Posted on 08/01/2009 12:05:00 PM PDT by Clive
A New Brunswick newspaper that ran a front-page apology Tuesday for a story that claimed Prime Minister Stephen Harper had pocketed a communion wafer has also announced that its publisher and editor-in-chief are no longer with the paper.
Saint John Telegraph-Journal publisher Jamie Irving and editor Shawna Richer were no longer at their posts, effective immediately, said Annie Smith, a spokeswoman for the New Brunswick News Inc., the company that owns the daily paper.
"She is no longer editor, and (he) is no longer the publisher," she said. "I don't have any information other than that."
Ms. Smith would not comment on whether Irving or Richer had been fired or had resigned, nor whether either would take another position with the newspaper. No decision has been made on who will take over their roles, she said.
Mr. Irving is the son of James K. Irving, the eldest of three sons of billionaire industrialist K.C. Irving. The Irving family owns the newspaper.
The paper published the apology for a July 8 story, saying it "was inaccurate and should not have been published."
The story created a national controversy that lasted for several days, while Mr. Harper was attending a G8 gathering in Italy and preparing to meet the Pope.
"There was no credible support for these statements of fact at the time this article was published, nor is the Telegraph-Journal aware of any credible support for these statements now," said the apology, written under a double-bolded headline in capital letters. "The Telegraph-Journal sincerely apologizes to the prime minister for the harm that this inaccurate story has caused."
A spokesman for Harper, Andrew MacDougall, said Tuesday the prime minister has accepted the newspaper's apology. Mr. MacDougall declined to comment further.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalpost.com ...
As a head of state, he has a protocol office that is supposed to be on the alert for this sort of thing, precisely to avoid the sort of scandal that resulted.
As I said, I don't blame him personally because he obviously had no idea what was coming. Boo to his staff, they fell down on the job.
And boo also to the priest, who was on autopilot and not paying attention. He seems to be quite elderly, and he may have been completely discombobulated because it was a state funeral and a lot going on. An altar boy or deacon in attendance with a paten might have helped, but at a funeral where you know many non-Catholics are going to be in attendance it's the priest's responsibility to make a little announcement either before the Mass begins or after the Liturgy of the Word for the benefit of the non-Catholics present.
So I think we're pretty much in agreement. And, sadly, it is a scandal that so many young Catholics are poorly catechized or not instructed at all. That seems particularly prevalent in parishes that went all gooshy after VCII, trying to softpedal or ignore anything that made Catholics 'different'. Fortunately, when we converted we found a truly orthodox parish that has a very active instruction program for children AND adults.
My daughter was in the first class of confirmands that were presented to our new archbishop after his installation. As a new broom, I guess, he decided that he was going to catechize the kids, live and on open mike in the service!!!! -- to say that our Parochial Vicar and Christian Education supervisor were collectively having kittens is an understatement! Fortunately the kids had been well instructed and absolutely nobody muffed their questions (big sighs of relief from the PV and our Sunday School lady).
Obviously protestant denominations vary both in their theological views of communion, and whether communion is "open" or "closed". I know Baptist churches that not only have closed communion, but even members have to be in good standing to receive. I'm sure there are others as well.
But I know what he means.
No, but so far as I can tell, there are no mainstream protestant churches that deny communion to any other protestants. I could be wrong about that.
That’s interesting. I know Baptists can refuse membership until you have a Baptist baptism, but I haven’t ever been to a Baptist church which refused communion to non-Baptists.
But obviously, I have not been to every church :-)
That was also true of an Alabama Baptist church in the 1800s . . . I wrote an article awhile back for The Alabama Review and I read all the minutes of that church from its founding in 1832 until most of the members moved to the nearest railhead in 1898. They kept a list of who qualified for communion. Of course, they WERE way out in the country and everybody knew everybody else's business in detail.
They were pretty heavyhanded in "disfellowshipping" people, btw. My great-uncle 'held a dancing party at his house' and he was not only disfellowshipped, he was 'henceforth to be held as a heathen and a publican.'
"So long as they didn't say REpublican," remarked my dad.
We all celebrate Holy Communion, but you do yours and I'll do mine.
No, but I didn't want to list all of the different sects that I know of that celebrate. I myself am Baptist. (Flame away), The original post that I was commenting on said:
"However, what's been lost in the story is that as a Protestant, Harper should never have attempted to recieve communion to beginwith. Further, if the priest was aware that Harper was a Protestant, he should not have given him communion.
As has been implied on this thread already, we, the great unwashed, non-One True Church Christians simply aren't good enough to partake of the Catholic Communion.
You are almost correct about the protocol. The Prime Minister is Head of Government, not Head of State. In Canada, Her Majesty the Queen of Canada, is the Head of State. Her Excellency the Governor General of Canada acts on Her Majesty’s behalf when the Queen is out of the country.
Unlike here in the US where The President serves as both Head of State (symbolic leader of the nation) and Head of Government (the person who administers the government and sets policy), in Canada and most other nations, those two offices are separate.
LOL
Canada of course is still a member of the Commonwealth, and the Queen is still the Head of State (much as those in certain quarters would like to forget it).
The Catholic Church doesn't teach that you're 'not good enough', although particularly Americans with their "I'm just as good as you are" philosophy tend to take it that way.
Reception of the Eucharist in the Catholic Church involves two things: First, a statement or affirmation by action that you agree with all the teachings of the Church - "I believe these and all the truths which the Holy Catholic Church teaches, because Thou hast revealed them, Who canst neither deceive nor be deceived." If you don't believe, you should not receive, because you are acting a lie. Second, the belief that the Host is in essence and in fact the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ, the Second Person of the Trinity. Not only would you be acting a lie if you received without believing, you also would be 'eating and drinking damnation unto yourself'. 1st Cor. 11:29.
So it's not that you're 'not good enough' (who are we to judge the state of your soul) but that you're not in communion with the Catholic Church. Like they say on the little plastic bags, it's for your protection.
Not that anybody in the area had ever met one or the other . . . knowingly.
No problem, I’m a history buff myself. I just get a “nails on the blackboard” feeling when a hear or read a reporter or writer describe a Prime Minister as head of state. I see it too often and I think it’s sloppy.
You just got caught in my pet peeve. :)
Too many hats here . . . . < g >
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.