How can an educated person deeply immersed in his own religion and the rabbinate call a bishop, an archbishop, and a cardinal of another religion a “would-be” priest? What would be his feelings if they did the same to Jewish rabbinical leaders? I may completely disagree with their views, but I would be loath to denigrate their position. Shame on Rabbi Zahavy and shame on whoever accepted the article for publication.
Tzvee Zahavy responds: The letter-writer makes a hasty and unfounded accusation. If the writer actually had read my article he would have understood my point, i.e., that the ancient priests in the Temple in Jerusalem and priests in other religions worldwide task themselves with the responsibility of maintaining the sanctity of the precincts of the holy space of their respective faiths. I explored in the essay whether preventing the president of the United States from speaking at a graduation at Notre Dame was a legitimate instance of exercising this “would-be” classical “priestly” responsibility. I concluded it was not. That’s how an educated person examines an issue. There was no intended or actual “denigration” of anyone’s “position” in the op-ed, no cause for “shame” and nothing for which to apologize.