Sally Quinn's ignorance -- or arrogance?

Erin's already blogged about this, but I couldn't let Sally Quinn's disrespect for the Catholic teaching on the Eucharist go without some comment. As you probably know, Quinn, an atheist, decided to "honor" her friend Tim Russert by receiving the Eucharist at his funeral mass. Non-Catholics aren't supposed to receive communion in a Catholic church, and for very good reasons. That Quinn decided her personal feelings trumped the Catholic Church's rules for itself caused a pretty outraged reaction (though I like Erin's point that scandalized Catholics would do well to ask whether or not Catholics themselves receive the Eucharist worthily). When The New Republic called Quinn for her reaction to the reaction, this is what she had to say:

I'm very pluralistic about religion, and I feel that everyone should respect everyone else's. . . . I was really close to (Russert), and I was grieving. And I thought me taking the Eucharist would be a thing that he would really enjoy. And all these things are what religion should be about. . . . There's no sign out there that says you're not allowed to take Communion. [The Catholic Church is] like, "Everyone is welcome. This is God's house." God doesn't turn people away, supposedly.

I think it's really an important issue. The Pope doesn't want people who are pro-choice to take it. John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Chris Dodd, even the mayor of San Francisco, Gavin Newsom, and others were not allowed. . . . Frankly, none of that was going through my mind. I was feeling absolutely destroyed. It felt right to do it as a tribute to him. I wasn't thinking politically at all.

I've become a champion of pluralism and a spirit of inclusiveness. Any religious people who purport to be Christians, or whatever faith you might be, would do everything they could to welcome others -- in the case of Catholics, to welcome others the way Christ would welcome others. This is a perfect example of WWJD. Would Jesus have said, "No you don't, Sally Quinn. You're not going to get away with this one!"

I can understand, if I squint my brain, how it is that even an atheist as sophisticated as Sally Quinn might not get that non-Catholics are not allowed to receive communion in a Catholic Church. What I can't understand is, having had her grave offense pointed out to her, why she presumes to lecture the Catholic Church on how wrong it is to believe the things it does. How dare the Roman Catholic Church inconvenience Sally Quinn! You know?

How likely do you think it would be for Quinn to go into a Muslim or Jewish house of worship, offend against its most sacred principle, and having been called on it, lecture Muslims or Jews on how they need to get over themselves? It. Would. Not. Happen. People like Sally Quinn don't do things like that, and if she had, inadvertently, she would have worn herself out apologizing. For the Catholics, it's different. Sally, I believe, sees herself as one of their Betters. I don't know Sally Quinn, so I may be judging her motivations unfairly, but I certainly know her type.

Terry Mattingly at Get Religion had a really interesting take on Quinngate (heh), with respect to the way Quinn, a founder of the Washington Post's "On Faith" site, seems to approach thinking and writing about religion (as a purely subjective hobby, not something people should or do take too seriously as a guide to metaphysical truth). Here's TMatt:

This isn't about emotions and feelings. It's about getting the facts right and showing respect for the people for whom those facts, doctrines and rituals are a matter of eternal life and death. Facts matter in journalism, religion and journalism about religion.

Terry puts his finger on why religion isn't taken all that seriously in most US newsrooms. It's a lack of imagination. Too many reporters, editors and producers simply cannot imagine that people really believe these things, or take them all that seriously. Religion is seen as an interesting hobby, perhaps, but that's it.