Where is disagree is point 3. For a fundamentalist to say “I really think the Catholic Church is wrong on doctrinal issues” is not bigotry, it’s opinion. For someone to call that church names based on his interpretation of scripture may be bad form, or “mean-spirited,” and we have every right to be critical of these mean words. But unless he’s calling for the church to be banned, or for Catholics to be forced out of their jobs, or wear armbands, it’s not “bigotry” in any sense of the word.

We’ve let “bigot” come to mean “anyone who strongly disagrees with me” and that’s simply not the correct meaning.

Stephen A.,

Most Christians aren’t Universalists… yet. So exposing differences, even vigorously, is fair game - or did the media change the rules on this?

But it isn’t about this but about anti-Catholic bigotry (of the “Whore of Babylon” type). Sure, it is his right to engage in that but it is also the right of others to expose or criticize this. That other Fundamentalist pastors use similar language doesn’t make it better.

Dan Crawford,

in what way does Donahue diminish the word “Catholic”?

So far, Hagee has only taken back point 2.

He is seriously wrong in his take on number 1 but that is not bigotry in itself.

I haven’t seen him talk about point 3, where the bigotry is most clear.

Fr. J.,

while I agree that you describe Donahue’s role accurately, I disagree that “accepting apologies” is “the Christian thing to do”. No, the Christian thing is to forgive - quite regardless of whether the other guy repents - and quite independently of exposing bigotry. As others have said, the apology was not a full-fledged apology. It serves Donahue’s aims, which you described, well though.

Stephen A.,

Most Christians aren’t Universalists… yet. So exposing differences, even vigorously, is fair game - or did the media change the rules on this?

But it isn’t about this but about anti-Catholic bigotry (of the “Whore of Babylon” type). Sure, it is his right to engage in that but it is also the right of others to expose or criticize this. That other Fundamentalist pastors use similar language doesn’t make it better.

Dan Crawford,

in what way does Donahue diminish the word “Catholic”?

I do think you are an anti-Catholic bigot, based upon your comments on that thread.

a certain stream of Roman Catholic life — pro-Vatican

Any other stream would be Protestants masquarading (sp?) as Catholics.

I encourage you to work hard at living your principles here. In our earlier discussions, when I was disagreeing with so much Catholic doctrine, you used language that made it clear you thought I was an anti-Catholic bigot.

Not engaging in the latter ought to be an ethical matter for journalists; discerning the difference between legitimate disagreement and bigotry (in this and all matters, of course) ought to be a fundamental skill for a journalist.

Well, done, Bill, good and faithful servant.

…some video that was casting aspersions (on Catholics)

Is that all he did, “cast aspersions”? Wow, some people have very thin skin. Can someone please come up with some reporting on Hagee’s supposed slanders against Catholics?

I know it’s not PC from someone to say there are differences between Christians or between other Faiths, but doesn’t he, as a Protestant and a fundamentalist Christian, have the right to say “This other church over there is a False Church, in the Biblical sense, because I believe they are wrong on doctrine, and therefore, are endangering people’s salvation”? Most Christians aren’t Universalists… yet. So exposing differences, even vigorously, is fair game - or did the media change the rules on this?

I don’t have a dog in this fight, and don’t exactly care for televangelists because I don’t buy into their teachings or (often) their tactics. But in fairness, I need to see evidence that this guy is more bigoted than all the other Protestant pastors who simply happen to think Catholicism is the wrong way to go. Because that, friends, is a fair case for a Protestant to be making (and vice versa for Catholic Priests re: Protestantism.)

Care to predict some of the doctrinal and political ties among those on one side or the other, when it comes to the status of the Hagee apology?

No but I can describe mine: I am or at least try to be a faithful orthodox Catholic who obeys the Magisterium of the Church and lives my Catholicism if it were true. And I utterly reject Hagee’s “apology.” If Andrea Marcotte’s outrageous sacrilege was worthy of condemnation — and it certainly was — why is Hagee’s calling us the “Whore of Babylon” not worthy of equal opprobrium? Certainly not because of the quality of his “apology” — as you noted, it was no such thing. Why the selective preemptive graciousness on Donohue’s part?

Dan Crawford has already answered that question.

I can take the political calculation, really. But please don’t insult my intelligence! Don’t go around assuming that people who take offense at Hagee are somehow “bad” or “liberal” Catholics.

I’m not a virgin. I understand where this is coming from. We’re in the middle of a presidential campaign. He took on enormous pressure because I went after him after he endorsed McCain. So there are all kinds of media now who had never heard of this guy and they’re not putting him in the spotlight. He got rapped all over the place. Could I have gotten this letter eleven years ago? No, he blew me off then.

1) Black Catholics vote heavily Democratic

2) Hispanic Catholics vote heavily Democratic, though far less so than blacks

3) Female Catholics swing between the two parties, after having been a Democratic constituency

4) Male Catholics are now a strong Republican constituency

5) White Catholics are a marginally Republican constituency in every region of the country, except in the West.