Posted on 04/29/2005 4:56:31 PM PDT by CHARLITE
I knew when Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger was elevated to the supreme leadership of Christianity's largest church that there would be many unkind things said about the new pope.
I didn't think the problem would be rooted in his past connection as a juvenile with a wing of the Nazi Party, which was as all encompassing as Communist affiliations were in Russia and are in China. Only the immature London press, a freakish industry that is part New York Times and mostly National Enquirer, would attempt to frame this less than admirable shred as being representative of Ratzinger's 78 years.
Maybe without justification, I hold the American media up to a higher standard than the sensationalist scribes from Airstrip One.
Unfortunately, domestic commentary of Benedict XVI has been predictably erudite from "respected" quarters of American journalism in addition to a bevy of cassock wearing quislings.
Maureen Dowd, the most celebrated harpy in print media, has gone after the new pope as if he were a conservative Bush nominee up for the US Court of Appeals. Dowd has seen fit to flap her sagging jowls against Pope Benedict as a "Cheneyesque" schemer hell bent on using the Church as a means of electing Republicans (and using her train of logic, fattening Halliburton's coffers as well).
Apparently Ms. Dowd, who professes to be a Catholic, objects to Benedict's opposition to moral relativism and his determination to "purify" a church that is obese with far too many "Christmas/Easter Catholics" and policy advocates who work against the Church's teachings through their positions of power.
Just down the Atlantic seaboard is Cokie Roberts, who is equally contrary but is at least more polite in her protestations. Roberts, whose mother was Ambassador to the Holy See, kicked in her own two kopecks, lamenting that Benedict's papacy would be a setback for progressive reforms, namely the ordination of female priests.
What really irks Mrs. Roberts is Ratzinger's belief that his faith is the right religion. Egad!
How can anyone be so intolerant as to spend half of a century devoting his life to something and not accept it as Gospel? Pun intended.
That Ratzinger and the Vatican have not been swept up in the global trend towards democratization also disappoints Mrs. Roberts. Somehow at the annual Boggs family reunion, Ms. Lindy-- Cokie's mom, must have neglected to mention that Ambassador Boggs was stationed in a monarchy. Worse yet, at least for "liberated" Catholics whose views place them in the realm of Unitarianism, there is no 19th Amendment in the Vatican.
I am certain comparisons between the Holy See and the late Taliban regime will be forthcoming from liberals with the exception of Washington State US Senator Patty Murray, who has extolled the positive virtues of the former Afghan administration.
Yet it should be said that unfair criticism of Benedict XVI has not exclusively come from the usual suspects, as several of his "employees" have aired unflattering opinions.
There was a time when the Jesuits were the Marine Corps of Catholicism; now they resemble the Sandinisitas in their espousals.
Father Thomas Reese, editor of the Jesuit rag America, quipped about the new pope's unpopularity in Catholic academia because he is viewed as an unrelenting censor.
Not to be out done, Jesuit Father G. Simon Harak accused Benedict of hypocrisy concerning the dangers of moral relativism on Al Franken's Air America.
Now maybe I am what you call an occupational traditionalist, but it seems these priests are engaging in public insubordination of a superior. Surely cashiers at Burger King have been canned for saying far less about the district manager.
If all of these Catholics have a problem with Benedict, why don't they simply leave? While the Vatican is an absolute monarchy, affiliation with the church is voluntary. At any time disheartened exponents of liberation theology are free to turn in their collars. Dowd, Cokie, etc. can hit the cobble-stones and crash by Catholicism's metrosexual cousin over in Canterbury.
But they will not leave, for to do so would make them irrelevant critics. By clinging to the church in name, church liberals can be like Christie Whitman, crying, "It's my religion too" while claiming a higher level of personal outrage by remaining Catholic.
Finally it should be said that Benedict's detractors are in the extreme minority. According to a recent Wash Post Poll, 81% of American Catholics approve of the new pope. Considering the unprecedented sniping that welcomed his election, those numbers are impressive...and he didn't even have to win a war to get them.
------------
Mike Bayham is a political consultant in south Louisiana.
Liberal Catholics always seemed somewhat oxymoronish to me.
RC PING, swordfish!
These stories are boring. Who cares what liberal catholics and the ratmedia think about the pope?
In a lot of ways they were more like Special Forces, at least when it came to operating in small contingents in unfriendly territory trying to win the hearts and minds of indigenous persons.
This is a good article. The way I see it, two of the biggest challenges the RC Curch faces today are the number of nominal European Catholics who do not attend Mass and the number of nominal American Catholics who do...
The Jebbies defected to follow their prophet DeChardin.
The Jesuits motto used to be "Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam" now it's "Non Serviam" (with a few exceptions).
.......and the frightening potential alliance between the "nominals" and the liberal left, politically.
Good post, Joe! Thanks!
Char :)
Probably those who are interested in this topic. I post many articles in which I have no personal interest. Yet, I know that different subjects are immensely interesting to many FR members. It's a "Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks" concept, and it's what makes FR such a thumping big success - "something for everyone" = variety........"the spice of life!"
Char :)
The bad news is that the Liberals control so many assets. The good news is that their main allies in the episcopate, I mean the Jadot appointees, will soon disappear.
I her recent column, Mo actually accused Benedict of using his political power to have himself elected to the chair of Peter. You know, like Cheney selected himself as Bush's running mate. It was exactly the same, don't you know. She went on to ridicule him for not endorsing the "if it feels good, do it" philosophy. Like that's a bad thing.
As I see it, 'time to tow the line.'
A 'You are with us or against us' kind of mentality.
"Liberal Catholics" viewed Pope John Paul II as 'hard-line'. This one is said to be to the 'right' of him.
I predict ex-communications and the denial of Sacraments to CINO's will be soon to follow.
Sing it brother, sing it :)
That's a great 30 word analysis.
Because false modesty is just another form of deception, I will say this is the first original thought/expression I've ever had that is even remotely Chestertonian...admittedly, it's similar to Chesterton in the same sense a sandbox is 'similar' to a beach, but I've long tried to study, emulate and critically think like him, and I believe he'd have made a similar observation and analysis were he alive today.
Sadly, I think my remark captures a truth I dearly wish was not true.
Excellent observation. Thanks for the comment!
Char :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.