Wednesday, March 31, 2010
YOU BETTER BELIEVE THAT THE SECULAR, ELITE PRESS IS SMEARING AND DEMONIZING THE CHURCH, THE PRIESTHOOD AND POPE BENEDICT
I use to think the press was doing the Church a service in exposing the crimes and sins of predator priests and helping victims to come forward with their stories. But more and more, I believe that the reporting on the Catholic Church is motivated by something much less laudable then what I perceived to be the truth. There are those in our liberal press, government and society who want to destroy the Church. The Catholic Church is the only institution in the world standing in the way of their liberal agenda in the following areas:
1. Homosexual marriage
2. Birth control and abortion
3. Women's rights in all institutions, including women as deacons, priests, bishops, pope
5. egalitarianism as it concerns truth, religions, etc
6. Human rights come from God, not the state
Part of the attack on the Church is to bankrupt her. Lawyers are making millions as are victims. Who's paying for this? Not just insurance companies, but every Catholic who has donated to their parish and diocese.
Part of the attack is to undermine the Church's teaching on chastity, homosexuality, birth control and traditional marriage. How the secular world believes the Church treats women by excluding them from ordination is also at the heart of this attack.
Pope Benedict is very articulate in presenting the traditional understanding of Church teaching. This is of concern to the secular elitists especially in Europe where the pope's stated mission is to re-Christianize the continent. Secular liberalism is extremely strong in all of Europe, almost like a dictatorship. Europe has had problems with dictators in the past!
Last night we celebrated our Chrism Mass at the Cathedral. Part of Bishop Boland's homily focused on the media demonizing the pope, priests and the Catholic Church in general. The Catholic Church is not intrinsically evil as the media would have us believe. The Church is intrinsically good as are the people of the Catholic Church, including the hierarchy and priests of the Church.
As I drove home to Macon from the Chrism Mass, I listened to "Larry King Live" on my XM radio. There was a panel discussion with victims from 40 years ago and Bill Donohue of the Catholic League. Some of the victims and others made scurrilous, false accusations against the pope and continued the mantra of others in the media stating the pope must resign. I heard Sally Quinn of the Washington Post utter her silly, unchallenged suggestions on MSNBC on Monday--this is the Pope's Watergate, he must resign. This is what we're going to hear from those who have it in for this pope and our Church. The pope must resigned is one of the talking points now.
William Donohue was having none of it. He called it as it is and would not be intimidated by victims who are seeking revenge on the Church. For many of them their thirst for justice has moved to revenge. We cannot be passive to this blood lust no matter how much these victims have suffered at the hands of their priest-abusers. Two wrongs don't make a right!
The Catholic League had this ad in the New York Times yesterday:
click on image to enlarge:
The secular press wants you to believe that every case of sex abuse has been directed at small children, that all of these are cases of pedophilia.They are not! The vast, overwhelming majority of cases against a small minority of sick, immature Catholic priests are not towards small children, but teenagers, most of whom look like adults. This is a mortal sin too, it is immoral, it is a crime. But in the priesthood, the predators for the most part have been homosexual priests and their immature acting out and abuse of their position, authority and power. They have abused the trust accorded to priests and manipulated that trust for their own sick satisfaction and to the detriment of unsuspecting teenage boys and their parents and families.
But do you hear the press referring to these cases as "homosexual predations?" Yes, there are "heterosexual predators" of teenagers too that comes from the same immaturity and abuse of trust. In both cases, it is not pedophilia that is the culprit, but predation on teenagers, either male or female. Adult men who have sex with teenage girls are accused of statutory rape not pedophilia. You never hear the press referring to these cases against heterosexual men who have sex with teenage girls as pedophilia because it is not pedophilia, it is heterosexual predation!
Why is the press afraid to label what the majority of cases in the Catholic priesthood are, "homosexual predation?" I think you can understand the reason. It is fine to smear every Catholic priest as a pedophile, but don't you dare intimate that homosexuals could have a problem within their sub-culture, of predation of teenagers which is quite prevalent in much of the sub-culture of homosexuality and their pornography. Does anyone report on that? No! It is politically incorrect to do so.
Thank God for Bill Donohue who is not afraid to tell the truth, about the Church, the priesthood and what the actual problem is--the press and the elitist liberal society are out to destroy or neutralize the Church and her mission of truth. Satan is the other culprit in this conspiracy as well as sins of the members of the Church and her priesthood. As we continue to celebrate the events of Holy Week, let us keep in mind that Jesus Christ has died for us; He is risen and He will come again!
