Refuting letter writer’s statements

Having read Mr. Morton’s “opinion piece” (letter to the editor) of Jan. 30 in the Lethbridge Herald with quite some interest and a great deal of humour, I feel I must refute his statements in regard to my letter of Jan. 11.

1. Letters to newspapers are exactly that, opinions.

2. My letter is based on “hearsay” (Oxford’s “rumour”) — My opinion piece was written in response to a news article of Jan. 7 in The Herald in regard to a new way of solving the problem of church closures in Montreal between the diocese and the parishioners. As well, my feelings, thoughts and remembrances of the closure of St. Patrick’s Catholic Church in our downtown area years ago. Therefore — not hearsay!

3. I impugned the character and integrity of those least likely to defend themselves. As I was a parishioner who walked to St. Patrick’s for Sunday service, from my downtown residence, I respectfully emailed Bishop Henry my concerns in regard to the closure of this downtown church. His answer to one of my emails — “it’s been 1,000 days — get over it!” I was surprised but not particularly shocked at this remark. May I also presume that was a stock answer to many parishioners’ queries? Therefore I don’t believe a telephone call to the current bishop is necessary to clarify this issue for me.

4. I confused the readership, parishioners and Mr. Morton with my letter. Why anyone would be confused by my concise and to-thepoint opinion piece is a conundrum to me. No one who has commented to me and to this newspaper on my occasional letters has ever accused me of being confusing, although at times they have disagreed with my premise.

In closing, if Mr. Morton would like to write an opinion piece on the local Catholic churches’ current, very different and exciting story he mentions in his last sentence, I would be very pleased to read it. Hopefully, for Mr. Morton’s sake, my future opinion pieces will be marked by charity, justice and propriety. Josephine Aristone

Lethbridge