“If that had been the only point made and if that one point had been made better... I might have sided with you.”
That was, in fact, his only point. He made it very well, the claims of the stupid and the malicious notwithstanding.
“Good intentions on one point do not make up for poor execution in others.”
Poor execution? Howls, Bruce. Howls of derisive laughter.
Who are you to criticize a writer of Msgr. Pope’s stature?
Everyone here understood this article quite well. A few people, or possibly one person with a few identities, decided to highjack the thread with totally groundless claims.
Luckily, the OP is so very clear that no one will be misled.
“Who are you to criticize a writer of Msgr. Pope’s stature?”
I’m someone who will call you a hypocrite for making a disagreement personal after calling others out for what you considered Alinsky tactics.
He picked a poor example, and your only two choices are that he did it carelessly... or he did it intentionally. Both choices lead to different conclusions, neither of which are very flattering.
I personally think it was intentional, and my opinion of him is shaped by that. But buy all means, keep defending the undeniable and I’ll keep posting the same point in response and it will continue to build up a wall of evidence to memorialize the poor decision.
Or you could walk away from this one.