IN YESTERDAY'S NEW YORK TIMES, MAUREEN DOWD, PERHAPS THE MOST ANTI-CATHOLIC OP-ED WRITER SPEWS FORTH HER PONTIFICATIONS. DO YOU THINK THE NEW YORK TIMES NEEDS AN INQUISITION? HER EDITORIAL HIGHLIGHTS THE TALKING POINTS OF THE LIBERAL, ELITE SECULAR PRESS WHICH HATES THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. SHAME! SHAME! THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS EVERY MEMBER THAT IS BAPTIZED, CONFIRMED AND RECEIVING THE HOLY EUCHARIST AND OTHER SACRAMENTS. YOU CAN'T SEPARATE THE HIERARCHY FROM THE PEOPLE, BECAUSE THE HIERARCHY COMES FROM THE PEOPLE AND YOU CAN'T SEPARATE THE INSTITUTION OF THE CHURCH FROM THE PEOPLE EITHER.
Should There Be an Inquisition for the Pope?
By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: March 30, 2010
The New York Times
Do you think she has her talking points in line and an ax to grind against the Catholic Church?
It doesn’t seem right that the Catholic Church is spending Holy Week practicing the unholy art of spin.
Complete with crown-of-thorns imagery, the church has started an Easter public relations blitz defending a pope who went along with the perverse culture of protecting molesters and the church’s reputation rather than abused — and sometimes disabled and disadvantaged — children.
The church gave up its credibility for Lent. Holy Thursday and Good Friday are now becoming Cover-Up Thursday and Blame-Others Friday.
This week of special confessions and penance services is unfolding as the pope resists pressure from Catholics around the globe for his own confession and penance about the cascade of child sexual abuse cases that were ignored, even by a German diocese and Vatican office he ran.
If church fund-raising and contributions dry up, Benedict’s P.R. handlers may yet have to stage a photo-op where he steps out of the priest’s side of the confessional and enters the side where the rest of his fallible flock goes.
Or maybe 30-second spots defending the pope with Benedict’s voice intoning at the end: “I am infallible, and I approve this message.”
Canon 1404 states that “The First See is judged by no one.” But Jesus, Mary and Joseph, as my dad used to say. Somebody has to tell the First See when it’s blind — and mute — to deaf children in America and Italy.
The Vatican is surprised to find itself in this sort of trouble. Officials there could have easily known what was going on all along; archbishops visiting Rome gossip like a sewing circle. The cynical Vatican just didn’t want to deal with it.
And now the church continues to hide behind its mystique. Putting down the catechism, it picked up the Washington P.R. handbook for political sins.
First: Declare any new revelation old and unimportant.
At Palm Sunday Mass at St. Patrick’s, Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York bemoaned that the “recent tidal wave of headlines about abuse of minors by some few priests, this time in Ireland, Germany, and a re-run of an old story from Wisconsin, has knocked us to our knees once again.”
A few priests? At this point, it feels like an international battalion.
A re-run of an old story? So sorry to remind you, Archbishop, that one priest, Father Lawrence Murphy, who showed no remorse and suffered no punishment from “Rottweiler” Ratzinger, abused as many as 200 deaf children in Wisconsin.
Archbishop Dolan compared the pope to Jesus, saying he was “now suffering some of the same unjust accusations, shouts of the mob, and scourging at the pillar,” and “being daily crowned with thorns by groundless innuendo.”
Second: Blame somebody else — even if it’s this pope’s popular predecessor, on the fast track to sainthood.
Vienna’s Cardinal Christoph Schönborn defended Pope Benedict this week, saying that then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s attempt in 1995 to investigate the former archbishop of Vienna for allegedly molesting youths in a monastery was barred by advisers close to Pope John Paul II.
Third: Say black is white.
In his blog, Archbishop Dolan blasted church critics while stating: “The Church needs criticism; we want it; we welcome it; we do a good bit of it ourselves,” adding: “We do not expect any special treatment. ...so bring it on.” Right.
Fourth: Demonize gays, as Karl Rove did in 2004.
In an ad in The Times on Tuesday, Bill Donohue, the Catholic League president, offered this illumination: “The Times continues to editorialize about the ‘pedophilia crisis,’ when all along it’s been a homosexual crisis. Eighty percent of the victims of priestly sexual abuse are male and most of them are post-pubescent. While homosexuality does not cause predatory behavior, and most gay priests are not molesters, most of the molesters have been gay.”
Donohue is still talking about the problem as an indiscretion rather than a crime. If it mostly involves men and boys, that’s partly because priests for many years had unquestioned access to boys.
Fifth: Blame the victims.
“Fr. Lawrence Murphy apparently began his predatory behavior in Wisconsin in the 1950s,” Donohue protested, “yet the victims’ families never contacted the police until the mid-1970s.”
Sixth: Throw gorilla dust.
Donohue asserts that “the common response of all organizations, secular as well as religious,” to abuse cases “was to access therapy and reinstate the patient.” Really? Where in heaven’s name does that information come from? It’s absurd.
And finally, seventh: Use the Cheney omnipotence defense, most famously employed in the Valerie Plame case. Vice President Cheney claimed that his lofty position meant that the very act of spilling a secret, even with dastardly intent, declassified it.
Vatican lawyers will argue in negligence cases brought by abuse victims that the pope has immunity as a head of state and that bishops who allowed an abuse culture, endlessly recirculating like dirty fountain water, were not Vatican employees.
