Posted on 09/07/2010 1:29:19 PM PDT by topher
Tuesday September 7, 2010Pope Benedicts Scylla and Charybdis in Britain: the Media and His Own Bishops
Commentary by Hilary White ROME, September 7, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) So, hands up everyone who thought the papal visit to Britain, set for September 16, was going to be a smash success; a revelation of the orderliness, devotion and unity of British Catholicism, and of the dedication of the secular media to cool, even-handed objectivity. Anyone? Bueller? Watching the cringeworthy festival of pre-visit idiocy bursting out of Britain, both secular and ecclesiastical, has been a lesson for many in just how deeply the elite British institution hates and fears the traditional Christian mores and the worlds last unequivocal upholder of them - the Catholic Church. The media, to no ones surprise, has let out all the stops and has abandoned even its normal thin pretense of objectivity, while the local Church has responded with a ringing silence, if not open agreement, to the increasingly personal attacks on Benedict XVI and his goals. A small sample will illustrate. The Independent, a publication not widely praised for its total devotion to factual accuracy in religious matters, today ran the headline Pope chooses rap song as soundtrack for his UK visit. The pope, writes Jerome Taylor, the papers religious affairs correspondent, is a liturgical traditionalist who is known to favour the Latin mass with all its ancient trimmings. But when it comes to finding a song that will appeal to young worshippers, the Pope has opted for rap. This is demonstrated to be a lie in the next sentence, in which Taylor comes clean, saying, The committee overseeing Pope Benedicts itinerary in Britain next week announced today that they have chosen a hip-hop track to be the official youth anthem for his three day visit. So it was not, in fact, the pope who has had almost no personal say in the arrangements in Britain who is betraying his own deeply-held aesthetic sensibilities, but the organizing committee in Westminster who have an axe to grind against Benedicts reforms in liturgy and doctrine. A formal tenet of the worldview of these greying ecclesiastical hipsters is that the youth will not be interested in religion unless it is accompanied by the heavily amplified latest sound. This, despite the evidence of young people around the world flocking to the traditional Latin Mass, breaking down the doors of classes in Gregorian chant and polyphony and besieging seminaries and convents where these cultural treasures are preserved. Meanwhile, the British secular media will do anything, including make things up, to make Benedict look like a hypocrite. Both sides, which in peacetime amuse themselves by sniping at each other, have joined, according to their respective talents, to derail the first formal state visit by a Roman Pontiff to Britain. A historic moment it will be, certainly. Some small efforts are being made not by the bishops to form a united Catholic response to these kinds of attacks, but their effectiveness is likely to be negligible. In a surprisingly candid admission, a piece in the Guardian says the deck is already stacked against such efforts. Paul Donovan wrote, The media may not want to hear from such groups. It is good copy to get the most outrageous Catholic voices who can be found on issues such as abortion, civil partnerships and child abuse. Many in the media are not interested in a rational voice from the Catholic church its not good box office. Indeed. Since August, we have had a set of documentary hit pieces against religious belief from the independent television station Channel 4 featuring Richard Dawkins. In the programs, titled Enemies of Reason, and Faith School Menace? Dawkins, with his usual devotion to careful distinctions, has lumped all religion together, Christianity, Judaism and Islam, and thrown in New Age beliefs with Spiritualism, the pursuit of séances and spooks. Unsurprisingly, all is judged to be nonsense at best, and a grave threat to the well-being of children and society at worst. But aside from the obvious external attacks, Benedict will be facing even greater problems inside. The Guardian has asked: Is Pope Benedict's media team up to the challenge? Its a good question. The Holy See Press Office, run by the invincible Fr. Frederico Lombardi, has not had the greatest track record of smooth responses, even to the direct questions even of those relatively unhostile members of the press who are allowed to accompany the pope on his trips abroad. How can we forget Fathers glacially cool response to the assertion by a media type that the young Joseph Ratzinger had once been pressed into membership in the Hitler Youth? Is a man given to such histrionics ready to defend the pope from the onslaught of the slavering British media? In the lead-up to the visit, the