More evidence of media bias against the Pope - Times of London condemns pastoral letter BEFORE it is even published
This morning, before the Pope’s pastoral letter on Irish child abuse was published, and apparently before reporters from The Times had read a single word of it, the paper ran a story by Richard Owen and David Sharrock which began as follows:
The Pope’s letter to the Irish faithful will be released today and read at Sunday Mass in an attempt to defuse the spiralling scandal over clerical sex abuse.
However, the pastoral letter has already been judged a failure (italics added) by many after a week in which the Primate of All Ireland, Cardinal Sean Brady, apologised for his role in covering up the activities of a notorious paedophile priest.
The report makes clear that the Times journalists did not know at the time of writing whether the letter would include an apology (which of course it did). Therefore it’s fair to assume that they knew nothing important about its contents. Yet they were already reporting the “failure” of its reception. Did they jump into a Tardis?
I’m sorry if this seems like a sideshow compared to the very grave crisis facing the Pope, and I will blog about the letter in detail later. But I think it tells us something very important about the standards of reporting applied by parts of the secular media to the Catholic Church. Quite what is going on at The Times I don’t know (though I’ve written about its ignorant bias before). But I dread to think how this is going to play out during the papal visit.
The Pope’s letter to the Irish faithful will be released today and read at Sunday Mass in an attempt to defuse the spiralling scandal over clerical sex abuse.
However, the pastoral letter has already been judged a failure (italics added) by many after a week in which the Primate of All Ireland, Cardinal Sean Brady, apologised for his role in covering up the activities of a notorious paedophile priest.
The report makes clear that the Times journalists did not know at the time of writing whether the letter would include an apology (which of course it did). Therefore it’s fair to assume that they knew nothing important about its contents. Yet they were already reporting the “failure” of its reception. Did they jump into a Tardis?
I’m sorry if this seems like a sideshow compared to the very grave crisis facing the Pope, and I will blog about the letter in detail later. But I think it tells us something very important about the standards of reporting applied by parts of the secular media to the Catholic Church. Quite what is going on at The Times I don’t know (though I’ve written about its ignorant bias before). But I dread to think how this is going to play out during the papal visit.
Wow!! Does not surprise me in the least!
ReplyDeleteCA
Foully perverted, pseudo celibate, predatory Catholic priests enjoy privileged positions, not only by tradition within Irish Catholic culture but by law, in government, education, social welfare and virtually every other aspect of Irish civil life.
ReplyDeleteThe people of Ireland now want these ravening beasts out of the positions of control over them that they have held and abused for so long.
The people's hope was that the Pope would be able to overcome his weaseling nature and handicapping sexual grotesquery to voluntarily pull his slavering, priestly sodomite minions off the nether regions of Irish innocents. That was what they were hoping for in the letter this morning and that is what they did not receive.
The people themselves, through the careful exercise of democracy, will have to throw off this cruel sodomite yoke put on them by the whore of Rome. Maybe it's for the best. All things in their own time.
Reddog: WOW! You might need a little extra fibre in your diet. You seem to be suffering from sh*tty thought and language. Even if I grant you all that you claim (which of course I do not), because of your over the top hyperbole, exaggeration and foul tongue, no one will take your seriously.
ReplyDeleteFr. Tim
OK... now to your argument.
ReplyDeleteIf when you write -- "Foully perverted, pseudo celibate, predatory Catholic priests enjoy privileged positions, not only by tradition within Irish Catholic culture but by law, in government, education, social welfare and virtually every other aspect of Irish civil life." -- you are referring to the offending clerics, it's hard to argue with you. These predators must be removed from society -- a universal application of the 'one strike' policy practiced by both Church and State. This, together with a stringent assessment of all candidates for ordination to ensure that others be kept out, we will have a chance to win back the faith of Catholic souls.
Bishop Fred Henry, then rector of St. Peter's Seminary where I studied, often said that any benefit of the doubt in assessing the validity of a vocation 'falls to the church'; by which he meant that if there was any chance that a candidate for ordination may threaten the faithful, he was to be refused ordination. Sadly, the decision was not always his, as I know of a few Bishops who ordained candidates without the imprimatur of the Seminary... and some of those cases indeed caused great harm to the faith & the faithful. I do also state immediately that every single one of cases, where harm was done, the priest has been defrocked, and/or dead. Further, millions of dollars, and too many hours of prayer to count for the complete healing for those found to have suffered injury. I think I can also say that not one priest that WAS recommended by Bishop Henry has turned out to be a predator. I stand to be corrected if wrong, but if such a case exists, it would clearly stand as the exception that proves the rule.
BUT...if it should be that you are referring to ALL priests and bishops, then let me suggest that your "talking through your hat" and you know nothing about the truth of the Irish situation - or anywhere else within the church.
Further, when you post "The people's hope was that the Pope would be able to overcome his weaseling nature and handicapping sexual grotesquery (sic) to voluntarily pull his slavering, priestly sodomite minions off the nether regions of Irish innocents. That was what they were hoping for in the letter this morning and that is what they did not receive.", again I suggest that you are off the mark.
The statement of the Pope is a contrite and shamed request for forgiveness, in the face of the heinous injuries wrought upon innocents by priests and bishops. It is also a severe chastisement and promise of penalty for the offending priests. It is a central tenet of Christian faith that forgiveness is offered to any sinner who approaches Christ - thus we cannot judge the soul of any person, but they will carry the 'temporal effects' of their perversions in this life and the next.
As you say, 'All things in their own time'. Time WILL tell as to whether the Church as a whole is serious about the fine words of the Pope's letter. I trust that it pass the test.
Fr. Tim
Secular democracy has nothing to do with secular humanism. It has to do with governance by elected representatives of the people, for the greater good of the people they represent, ultimately answerable to the people and only the people whom they serve. Whether the people governed or governing are religious is not the question. The empowerment they feel that religion gives them and requires that they exercise over others is.
ReplyDeleteCatholic Priests, as members of the autocratic institutional arm of the Catholic Church, are never and can never be valid representatives of the citizenry within secular society. They are, by definition, the owned creatures of Joseph Ratzinger and his bishops. Whether they are good men or not, whether they perpetrate abuses upon the people or not, is immaterial. They have no place in positions of authority within formal, legal structures of society because their provenance and allegiance is not appropriate.
Those sworn to absolute allegiance to the church, that are currently in such positions within secular life must be removed. Strictures must be placed against any more taking their places. They self avowedly act not as representatives in the best interests of the people but as slaves to an absolute monarch who claims power by divine right.
The final transformation of society, as it completes the separation of church and state, is what the Vatican now confronts and must accept.
Who knows, maybe the days of divine right, rule of the sword and punishment on the stake will come again but it is not now.