Romeo LeBlanc funeral

jdobbin · July 12, 2009

I'm only blaming the priest in part. Harper is also responsible for what he did, but it's hard to tell. He should have just received a blessing, but why didn't the priest offer him that option when Harper consulted with him beforehand? Why didn't Harper's aides tell him about that before the service? A lot of people dropped the ball here.

I am with you there that the staff should have been up on the protocol on the funeral of a state official.

There are too many intricacies involved and even a well informed prime minister isn't likely to know what is expected.

As for the priest, I have no idea the details of their conversation. Maybe Harper was offered that option. We just don't know.

benny · July 12, 2009

I am with you there that the staff should have been up on the protocol on the funeral of a state official.
There are too many intricacies involved and even a well informed prime minister isn't likely to know what is expected.

Politics has to stop being about image only.

jdobbin · July 12, 2009

Politics has to stop being about image only.

But it is important. One of the reasons George Washington was considered a great President is because he followed a protocol that reflected the characteristic of the position he held.

http://books.google.ca/books?id=Zscghb2szd...lt&resnum=2

George Washington wrote out the Rules of Civility & Decent Behaviour In Company and Conversation so that it would guide him in public life.

http://www.history.org/Almanack/life/manners/rules2.cfm

Now, I don't expect all leaders to be so fastidious about knowing all rules of behaviour by heart but every government has someone who advises on protocol. I believe Harper should have made use of this person.

How the prime minister appears in state affairs is an important thing.

benny · July 12, 2009

But it is important. One of the reasons George Washington was considered a great President is because he followed a protocol that reflected the characteristic of the position he held.
http://books.google.ca/books?id=Zscghb2szd...lt&resnum=2

George Washington wrote out the Rules of Civility & Decent Behaviour In Company and Conversation so that it would guide him in public life.

http://www.history.org/Almanack/life/manners/rules2.cfm

Now, I don't expect all leaders to be so fastidious about knowing all rules of behaviour by heart but every government has someone who advises on protocol. I believe Harper should have made use of this person.

How the prime minister appears in state affairs is an important thing.

What is the difference between people with and without leadership? The first are making and respecting the rules (Washington) and the second are simply knowing and following others' rules (Harper).

Argus · July 12, 2009

Once again, the story started with the priest.

Which priest?

jdobbin · July 12, 2009

Which priest?

Monsignor Brian Henneberry.

benny · July 12, 2009

Monsignor Brian Henneberry.

Eating the wafer means no more scapegoats.

lily · July 12, 2009

I am with you there that the staff should have been up on the protocol on the funeral of a state official.
There are too many intricacies involved and even a well informed prime minister isn't likely to know what is expected.

As for the priest, I have no idea the details of their conversation. Maybe Harper was offered that option. We just don't know.

If Harper was offered to option of simply receiving a blessing, he should have taken it.

A well-informed PM should have known exactly how to respond when it came to receiving communion. One of the differences between Protestant and Catholic communion is whether the host is symbolic or real. Most churches will invite anyone who wishes to partake to do so.... I would never go up and receive Communuion in another church without knowing if it was ok or not.

Harper absolutely should have known ahead of time.

I don't know if he pocketed the wafer. If he did, shame on him... and I'm not even Catholic.

Don't the priests place the wafer directly on the tongue?

rabidgoose · July 12, 2009

If Harper was offered to option of simply receiving a blessing, he should have taken it.
A well-informed PM should have known exactly how to respond when it came to receiving communion. One of the differences between Protestant and Catholic communion is whether the host is symbolic or real. Most churches will invite anyone who wishes to partake to do so.... I would never go up and receive Communuion in another church without knowing if it was ok or not.

Harper absolutely should have known ahead of time.

I don't know if he pocketed the wafer. If he did, shame on him... and I'm not even Catholic.

Don't the priests place the wafer directly on the tongue?

No, they generally haven't done that since around the time of Vatican II (1960's). It is normally handed to the communicant (recipient). Again, in general, anyone who request for or distributes to the tongue is a more traditional Catholic (might even want the Latin Mass back).

But more importantly, I agree that he should have known ahead of time. Be you Catholic or Protestant, this is one of the core issues that led to the Reformation - Catholic teaching is quite clear regarding the real presence of Christ, whilst most Protestant denominations believe it is symbolic presence. Whichever of these two large groups one is in, one should be aware of - and especially for a public figure such as the PM, sensitive to, the respective beliefs of these groups.