Bishops of England and Wales have been accused, in part by their own priests, of doing nearly nothing to defend or promote Benedict and his program to the faithful, apart from asking for money. Back in June, Fr. Ray Blake, a parish priest in Brighton and the second most popular priestly blogger in Britain, said, after sending around collection envelopes: "That is all we have heard from Eccleston Square. The exam season is underway, so there will be little possibility of much preparation or catechesis in our schools. The holiday season is beginning, so people are already starting to go away on holiday, parishes are winding down. The high point of the visit is the beatification of [John Henry Cardinal] Newman, so far nothing has been issued to encourage an English cultus or even knowledge of the great theologian. The rest has been left to Tatchell, Dawkins and Hitchens The depressing thing, the really disappointing thing, is the sheer childishness of it all. While he is striving to restore moral sanity, and the Christian culture of Western Europe; while he is facing down threats and his priests, bishops and nuns being murdered in the Islamic world for suggesting that reason ought to be the guiding principle of religious and secular culture; while he is battling his own bishops on the continent to stop homosexuals and other unstable characters being let into the priesthood; and while more revelations of institutionalized homosexual abuse come to light, Benedict has been left to fight alone. John Smeaton, a devout Catholic and the head of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children said in a phone call today that he has striven to break through the tangle of PR talk coming from the official administration and alert the competent grown-ups in Rome about the true situation of Britain. At least one of these grown-ups is listening. In response to the plans for the papal liturgies, Monsignor Guido Marini, Papal Master of Ceremonies, has at least set a limit on the usual progressivist fare of dancing girls and pop musicians. Marini told Scotlands Herald newspaper that Pope Benedict will celebrate the major parts of all his Masses in Latin, to emphasise the universality of the faith and the continuity of the Church. But Smeaton was referring more specifically to a statement from Archbishop Vincent Nichols of Westminster. Now rumored to be in the running for a red hat in November, Nichols said through a spokesman last week that he is not in agreement with comments by one of his officials, Edmund Adamus, that Britain is the geopolitical epicentre of the Culture of Death. Even more outrageously, Nicholss colleague, Bishop Keiran Conry of Arundel and Brighton, told the Guardian, Pope Benedict is coming to a country where Catholicism is unusually stable, cohesive and vibrant enough in the current overall context of decline of interest in the church in Western Europe. Pope Benedict, he said, may well be relieved to be coming to a place where, unlike some of his other recent trips, there are no big problems for him to sort out. Smeaton said, If the pope were listening to Archbishop Nichols, if he were to believe a word of what Nichols said, there would be no point in his coming. It is essential that the pope is made aware that what Nichols and other members of the British hierarchy have said about Britain is totally untrue. |
Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.
The reason for this is very simple. The Catholic Church excludes the facticity of the Biblical narrative from its list of orthodox beliefs. It is this that has made the current moral rot in that Church inevitable. But just try telling that to most Catholics. Just as liberal "greens" want to go back to a preindustrial age except with "gay marriage," most Catholics want to return to the Middle Ages but with higher criticism and evolution.
You must not get around much. Traditionalist Catholics do not believe in higher criticism or evolution. The wimpiest traditionalist in the world looks like a lion next to any Protestant, fundamentalists included. The Bible was compiled by traditionalist Catholics precisely to their own specifications, so they have no problem with any part of it. Trads want to live in the modern age, except with Inquisitions and Crusades.
There is no difficulty with liberal bishops and theologians that a restored Holy Inquisition would not resolve.
Gee, where have you gone?
Are you embarrassed to have made another serious error?
>>It is a sacrilege that Ratzinger is going to conjure up a Roman Catholic mass in Westminster.
“What say you?” <<
I say that this is the funniest thing I have read in a long time!!!!
And personally, I can’t believe that anyone would take that bait. I swear, Dr. E has got to be a group of people who sit around coming up with the wackiest things anyone could say about Catholics then throwing them up on FR to get a reaction.
