Hell’s Bible published something by the execrable Garry Wills, who hates the Church and the Pope.
His opinions are what you would expect from an angry Irish ex-Catholic. Blah blah blah. But, in case you bother to read him, don’t let him have a pass on bad history. For example, he wrote:
In 1859, John Henry Newman published an article that led to his denunciation in Rome as “the most dangerous man in England.” It was called “On Consulting the Faithful in Matters of Doctrine” and it showed that in history the laity had been more true to the Gospel than the hierarchy. That was an unacceptable position to Rome. It still is.
No, Garry. Newman’s point was restricted to the Arian heresy. You would have us think this lay faithful v. bishops thing was across the board. Moreover, Newman was wrong.
Wills gots Newman wrong, and Newman got 4th and 5th century Church history wrong.
So, Wills is either ignorant or he is fibbing. Which is it? This might be a both/and rather than either/or choice. After his book about Pius XII I think we can apply the Mary McCarthy dictum to him: Every word he writes is a lie, including “and” and “the”.
Read the NYT piece, if you have a few minutes to waste. If this is the level of thought that pervades his new hate-on-Catholics book, we have nothing to worry about.