

Fuinseoig for president!

I find it hard to believe that Sally Quinn was turned away from St. Peter’s for wearing a skirt that was “a half inch too short.” I suspect some exaggeration (or should I say minimization?) is going on here. I’m half surprised she didn’t go all the way and claim she was turned away for not wearing a full habit.

Then she goes on to quote Garry Wills – a Catholic who no longer believes in the sacramental priesthood or the Real Presence – to express outrage that the Church insists on baptism. Apparently the Church must be relying on some arcane papal decision or obscure canon, like…oh, perhaps this: “Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he can not enter into the kingdom of God.” (John 3). Take it up with Christ, Sally.

And Sally Q, the tart who intercoursed her way to a job at the Washington Post via the adulterer Benny Bradlee, writes a weekly column on “Faith.”

Sorry, protestants, but she is one of yours. And the Romans and we Orthodox are very, very grateful for that.

Richard M, you must remember this happened back in the 60s when Sally was in her 20s, skirt and dress hemlines were getting shorter by the year, and half-an-inch either way would make a lot of difference between “Just about acceptable”, “Did this shrink in the wash?” and “That’s a belt, not a skirt”.

Don Janousek, Sally Quinn describes herself as always having been an atheist, so no, she’s not “one of us” [Protestants]. She’s not one of any. Why she writes a column “on faith” is a mystery.

Fuinseoig, my husband has, in his wallet, a faded photo of me in a dress which definitely would not have gotten past the Vatican gates, and mine was modest by standards at the time. And even today people can’t get into Italian cathedrals with knees showing (no shorts).

I don’t buy the “1/2 inch too short” thing. I can pull a skirt up or down an inch or two if I need to, the waistband is at least that accomodating.

If they pointed at a place on her leg (whoopsie, LIMB) she could have tugged her skirt down to that point and gotten past the guard.

Either the whole thing is a fabrication or she was WAAAAAY off on her skirt length, which they warn and warn you about before you visit.

I hate it when they make stuff up.