sinden.org/blog

Today, my printed copy of the New York Times contained the following:

"Mr. Richardson’s endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic," Mr. Carville said, referring to Easter.

Wrong. Easter is not the day that Christians celebrate Judas's betrayal of his teacher, Jesus.

But the online version of First a Tense Talk With Clinton, Then Richardson Backs Obama has changed. It now reads:

"Mr. Richardson’s endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic," Mr. Carville said, referring to Holy Week.

emphasis added

So the "day" James Carville is referring to is "Holy Week". That makes a lot of sense.

Why can't we let James Carville's words stand for themselves? Why do we have to let the New York Times clarify what he was talking about.

I am a bit miffed that the Times doesn't indicate that the current online article is a corrected version. Apparently these kinds of religious snafus are not worth mentioning, or getting right.

Here, for the benefit of the New York Times are some other things Carville might have been referring to when he mentions Judas's betrayal:

• Good Friday
• one of the events remembered by Christians during Holy Week
• The first day of the week beginning with F prior to the Sunday following the first full moon succeeding the vernal equinox
• Lent
• the month of March
• Passover
• the Bible
• the Easter Bunny

Labels: journalism, liturgy