To the Editor:

If “Nothing Sacred” is “...by far the best new show of this fall’s crop,” then it is time to leave the farm.

St. Paul clearly tells us that our “thoughts should be wholly directed to all that is true, all that deserves respect, all that is honest, pure, admirable, decent, virtuous, or worthy of praise” (Phil 4:8). Certainly Nothing Sacred would not be on St. Paul’s viewing list.

Why should we expose our families to this “warts and all” approach to the Catholic Church? The program deals badly with serious issues. Why should we expose our children to the humanistic answers proposed by the characters?

Watching Nothing Sacred is like watching someone hang dirty laundry. Yes, it may happen, but I certainly would never recommend it.

Kathie McGann,
Parry Sound, ON.
 

To the Editor:

Regarding the Interim article, Nothing Sacred reconsidered (January), Charles Moore defends the program because it contains some good points. If a cake is 80 per cent rotten and 20 per cent good, does that make it acceptable? This show is sometimes defended with the argument that it assesses the problems and situations of the faithful and clergy in a realistic way.

The problem is that this show presents the abnormal as normal - even acceptable. For example, Father Ray seems to care about the poor and the downtrodden, but does not seem to think it such a bad thing if the unborn child dies violently by abortion. He tells the pregnant teenager who is considering an abortion that he can only tell her what the church teaches, and not what she should really do.

In a homily, Father Ray denies the validity of St. Thomas Aquinas’ proof of the existence of God, and tacitly states that God is simply a name given to the goodness we see in people. From the pulpit he says, “if you want to confess your sexual sins, you have to go to anther parish.” Give me a break! Does he really think that he is doing anyone a favor by saying this? Other negatives of the show include the fact that dissenting Catholics are made to seem hip, while orthodox Catholics are made to seem narrow, cantankerous, or like bumbling fools.

It may seem to Mr. Moore that the entertainment industry has taken a giant leap forward. After all, going from two per cent to 20 per cent accuracy in the presentation of the faith is a 1,000 per cent increase. But perhaps the real agenda is to eliminate Christian truth altogether.

Jim J. McCrea
Toronto.
 

To the Editor:

I am very surprised that you published the column “Nothing Sacred reconsidered” in the January Interim.

The few passages quoted in the article that seemingly carry some respect toward the Catholic Church must be read in accordance with the meaning of the title Nothing Sacred.

Does the author understand that the overwhelming majority of the viewers grasp only the negative side of the show? Can he say in good faith how many in the audience have seen the well-hidden meaning the author is trying to unveil to us?

But I strongly blame the Interim too for publishing such a show of “acumen” and “keen discernment.”

Pietro Bolongaro
Surrey, B.C.
 

To the Editor:

It is bad enough that Catholics must contend with those who praise Catholic-bashing TV programming in the mainstream media, without having to read this sort of material in The Interim.

According to Charles Moore’s column, Nothing Sacred reconsidered (January, 1998), those who object to ABC’s new drama are “hopelessly wrongheaded.” Mr. Moore apparently believes that he knows more than the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, Focus on the Family and Morality in Media, who have all called for Nothing Sacred to be taken off the air.

In his column, Mr. Moore states that the “believable characters” in Nothing Sacred “take their faith seriously.” In the same column, he then cites the main character, Father Ray, whom he says “counsels a pregnant high school girl to follow her conscience” when considering an abortion. Any priest who took his faith seriously would not be acting as an accessory in committing a murder. I doubt that even the most liberal seminary could produce a Catholic priest who knows nothing about what the Catechism describes as a sin that cries out to heaven for vengeance.

Father Ray is a despicable secular caricature of a Catholic priest, a man so idiotic and cowardly that he cannot even bring himself to counsel clearly a young woman not to murder her unborn child. Besides making himself an accomplice in the procuring of an abortion, Father Ray also manages to excommunicate a slum landlord over the telephone, a truly amazing feat considering that only a bishop can excommunicate a Catholic.

