….to the Hannity/Euteneuer dustup…FoxNews commentator, Fr. Jonathon Morris, LC:

As I watched a fellow Catholic priest spar with you on the March 9 edition of Hannity and Colmes, I hung my head in shame and sadness. My colleague in religion (whom I’ve never met) used the public airways and Internet to call you a heretic and hypocrite. Because he chose to do this in a public forum, I want you and your viewers to know, publicly, that as an analyst of this television network, I believe this good priest, who does great work, exercised, on this occasion, shockingly poor judgment. I consider his willingness to give his personal opinion about your status within the Church inappropriate and ill-considered, to say the least.

Regardless of the issue and arguments at hand, brandishing law without palpable love almost always repels. I must assume he just made an honest mistake.

The unfortunate event reminded me of the bigger question of the fast-eroding credibility among religious leaders in our nation and its causes.

snip

Here’s my point:

When we believe we have discovered truth and, therefore, we believe others are wrong — a sign of cultivated intelligence, not pride — we must reject the temptation to throw civility to the wind. Being right always didn’t ever inspire Jesus to jeopardize people’s reputation or dignity. It went against his very nature, and it should go against ours too. Sometimes he spoke harshly, but he always spoke in love, and he made sure people knew it.

Sean, I don’t always agree with you and Alan, as I have told both of you in person, but I think you are both honest, and both have the humility and courage to accept truth when you stumble across it, even when it comes in bits and pieces. I think it’s precisely this three-pronged attitude of honesty, humility and courage that best prepares us, with all of our imperfections, for heaven.

Rather strange.

I agree that Fr. Euteneuer put himself in a challenging situation and the whole concept of heresy could have been put aside in favor of another way of discussing the same subject in a way that’s not so incendiary.

Some can say (and are saying) that he should have attempted to contact Hannity privately with his concerns. Possibly true – but, trust me, getting through to those people at that level is very difficult, and would be even for the head of an international pro-life group.

Another possibility, that I hear no one mention: that upon hearing about Fr. Euteneuer’s original column, if Hannity was so concerned and really invested in being a faithful Catholic, he could have contact Father and asked, "I’m wondering about that column you wrote…could you enlighten me further? Because you’re a priest, and I’m a Catholic in the punditocracy, and gosh, I want to make sure I get Catholic teaching right before I spout off about it to millions. That’s a responsibility I take seriously."

But no, he invited him on his show, yelled at him, and allowed him very little time to speak without interruption. Which is par for the course, and to be honest, if I’d been advising Father (yeah), I would have told him not to go on the show – to insist on radio time, perhaps, since that was the starting point of all that, and the radio show is a bit less blustery and frantic than the television setting.  That "talk show" environment of those programs is a lose-lose situation, almost all the time.

The clip is on YouTube now.

UPDATE

Thanks to a commentor for noting  – Fr. Euteneuer has posted comments on his appearance

(It’s also here – a blog with a comment function).

….and another to Fr. Morris:

Your letter to Sean Hannity indicates that you did not know that I asked to speak to him in private about this matter in 2004 otherwise you may have tempered your remarks about my supposed lack of charity in dealing with a high profile Catholic who dissents from clearly-defined and reiterated Church teachings. [See “Fr. Euteneuer asks to meet with Hannity about birth control” on sidebar.] You also seemed to be unaware of the fact that Sean was the one who invited me on his program and who then promptly “[threw] civility to the wind,” refused to display “cultivated intelligence” on the issues and jeopardized another person’s “reputation and dignity.” May I also point out that you did not employ with me the same standard of “fraternal correction” that you expected me to employ with Mr. Hannity. I at least made the attempt to speak to him about this issue in private without success; you, in contrast, went immediately to the internet to take me to task. I do not intend to understand your motives; I can only evaluate what I see in your actions.

The question that comes to mind is an obvious one: if you are a Fox analyst on Catholic matters, wouldn’t you have been the one to have had those “private conversations” on birth control with Mr. Hannity? How about discussions on his abortion exceptions? When you told Sean “in person” that you “disagreed with him,” was it on the issue of birth control? If you had done that, I applaud you, but your powers of persuasion may need a little honing—Sean has only gotten more vocal on this issue over time. If you did not speak to him about his public dissent, then I ask you, “Why?” While we are on the subject, have you also analyzed and disagreed with Bill O’Reilly’s perfectly horrible disdain for the Holy Father and the Church that you represent?

snip

As a seminary rector, I would sincerely hope that you are not teaching by word or example the young men in your charge to be politically correct sissies who are afraid to roll up their sleeves and defend the Church in private and in public. We have tons of those types in the clergy already. I would advise you to drink deeply of the wisdom of the Number Two man at our Headquarters who has in no uncertain terms told all of us that high profile dissenters are a scourge and a danger to souls. [See item: “Bertone: Dissident Catholics More Worrying Than Atheists.” http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jan/07011003.html.]

I wish you fraternal blessings for your priestly work.

Is it me, or is it getting hot in here?

My only problem with Fr. E’s first response, which concerned the show in general – is his use of the vocabulary of "conservative" and "liberal." I can see his reasoning, since Hannity’s MO is "conservative." Fr. E then uses the occasion to say that Hannity has been revealed as a "liberal."

That’s a mistake, though because we’re talking about matters of faith here, and that vocabulary is totally inadquate to the cause. Besides, I would hazard a guess that the vast majority of political conservatives in this country share Hannity’s "no problem" with contraception, and don’t even see it as a moral issue, much less a political one.

So with that caveat…Round Three? Four?