Saturday, April 02, 2005

Pope John Paul II's Death Provides Main Stream Media An Opportunity to Reveal Its Ignorance of (and Bias Against) Religion

Three strikes and your out, right? Let's count....

Strike One: Christiane Amanpour, while reporting on the death of Pope John II today has been quoted as saying :

“There are millions of Catholics who disagree with the very, very conservative views of this Pope. Many women were disappointed at not being empowered to be able to join the Church."
Strike Two: a compilation by K.J. Lopez at National Review Online:
It was just pointed out to me that the aforementioned Christiane earlier said that John Paul II was "the first non-Catholic" to be selected pope. Then Shep Smith on Fox referred to St. Matthew's Cathedral (in D.C.) as St. Patrick's. Another reporter on CNN earlier called the Basilica of the Immaculate Conception in Washington as Washington’s National Cathedral (the latter isn’t Catholic). Paula Zahn a few minutes ago called President Bush the “pope.” The list could go on. Cardinal McCarrick was called Fr. McCormick on CNN, also.
Strike Three: The New York Times had an opportunity to celebrate a great man today but spent as much time being critical of Pope John Paul II as they did of saying anything positive. In their first on-line obituary posting this morning they actually forgot to add a paragraph that was intended to say something nice about him. Instead, in place of that paragraph, appeared these words:

Even as his own voice faded away, his views on the sanctity of all human life echoed unambiguously among Catholics and Christian evangelicals in the United States on issues from abortion to the end of life.

need some quote from supporter

John Paul II's admirers were as passionate as his detractors, for whom his long illness served as a symbol for what they said was a decrepit, tradition-bound papacy in need of rejuvenation and a bolder connection with modern life.

As if that wasn't bad enough, other less-than-complimentary phrases were scattered generously about such as:
"In my opinion, he is not the greatest pope but the most contradictory of the 20th century," (said Hans Kung, the eminent Swiss theologian who was barred by the pope from teaching in Catholic schools because of his liberal views.) "A pope of many, great gifts, and of many bad decisions."
Yes, it's always good to get statements from objective sources....

Among liberal Catholics, he was criticized for his strong opposition to abortion, homosexuality and contraception, as well as the ordination of women and married men.
True, yes. But it have been even more accurate to have said,
Among conservative Catholics in North American and virtually every Catholic in Africa, Asia and Latin Americn (numbering close to 1 billion people) he was praised and admired for his strong opposition to abortion, homosexuality and contraception, as well as the ordination of women and married men.
And the piece de resistance, the coup de grace...
He was a most public man: traveling, bear-hugging, chatting and preaching the value of love with a warmth that belied his often-doctrinaire positions on church issues.
Final Thought #1--Can't someone have "doctrinaire positions" and also be a "bear-hugging, chatty, love-valuing, warm man" without that being considered an oxymoron?

Final Thought #2--Isn't the Pope supposed to have doctrinaire positions on church issues? Isn't that what makes the Pope the Pope?

I fully expect that there will be editors at the New York Times who will actually be surprised to discover that the next Pope 1. Will not be the Dalai Lama; 2. Will not be Hans Kung; and, 3. Will oppose abortion and be familiar with the Bible.

Three strikes and you're out. A self-inflicted KO in the first round. I can't wait to see what comes next.

Hat Tips and thanks to Hugh Hewitt, Captain Ed, John Hinderaker at Powerline and the folks in The Common Room