Perhaps Mr. Moore is unaware of the fact that Nothing Sacred placed 99th out of 120 in the prime time TV ratings, yet managed to make the cover of TV Times and has been the subject of enormous positive review space in the mainstream print media. The reason for this bizarre support of what would otherwise qualify as a significant flop, is simple. Nothing Sacred is yet another pretense of honest and realistic portrayals of religious life to insult Catholics and push for the eventual secularization of the Catholic Church.

Robert Eady,
Kanata, ON
 

To the Editor:

I would like to thank you for publishing the article about "Nothing Sacred.” I have found this show to be everything that is mentioned in the article. I especially appreciate your publication of the article, since I'm sure you are hearing from those who dislike it so much. They are the persons referred to in the article.

I work in a church office, and find that the show is a good reflection of reality, except that the secretary is not nearly busy enough, and the phone seldom rings. The rest is right on. 

Thank you for having the courage to publish this column.

Edith O'Brion,
Toronto (via e-mail)
 

To the Editor:

Just a note to let you know that I certainly enjoyed reading Charles Moore’s column on "Nothing Sacred.”

I agree that it is truly a shame that a show of this calibre seems to the subject of a boycott. I can't help but wonder how many of those people/advertisers who are not supporting the program "as a religious duty,” have ever given it a chance. I wonder how many of the organizations' leaders who have called a boycott (long before the show was established) have watched it themselves.

The show never fails to reach me in some way, much more than a program like "Touched By An Angel" ever would. I assume that you've read Father Andrew Greeley who called the Nothing Sacred the best propaganda for the Catholic church since "Dead Man Walking".

It's only too bad that a sliver of the faith and spirit and life of St.Thomas couldn't be transferred into the majority of Catholic churches that open for Sundays with a fraction of the pews filled.

Barbara Chabai
London, ON (via e-mail)
 

To the Editor:

Charles Moore in the January, 1988 Interim, exhorts us to apply our Christian virtue of charity to accept Nothing Sacred "warts and all" as a show that preaches the Gospel.

What concerns me is how can something entitled "Nothing Sacred" claim to preach the Gospel which is sacred? This is precisely what the Bible warns us about in Jude v. 18-19. "People will appear who will make fun of you. These are people who cause divisions, who are controlled by their natural desires, who do not have the Spirit" 

The show with its sympathy for human weakness, subtly promotes the scandal of division within the Church. What then is the value of a show that draws its strength from the Church's weaknesses - that of ridiculing the Mystical Body of Christ which calls for unity. How can we fall for that?

Anita Mascarenhas,
Mississauga, Ontario (via-e-mail)
 

To The Editor:

I am writing in response to the "Nothing Sacred" review by Charles Moore (January Interim). Like Mr. Moore I was prepared to dislike the show but after watching several episodes, I began to deeply dislike the show. The October 30 episode was the final straw, that episode convinced me I didn't need to watch anymore to know how outrageous it was.

Mr. Moore says that in the show "Christian faith, ritual and tradition are all treated with respectful reverence.” I disagree. In the October 30 episode which he applauds, we see children being told scary stories. Why not stories about the Saints? After all this is the eve of All Saints day! Why wasn't there a mass at this celebration? It seems to me that it would be appropriate at a Catholic Church. While saying one prayer at the bonfire which followed was a nice gesture, it certainly doesn't make it a Christian celebration when the focus of the evening is ghosts, goblins, and devils.

At the evening bonfire we saw a nun dressed as a bishop (a public display of disrespect to the authority of the Magisterium). One of the party-goers was even dressed as a devil - a devil at a Christian celebration? In the shows that I watched I did not see much reverence for God or any attempt to convey an understanding of the authentic teachings of the Catholic Church.

Perhaps Mr. Moore's statement "Father Ray is tormented by the thought that he may have given bad advice" shows was it most wrong about the show. Ray should be tormented with the thought that he gave advice that was offensive to God. Surely counseling abortion is offensive to God and not merely bad advice. The show lacks a presence of God and that is what I find most wrong about it.

L. Sopczak,
Deep River, ON (via e-mail)
 

The Interim welcomes letters and submissions. Both may be subject to editing. Please send to interim@lifesite.net