Harper's people seem a bit concerened about this issue. And in my humble opinion, he seems to be continuing a pattern of using his aides when things don't go his way.

lily · July 12, 2009

I was born during Vatican II (1960s) and I'm sure I've seen the priest place the wafer on the tongue... but as I said, I'm not a Catholic and i haven't seen a lot of Catholic Communions.

benny · July 13, 2009

I was born during Vatican II (1960s) and I'm sure I've seen the priest place the wafer on the tongue... but as I said, I'm not a Catholic and i haven't seen a lot of Catholic Communions.

The whole idea of placing the wafer directly in the mouth was precisely to avoid it going anywhere else.

cybercoma · July 13, 2009

I was born during Vatican II (1960s) and I'm sure I've seen the priest place the wafer on the tongue... but as I said, I'm not a Catholic and i haven't seen a lot of Catholic Communions.

Depends on the Church, the priest, and the person receiving the communion. Typically, priests no longer place the Eucharist on the tongue, but will do so for older members of the Church that are used to that. Some churches don't pass around the wine anymore either. The problem is with communicable diseases, so they don't do it for health reasons. Regardless of the ritual, the Eucharist in a Catholic church actually becomes a piece of Christ through transubstantiation. Catholics commune with God by receiving Him into their bodies through the sacrament.

Argus · July 13, 2009

Monsignor Brian Henneberry.

He was not at the church and had not even seen any footage when he raised the question. So how come your leader (Kinsella) decided to push this so strongly?

jdobbin · July 13, 2009

He was not at the church and had not even seen any footage when he raised the question.

The priest at the church Andre Richard did deliver the communion and was the first to comment on the protocol and it was the second priest who expressed his opinion on the offering.

So how come your leader (Kinsella) decided to push this so strongly?

I don't think any Liberal has suggested that Harper pocketed the wafer. It is your leader (Kinsella) who says he saw Harper consume the offering but is unclear on the timing.

Warren Kinsella was surprised when Radio-Canada pulled their video from Youtube after people decided to see the video for themselves. He posted the video back up thinking it suggested political pressure that it was pulled in the first place. Radio-Canada kept taking the video down.

Now, Canadian Press has the story available on their own website and Youtube and people can see for themselves and decide.

There were a few other commentators who wondered why the video was pulled. This seems to be the big issue.

Like the RCMP and the video of the Vancouver tasering, people wanted to see for themselves. And why shouldn't they?

Edited July 13, 2009 by jdobbin

benny · July 13, 2009

Warren Kinsella was surprised when Radio-Canada pulled their video from Youtube after people decided to see the video for themselves. He posted the video back up thinking it suggested political pressure that it was pulled in the first place. Radio-Canada kept taking the video down.
Now, Canadian Press has the story available on their own website and Youtube and people can see for themselves and decide.

There were a few other commentators who wondered why the video was pulled. This seems to be the big issue.

Like the RCMP and the video of the Vancouver tasering, people wanted to see for themselves. And why shouldn't they?

Because the population may still be too eager to see a scapegoat in its leader.

Edited July 13, 2009 by benny

rabidgoose · July 15, 2009

Because the population may still be too eager to see a scapegoat in its leader.

Well, Harper met with Pope Benedict. Then it looks like he raised the controversy anew. Thoughts on why he would do that? Seems like a bad idea to me.

benny · July 15, 2009

Then it looks like he raised the controversy anew.

Your second link is faulty.

Topaz · July 15, 2009

Harper is part of the problem. Most people when they take the wafer put it DIRECTLY into their mouths and Harper didn't. why? IF he did put it in his mouth, than when, because on the tape he turned with it in his hand and was following the others out.

M.Dancer · July 15, 2009

I always save the wafer for when I get home for lunch. It's a lot better with peanut butter and milk than dry with stale wine.

benny · July 16, 2009

I always save the wafer for when I get home for lunch. It's a lot better with peanut butter and milk than dry with stale wine.

It is not a wafer, it is flesh.

Edited July 16, 2009 by benny

Argus · July 17, 2009

Harper is part of the problem. Most people when they take the wafer put it DIRECTLY into their mouths and Harper didn't. why? IF he did put it in his mouth, than when, because on the tape he turned with it in his hand and was following the others out.

Do you think that "most people" group you're talking about is "Catholics"?

benny · July 17, 2009

Do you think that "most people" group you're talking about is "Catholics"?

of course

Topaz · July 21, 2009

Do you think that "most people" group you're talking about is "Catholics"?

Well , let me put it this way, the man on Harper's right put it directly into his mouth and then the two men to his left did the same. Harper just kept it in his hand and turn to leave. I really don't care what he did but just tell the truth and we all know how truthful Harper and his Tories are.