On a story on Pope Francis, the New York Times was forced to issue a correction on what’s a pretty basic tenet of Christianity. Check this out. Laugh or pull your hair out, depending on your disposition.
Correction: April 1, 2013
An earlier version of this article mischaracterized the Christian holiday of Easter. It is the celebration of Jesus’s resurrection from the dead, not his resurrection into heaven.
Oh, and this is not an April Fools joke. This is legit. The New York Times had to issue a correction because they didn’t know what Easter was.
April 1, 2013 at 6:25 pm
Think you're so smart? Well, imagine yourself a Christian and a reporter on deadline and you mischaracterize what Passover commemorates. It happens.
April 1, 2013 at 7:07 pm
RT @Anonymous: Except most Christians do know enough of the Bible to remember what Passover is about. Mistakes and typos do happen, but that doesn't mean they're not due to sheer negligence. It also doesn't that we can't laugh at the person who did it. 😉
April 1, 2013 at 7:22 pm
I'm not sure whether I'm more amused by the frank Religious ignorance on display here or by the linguistic oddity that is the phrase "Resurrection into Heaven." I suppose it's technically grammatically kosher, but it's still weird.
April 1, 2013 at 7:56 pm
OK, maybe Passover isn't the best example. But there are any number of things that Catholic reporters don't know about Jewish or Mormon or evangelical practice. And if I'm the reporter who gets one of those things wrong, and there's no one on my copydesk that can catch it, I'm hoping that members of that faith aren't openly laughing at me. Let he who is without mistake cast the first stone.
April 1, 2013 at 8:49 pm
@Anonymous 2:56: Except that it is the *job* of a reporter to get basic facts right, especially about something so absolutely central to someone's faith. (One would hope the reporter at least knew *that* much about the Resurrection for Christians: that this is a core teaching and they better get the facts right. We are not talking about some obscure point of canon law here, for example).
If it were a question of Mormonism, for example, and they didn't know what they were talking about, they would be sure to consult someone who did.
That is precisely the probably in secular reporting about Christian things. They assume they know what they are talking about, when they don't.
So your analogy of not casting stones falls flat.
It is either inexcusable ignorance or laziness or both. The NYT has become increasingly hostile to Christianity recently, and especially Catholicism.
I don't think they deserve a pass on this one.
April 1, 2013 at 9:08 pm
'Resurrection into heaven' doesn't even make sense.
April 1, 2013 at 9:28 pm
"That is precisely the probably in secular reporting…" Seems you need a good copyeditor too. And no, the NYT hasn't become "increasingly hostile to Christianity recently." All media has always been fairly ignorant of faiths that they're not a part of. If I get something wrong about a basic tenet of Judaism, my mistake is closer to stupidity than hostility. There's a big difference, but no one gets it.
April 1, 2013 at 9:31 pm
And at least I catch my mistakes: "All media HAVE always been fairly ignorant …"
April 1, 2013 at 10:50 pm
What does anyone around here expect from the NYT? NYT's hostility to Catholicism is old and perpetual. I read any of it only when it's linked from another site. I think it's also quite silly to write "the day that Christians honor etc." Perhaps Celebrate would be good. And if I may say, Jews have a somewhat different view of Passover than do Christians. Passover for them is a way of life. God is not Himself slaying Israel's enemies. They and NATO do it.
April 1, 2013 at 11:24 pm
Incompetence on this scale would never be tolerated in the Times's sports or political coverage. It appears in their religious coverage because they cannot be bothered to dedicate the resources. They cannot be bothered to dedicate the resources because they consider the subject unimportant. it's not the act of an organ that flatters itself the newspaper of record.
April 2, 2013 at 1:01 am
Maybe an honest mistake. But when it comes from a leftist publication that has a long history of mocking the Church, inciting errors and rarely reporting objectively on the subject of Christianity, yet offering dignity and respect to issues clearly not credible, like calling females priests (akin to calling me the king of Denmark because I feel I should be) then yes, we assume the worst. ,go figure.
April 2, 2013 at 3:10 am
They make such a fundamental mistake of fact because they do not care for the facts when it comes to Christianity.
April 2, 2013 at 3:42 am
I am crucified with Christ never the less I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the land I know live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave his life for me. Galatians 2:20 / This saved my life a pope and rituals noy in the bible can save you. Professing Jesus is your Lord and savior is all you need to do.
April 2, 2013 at 4:48 am
Without the Church and the Pope, there would be no Sacred Scripture, which is just part of Sacred Tradition as attested to in the Bible.
April 2, 2013 at 5:48 am
I think it's quite funny! I was laughing my head off at the notion of morphing Easter and the Ascension into one Solemnity. I mean how riducu… oh, wait a minute. I better shut up lest I give ideas to the USCCB.
April 2, 2013 at 5:51 am
While they're at it, the NYT can correct "holiday" to "holy day".
April 2, 2013 at 10:15 am
Anonymous said "OK, maybe Passover isn't the best example." But it IS a very good example, because the Resurrection of Christ is central to Christianity, even more so than Passover is important to Judaism.
April 2, 2013 at 3:58 pm
Ignorance is the new normal. Wouldn't you think that just knowing the definition of the word "resurrection" would clue one into what Easter was all about? From the freedictionary.com "The act of rising from the dead or returning to life." Honestly, knowing the meaning of words goes a long way to understanding what you are writing about.