Narses, do you ever see them post anywhere else? I don’t. “The E Group” hang on the Religion Forum waiting for us Catholics to freak out about the things they say.
Next it will be “strangling babies with rosaries and drinking their blood.” like the Protestant kids used to say about us.
This one is hilarious. I feel so Harry Potterish.
Imperio!
Good post. Of course I disagree, but it was clearly and cogently said. And some of the charges are true. Some Dominicans were asked to do the Campus Ministry at Hopkins and they find they are replacing a pro-gaiety pastoral team! At least they were asked to fix it.
Do you object in principle to ministry to homosexuals, or is it more a matter of the way those ministries often end up supporting what they should seek to amend?
Avada Kedavra!!!
You better watch out! I might just work some Catholic magic on your butt, Dr. E.
LOLOLOL!!!!!
Were you predestined to ask such a stupid question, or was that done of your own free will?
?????
LOL!!!
Well, I guess that makes up for all those liberal, higher critical Catholic clergy and theologians of the past century or two!
Then it's false.
But there's more to it than that. By worshiping a man, accepting a "trinity," and even by accepting the dualistic chr*stian concept of the Devil, a Jew commits idolatry.
By forsaking the everlasting Torah a Jew commits (as it were) "adultery" against the G-d of Israel.
The Torah does not authorize any "fulfillment" such as chr*stianity. That any Jew would turn to it (in any form) instead of the Torah is tragic.
You might not think that the Bible is mythology. There may be other Catholics who don't think that the Bible is mythology. But the vast majority of educated Catholics (very much including the clergy) do think that the Bible is mythology.
What is written in some ancient Council decree isn't what counts. What counts is the day-to-day beliefs and actions of Catholics. And whatever is written in old, forgotten council decrees, most Catholics long ago abandoned belief in the facticity and historicity of the Biblical narrative (which they think is a "Protestant" concept). That's what counts.
Show me a Fundamentalist Protestant anywhere in the world whose belief in the historicity of the Biblical narrative are in question.
I'm happy to hear it. Unfortunately, Trads are not mainstream Catholics. Equally unfortunately, many Trads have no problem with evolution or higher criticism. I can state this because there are Trads right here on Free Republic who refuse to get involved in these issues at all (or even to answer simple questions about their beliefs concerning these things), choosing instead to restrict themselves to safe, traditionally Catholic issues.
There is no difficulty with liberal bishops and theologians that a restored Holy Inquisition would not resolve.
Time's a wastin'!
I object to a "universal" church (and I mean any church that makes that claim, not just the Catholic Church) that has a compassionate outreach to "gay persons" but that laughs at simple people who believe the Bible is literally true and tells them to go elsewhere. Let me know when any Catholic parish has a ministry for "literalist persons," won't you?
That the Catholic Church works so hard to win "gays" but tells literalists to go join a Fundamentalist church (because they're not smart enough to be members of the "one true universal church") is one of the greatest black marks against it.
I'm not worried. Christ said He's protect me and keep me from idolatry.
These feet ain't slipping. And the butt follows the feet. 8~)
God is the first cause of all things.
Thankfully.
Typical post
Be careful in making such assertions. I have yet to find an African priest who did not accept the facticity of the Bible Ask one of Mother Teresa’s Indian nuns. Such people have an intuitive knowledge of the world of the Apostles and they have had personal encounters with Shamans. So they firmly believe in the reality of the Devil as a force in the world. As for educated Catholics, Bobby Jindal, the governor of Louisiana has published a personal experience of an exorcism, so again,so avoid hasty generalizations . Positivism has indeed, prevailed in many Catholic universities, but a significant minority is in rebellion against this.