Maybe they worked for Enron.
"FATHER FORGIVE THEM FOR THEY KNOW NOT WHAT THEY DO!"
Posted by Fr. Allan J. McDonald at Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
This crisis will make us (Church) stronger. We have a strong leader who does not flinch at attemps to defile the Church. We should feel secure in that our Holy Father has a vision for strengthing the Church. Trust In Jesus.
Some have said, and I think perhaps the Pope has alluded to it, that Pope Benedict wants a smaller purer Church. Frankly, I think now is the time to go in that direction. Save the Liturgy, save the world! We can only defeat this with prayer and a faithful liturgy. Playing their spin games only has us stooping to their level.
Please make a note that the majority of the criticism and outrage is coming from the Left...that's Democrats, for all you Catholics out there who can't seem to understand that a vote for a democrat is a vote against the Catholic Church...but, I digress.
I knew women like Maureen Dowd in college and grad school. A lot of them are "journalists" now, that being another name for media whore. The rest are social workers, Peace Corps volunteers, and college professors of meaningless subjects like "women's studies," "the gay/lesbian life-style," and anything with "Post-Modern" in the title. They chose these careers because they were too dumb or too directionless to succeed at anything of substance.
I remember them sitting out in the park in granny dresses making daisy chains and reading, "The Greening of America." They have smoked enough dope to fill St. Jo's, and they all had big "E's" on their chests (that's stands for "Easy," Father). Now, they are teaching your children and writing the news. They are all angry as Hell, but they couldn't tell you why...they don't have enough self-awareness to figure it out. They just have some vague sense of having missed something along the way, of having been somehow wronged, and locate the cause in any authority figure, be it any male (Daddy), a tradition (democracy, monogamy, heterosexuality), or an institution (the Church). Having no control over their behavior, they insist upon "control" of their bodies (what normal male would want them?), and so view any result of their promiscuous lifestyles as an inconvenience to be aborted. Most of them are either divorced or lesbian...can you guess why? There is a male counterpart to this class of rabble, just change a few adjectives (see Chris Matthews or Bill Maher).
"5. egalitatianism as it concerns truth, religions, etc"
Now, is "egalitarianism" the word you really wanted, Good Father? Egalitarianism is "advocating the doctrine of equal political, economic, and legal rights for all citizens."
As far as I am able to determine, the Church desires equal political, economic, and legal rights for all.
Maybe you were reaching for "latitudinarianism" but missed?
No,Pater, Fr. was quite correct in his choice of the word "Egalitarianism." Most of us who have been to school know better than to rely upon a dictionary for definitions of terms that are loaded with philosophical and political meaning. The country used to be a majoritarian democracy. Academics, the Left (pardon the redundancy), and whiny, guilt obsessed liberals have managed to turn it into an egalitarian state...where it has become the government's job to promote minorities and the "poor" above the middle classes and to guarantee equal outcomes. Democracy, a representative majoritarian Republic, promotes equal political and legal rights and economic opportunities for all. But, it does not guarantee outcomes or re-distribute wealth. Egalitarianism does. I had a history professor once, a Harvard PhD and published, who said, "Most of my colleagues on college campuses around this country believe the French Revolution was a wonderful thing. I, on the other hand, believe it was a terrible political/philosophical disaster, the price for which we will be paying for decades." So, give some thought to the terms, "Liberte', egalite', fraternite'" and what they really imply. Wanna see a guillotine on the DC Mall? I guess it will be firing squads today. PS They didn't like the Church too much, either.
This is exactly why I no longer read the times. Hopefully they will go under soon. Who needs this biased reporting in the age of the internet. Working for the Times no longer has the prestige of anything and in private circles many people think it is a useless rag. And reporters like this contribute to that growing reputation.
No, pin, Father's choice was not correct, unless one believs that each individual makes his or her own reality in terms of vocabulary. This kind of linguistic individualism is precisely the kind of "French Revolution Result" your Harvard PhD professor warned against. Pay attention.
"Writing maketh an exact man" saith Francis Bacon. I happen to believe this is true.
Pin, don't fear the dictionary.
You are attempting to defend your intellectual laziness by tossing it off as "linguistic individualism?" You know, you really should read a book now and again.
Pin, I thought it might have been possible to engage you in these comment pages in an adult dialogue. I had hoped that you had decided,l after being warned by Fr. McDonald, to act here in an civil, respectful manner. I was wrong. Peace.
Pater, You have shown great disrespect for Fr. MacDonald with your snide innuendo, phony courtesy, and generally snotty behavior.I don't know why you even continue to come on this blog since no one here (to date) seems to be on the same page as you. I believe it is because you seek an antagonist everywhere you go. I have read your comments on other blogs and can always be sure it is the same Pater Ignotus because the cynicism and sophomoric comments are your trademark.You do not want dialogue; you want an audience. No wonder you don't like ad orientum. Sheesh!
Post a Comment