Deacon Andrew Bennett was certainly right in his Feb. 11 column to correct my error in generalizing the “approval” understanding of blessings as being “corrupted and secularized.” I was unaware of the Eastern understanding of blessings. An online commenter graciously corrected me after my article was published.

However, Deacon Bennett did not really counter the rest of my argument. He circled back to calling Fiducia supplicans “confusing” and full of “casuistry.” My error regarding the Eastern understanding of blessings does not change the relevance of Fiducia supplicans to the Latin rite. I stand by my argument that the document is hardly confusing unless one reads it in bad faith.

Roderick McKay

Barry’s Bay, Ont.

(You are both clearly of good faith – the Editor.)