You seem to be saying that 1 - this incident is untrue, and 2 - it is unimportant.
Reflect on the multiple sources I posted. Reflect on the current, public controversy in the USCCB. Reflect on the role His Holiness plays in our Holy Mother the Church.
It appears to me to be more likely true than not and that the confusion evidenced in the USCCB is equally present (or at least simularly present) in Rome.
The Church is idefectable, the men given charge of Her are not. We, as laity, especially since Vatican II, have been encouraged to be involved, to speak out, yes?
Assume the facts posted here are verifiable, doesn't that help explain the divergence of opinion in the USCCB?
I think both accounts are overblown and doubt the veracity of either,while leaving room for my being wrong.
On the chance that the post I am responding to was referencing yesterdays conversation,I pulled up both of your links and found no substantive source documents. They all go back to the conversation some blogger had with the former Mayor but gave much information for my chief occupation,playing "connect the dots". See my post # 67.
I have reflected and I agree that confusion is rife in the USCCB and seems to parallel a confusion that exists in the Curia. I think it is the same confusion and the same characters that existed since long before the Passion and culminated in the Crucifixion which resulted in the Resurrection. God never changes and neither does human nature (the exception to my abhorrance to the use of the words never and always).
I looked at the "Passion of the Christ" from that perspective at one viewing and found striking similarities. I'd like to pursue this further but right now have to go for a couple of hours.