As for numbers and ancient creeds, it is significant that the pope is traveling to England for the beatification of Cardinal Newman. To the distress of the Arian bishops of the Catholic Church in England—I might add. I use the term Arian because Newman is famous for his history of the Arian movement in the 4th Century. Owing to the support of the Emperor Constantius, the Arians and the “semi-Arians” in the episcopacy were in command. Yet in the end, the Nicene Creed prevailed and there are many of us who recite it with as much conviction as ever, as Newman himself did, whatever the convictions of the “educqted.”
Do you really believe that is the case? Is that why the Catholic Church STILL teaches that sodomy is a grave sin and that the homosexual attraction is disordered?
You know, I don't know why I didn't realize this before, but here's my general conclusion about your posts. It seems that you were looking for a place so "conservative" in Christianity that when you didn't find that, you ending up leaving Christianity. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. Am I wrong?
I guess it sure has sunk quite low since the days of 'Enery the VIII. I suppose heads could be lopped off if it will make you feel better. As for superstition and tyranny, you may want to yoke yourself to Voltaire, Rousseau, the sans-culottes and assorted other atheists and secularists. They say as much about any form of Christianity.
That's good to know, but I can't help but point out that it is the positivists who speak on behalf of the Catholic Church and who dominate its clergy and its theological organs. Almost all US Catholic publications, without exception, insist on at least the possibility of both evolution and higher criticism as one of the historic distinctions that separates Catholics from Fundamentalist Protestants. Also, I have not heard of any Third World bishop or theologian making much noise to counteract the prevailing positivism.
As for numbers and ancient creeds, it is significant that the pope is traveling to England for the beatification of Cardinal Newman. To the distress of the Arian bishops of the Catholic Church in EnglandI might add. I use the term Arian because Newman is famous for his history of the Arian movement in the 4th Century. Owing to the support of the Emperor Constantius, the Arians and the semi-Arians in the episcopacy were in command. Yet in the end, the Nicene Creed prevailed and there are many of us who recite it with as much conviction as ever, as Newman himself did, whatever the convictions of the educqted.
I am afraid I don't hold the enthusiasm for Cardinal Newman that most conservative Catholics do. The man was a Biblical minimalist, even going so far as to suggest the Bible contains non-inerrant (perhaps even non-inspired) "obiter dicta." As far as I am concerned, he would feel right at home in today's liberal Catholic universities.
Do I believe what is the case? That Catholic dioceses have official outreach programs for "gay persons?" All you have to do is go to a diocesan web page to see for yourself that this is true.
I notice that you didn't even bother to challenge the other part of my charge--that Biblical literalists don't receive this type of "understanding." But this is obvious. You won't find any outreach to "literalist persons" in any Catholic diocese. Instead the official diocesan papers will simply say that's what the Fundamentalist churches are for (ie, there is no place in Catholicism for literalism, though there is for "gay persons").
Let me know when the Catholic Church has even so much as a scintilla of compassion for literalists that it does for "gay, bisexual, and transgendered persons."
You know, I don't know why I didn't realize this before, but here's my general conclusion about your posts. It seems that you were looking for a place so "conservative" in Christianity that when you didn't find that, you ending up leaving Christianity. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. Am I wrong?
No, that's pretty much it, but what's surprising about it? I spend a lifetime searching for "the truth" (which I assume to be some form of chr*stianity) only to find out that the "real chr*stianity" not only is liberal as all get out and has no use for me or mine but also that every reason I ever thought that justified chr*stianity is false.
Now, if I can't in good conscience be a good chr*stian in an authentic tradition, what is the point in joining an inauthentic tradition?
It's simple logic, really.
Yes, I'm quite aware, but I don't make the faulty conclusion.
I notice that you didn't even bother to challenge the other part of my charge--that Biblical literalists don't receive this type of "understanding." But this is obvious. You won't find any outreach to "literalist persons" in any Catholic diocese.
Yeah, but I've already had this debate with you countless times.
Bottom line: it's utterly predictable that you're going to cherry pick various abominations occurring inside the Catholic Church to support your unfortunate course of action. It's like reasoning with a suicide bomber.
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.