Critique of pope's 20 years in Vatican is praised, criticized
The Opinion Commentary article by Father Joseph Gallagher "Pope John Paul II's reign" (Oct. 16) follows his Perspective article "Holy Father, holy truth" three years ago (Oct. 1, 1995), presented on the occasion of the Pope's visit to Baltimore.
In his earlier article, Father Gallagher virtually claimed papal primacy and authority to be a fraud, a "papal myth" foisted on the church over the centuries. In his recent article, Father Gallagher attempts to document the historical development of this presumed fraudulent teaching. This on the occasion of the pope's 20th anniversary.
As a historian, I cannot accept the validity of Father Gallagher's chronicle. It contains too many probabilities, too-vague documentation, unfounded generalizations and misinterpretation of facts.
He treats the church as a purely human corporation, with the role of its chief executive officer evolving over the centuries. Missing is any consideration of the church's mystical character.
Father Gallagher sadly emerges as a deconstructionist, intent on doing bodily harm to the Roman Catholic Church rather than serving it as its priest.
Charles J. Scheve
Towson
Father Joseph Gallagher's article evaluating the papacy of Pope John Paul II was objectively based in history and on the development of the role of popes and bishops in the church through the centuries.
It was a welcome balance at this time. The 20th anniversary of the reign of John Paul II has stimulated many well-deserved congratulations and an excessive amount of praise for him, with some predicting his early canonization.
Everyone will concede that he is a popular pope who has worked tirelessly to promote peace and good will among all people in all corners of the world, and his personal holiness and sincerity is beyond question.
But now let us look, not at the man, but at his papacy over 20 years.
Ideally, the church is governed by the pope together with the bishops of the world. Pope John Paul II has not always been mindful of this ideal. He has disagreed with suggestions made by many bishops in good faith and has interpreted these suggestions as dissension. He has answered them not with dialogue, but with repression with an iron hand. It is for canon lawyers to decide if this oppression is lawful.
It is true the church is not a democracy, but on the other hand, the pope is not an absolute monarch. John XXIII knew this when he wisely called his brother bishops from around the world to the Second Vatican Council and listened to them.
One wonders what history will record of John Paul II, not of the man, but of his long papacy.
Mary C. Baker
Baltimore
Intolerant to bash those who scorn homosexuality
Regarding "Hate speech can stir up hateful acts" (Perspective, Oct. 18), Steve Sanders is of a special interest group that preaches tolerance, yet it is quite obvious from his article that he is extremely intolerant of anyone who holds a differing view.
Rather than enter into an honest dialogue, he resorts to slander, name-calling and wildly irrational conclusions. Even those who left the gay lifestyle and are now married in heterosexual relationships are called "ex-gay charlatans."
Mr. Sanders also fails to make the distinction between legal, social and intellectual tolerance. Legal tolerance refers to First Amendment rights, such as freedom of speech and religion and the protection of minority opinion. Social tolerance refers to the rights of all individuals to be treated with respect and dignity. Intellectual tolerance is the belief that we must hold another person's belief as "true for them."
If we express a differing opinion and criticize the view we oppose, we are called bigots and hypocrites (the terms Mr. Sanders used to describe religious leaders such as James Dobson and Gary Bauer). Mr. Sanders writes that "pro-family" groups go to "extraordinary lengths to poison debate (and) sow misunderstanding."
After reading his article, however, it is obvious that Mr. Sanders is guilty of the very behaviors he condemns.
Janie Mock
Columbia
We don't need new murder category
This country does not need more laws to differentiate between a "hate crime" and any other murder. No life is more or less important than any other, regardless of color, religion or any other category that society wants to set apart.
It's time for our government to be consistent in its pursuit of criminals and very firm in the punishment of these offenders.
Does it really matter whether Wyoming student Matthew Shepard was gay, black, Jewish or Native American? He is dead. When this young man's murderers are convicted, their sentences should be consistent with this crime.
Tom Lusardi
Fallston
Concerted backlash of few victimizes Clinton, freedom
Making the president a moral exemplar is not a new idea that "recently came out of nowhere," as Daniel Berger says in "Making an example of the U.S. president" (Oct. 20). Or exactly why did FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover want to keep John F. Kennedy's and Lyndon B. Johnson's exploits secret, as Mr. Berger himself says?
What is new since the 60s is that taciturn sleuths like Hoover have been replaced by tell-all sleuths like Kenneth Starr.
What is new is the low tone of our personal comportment and popular culture.
What is new is the backlash, by a concerted minority, against that tone. President Clinton is a victim of that backlash.
But the low tone is a byproduct of ordinary people throwing off shackles, moral or otherwise, to express, to an extent that may be unprecedented in history, what is really within them. No longer willing to suffer under arbitrary rule, we are taking charge of our own lives. Or trying to. All too often, we mess up as Mr. Clinton did, but the struggle for personal freedom remains a worthy one.
Eric Stewart
Catonsville
Check identification at the polling place
As the general election draws near, my hopes are for a fair and accurate election, unlike the governor's election four years ago. But I am doubtful.
During the recent primary, I discovered how cheating could have taken place. I was given the opportunity to vote without having to prove who I was.
It's ironic that it is very difficult to make a purchase with a check but no identification is required to vote for a leader who will affect our lives for four years. I can't understand why voters are not required to provide photo ID.
Andy Reidler
Baltimore
Jazz singer Betty Carter's connections to Baltimore
Tributes to the late Betty Carter have appeared in numerous newspapers, including The Sun. Her career has been traced, applauded, criticized and revered. However, these writings have not connected her with Baltimore musicians or appearances.
One weekend in the 1950s, Betty Carter appeared at the Bamboo Lounge on Pennsylvania Avenue, where I was the pianist for the house band. Her first recording, "Jazz Ain't Nothing but the Blues," had been released. Our personalities were in conflict from the moment we started to have the Friday afternoon rehearsal and remained that way for two days when she persuaded the management to fire me.
This experience made me a much better accompanist and musician. Until that time, I thought that all the musician was supposed to do was read the piano score precisely and DTC correctly. Ms. Carter demonstrated to all what an improvising artist really does when creating jazz. I learned how to get beyond mathematics and create artistically, through nonverbal communications: the use of hands, face, eyes, arms, body and feet.
She also could sing so slowly behind the beat that she created anxiety in her accompanying musicians and listeners.
I was in the Royal Theater when Lionel Hampton introduced her to the audience as Betty "Bebop" Carter from Detroit, accompanied by his big band.
I watched her with pianist Albert Dailey and, later, Cyrus Chesnut, both outstanding pianists from Baltimore. We will miss Betty Carter's voice and spirit. "Am I to cling to some fading thing that use to be?" Yes!
Reppard Stone
Baltimore
Pub Date: 10/24/98