Jesuit Laff Track: "I hope you heard her confession!"
By Diogenes (articles ) | Mar 25, 2005
When it comes to Good Friday gags about killing the defenseless, nobody gets in more giggles than the Jesuits of the New England Province! Check out the wit of Fr. John Paris, S.J., displayed in a recent Newsweek interview:
Q. But is anyone arguing that for Schiavo to die would be an "unmitigated evil"? They just don't want her death to happen unnecessarily.
Paris: It's not happening unnecessarily. It's happening because her heart attack has rendered her utterly incapable of any future human relationships. The Republican riposte to this is astonishing: interest in states' rights disappearing, interest in privacy of the individual to be free of government intrusion disappearing. If we implemented the policy articulated by the Congress and the president, we'd have everyone going forever!
Q. And Social Security would really be in trouble.
Enjoy the wholesome yuks, Father! -- and thanks to commenter Euclid for correcting my lines. If a nurse were to read the dialogue out loud in the right hospital room, maybe Mrs. Schindler could slap Terri’s knee for her! She's incapable of any future human relationships, after all.
And lets not forget the fun-loving mischief of everyone's favorite partial-birth prankster, the Rev. Robert "Abortion on Demand" Drinan, S.J. For a September 1996 article in OSV, Mary Meehan went through his congressional papers and came up with some hilarious one-liners:
[In June of 1974], one of Father Drinan's interns named Dawn had written the priest a memo about a woman who stopped by his congressional office to explain her devastating experience with abortion. "She wanted you to know her personal history," Dawn wrote in a June 6, 1974, memo, since the woman felt that "Congress could learn from her experience."
A handwritten note at the bottom of the memo was signed by "Abbot Robert," which Father Drinan has acknowledged to be his nickname. Addressed to "Dear Mother Dawn," the note said: "I hope you heard her confession." Referring to the woman's personal history, the note added, "Any more interesting details?"
But in a June 7 letter to the woman who had the abortion, Father Drinan said he shared her "deep concern" and praised her "activities on behalf of the inviolability of all human life."
"Any more interesting details?" -- those wacky Faith-Doing-Justice SJs crack me up ... like ... like a pair of cranial forceps.
And hey -- don't miss Abbot Robert's comedy video Lite Calvary: Can I Offer You a Pain-Killer First?, available soon from Georgetown Entertainment Ltd!
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: benedictusoblatus -
Mar. 31, 2005 12:35 AM ET USA
That Drinan fellow looks creepier with each passing year. He'll soon be "ripe for the picking" in the Grim Reaper's harvest. Wonder what office he will hold in the lower and warmer regions?
Posted by: Sterling -
Mar. 26, 2005 12:50 AM ET USA
I never hear anyone commenting on the ridiculousness about the government intruding on the privacy of the individual. (Maybe it's so ridiculous no comment is needed?) How is rescuing someone from death - someone, it appears to many, who never said she wanted death - intruding on her privacy?
Posted by: -
Mar. 25, 2005 12:36 PM ET USA
A feeding tube is unduly burdensome? I imagine, then, one might say the same for a nursing mother whose child can’t tolerate the bottle, or an Alzheimer patient who needs perpetual spoon feedings. Hell, maybe we should just kill all the defectives. But if it’s OK with the judge Greer, et al, let’s start with the Jesuits. I mean—I’m sure the Holy Father considers goofballs like the Rev. Paris, S.J. and his brothers in the Society quite a burden.
Posted by: -
Mar. 25, 2005 4:36 AM ET USA
Fr. John Paris is a despicable man and a disgrace to the Society of Jesus, as his comments in 'Newsweek' indicate. But Diogenes undermines his own argument by incorrectly attributing a quotation. The words, "And Social Security would really be in trouble," are not his but those of his interviewer. Paris is reported to have laughed but it was not his joke.