From Dr. Janice Campbell. (Letters to the Editor).
I then tried to look up past critical articles about CWL as referenced in the article (2000: June p.7-8; July/August p.8-9; September p.12-13; December p.89, 2002 and various Letters to the Editor and News in Brief items), but was unable to find the specific articles the way the archive section is laid Out on your web site.
I have been asked to participate in the formation of a council at my parish, and the priest is very supportive and has agreed to be our spiritual advisor. What I don't understand is the critical tone of this article. How could a Catholic magazine be criticizing the Catholic Women's League?
As I see it, your magazine is either too critical, or has a beef against the Catholic Women's League, when perhaps the editor should think twice about publishing the article; or the Catholic Women's League, and the priests who support it, are not following Catholic doctrine, and therefore they should be criticized. Which one is it?
A prompt answer would be appreciated. A meeting will be held this month to form a new council, and I want to make sure I am joining an organization that is above reproach.
Editor replies: The News in Brief item in the May issue made three points: Ottawa CWL member Rita Curley made a sound and theologically correct submission to the House of Commons Justice Committy in her own name and position.
Homosexual MP Svend Robinson screamed at Miss Curley because she used the accurate and biblically supported term "sodomy "(homosexuals want this word banned at all cost as hate literature, indicating thereby how far they are ready to go). This was reported by the media, although Robinson and Curley met later on and parted amicably which was not reported.
Marie Cameron of Calgary, CWL National President, apparently frightened by the Robinson ruckus, hurriedly disowned Rita Curley as not representing the National CWL (which she had never claimed to do). Cameron then drew attention to the CWL Executive 'sown submission to the commitee which proved to be politically naive, and worse, theologically incorrect.
See also the News in Brief article on pages 36-37.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Date:||Jun 1, 2003|
|Previous Article:||From Yvonne Exner re CWL. (Letters to the Editor).|
|Next Article:||From Marge Willis. (Letters to the Editor).|
|NCAA slaps UO with probation.|
|Oregon's credibility takes direct hit.|