The Catholic-Bashing Telephone Game

You remember the game, "Telephone", don't you? It's fun enough when you're nine years old and the sentence, "Farmer Smith used to grow wheat, but now raises genetically-altered soy beans," turns into "Far as I can be the sweet tooth, the hot praises of gin and so-so trains."

But how does the homosexual-oriented website, Towleroad (offensive images warning!), arrive at this headline?

VATICAN COMPARES CATHOLIC PRIEST PEDOPHILES TO HOLOCAUST VICTIMS

It cites an AP story, which has the headline:

Pope's personal preacher offers defense of pontiff

Someone needs their hearing checked. The AP's headline and story are accurate in its details. But it's obvious—even if the Towleroad headline is something of an extreme example (I'm not so sure it is...)—that some folks will use anything to bash the Catholic Church. The Towleroad sets some sort of dubious record in getting three things wrong in an eight-word headline: 1) it was not the "Vatican" who made the statement; 2) the reference was not to "Catholic Priest Pedophiles"; and 3) there was no reference to the Holocaust or Holocaust victims.

What the papal preacher, Father Raniero Cantalamessa, actually said, at the end of a lengthy Good Friday homily was:

By a rare coincidence, this year our Easter falls on the same week of the Jewish Passover which is the ancestor and matrix within which it was formed. This pushes us to direct a thought to our Jewish brothers. They know from experience what it means to be victims of collective violence and also because of this they are quick to recognize the recurring symptoms. I received in this week the letter of a Jewish friend and, with his permission, I share here a part of it.

He said: “I am following with indignation the violent and concentric attacks against the Church, the Pope and all the faithful by the whole world. The use of stereotypes, the passing from personal responsibility and guilt to a collective guilt remind me of the more shameful aspects of anti-Semitism. Therefore I desire to express to you personally, to the Pope and to the whole Church my solidarity as Jew of dialogue and of all those that in the Jewish world (and there are many) share these sentiments of brotherhood. Our Passover and yours are undoubtedly different, but we both live with Messianic hope that surely will reunite us in the love of our common Father. I wish you and all Catholics a Good Easter.”

And, of course, certain Jewish groups are "repulsed" and "offended," because, you see, not only should the Church avoid any attempt to defend herself against falsehood, she must never, ever think that any persecution of innocent Catholics could ever compare to the persecution of innocent Jews. Never mind that Fr. Cantalamessa was quoting a statement by a Jewish friend. In other words, not only are Catholics supposed to avoid any comparisons between anti-Jewish bigotry and anti-Christian bigotry, they aren't even allowed to refer to Jews who make the comparison. (And we shouldn't mention, I suppose, that more Christians than Jews were killed in the twentieth-century because of who they were and what they believed. That would also be repulsive and offensive, right?) Goodness, it's a comparison, not a competition! And, frankly, it's a good and fair comparison. I suppose you could argue that Fr. Cantalamessa's remarks weren't prudent, but that, frankly, would strike me as erring on the side of cowardice and political-correctness. Need it be said again that it is completely reasonable for Catholics to support every effort to root out child molesters, fornicators, and homosexual predators from the priesthood and to defend from slander and lies those who are innocent?

The bottom line is that there are some people who would rather damn the Church, the Pope, and good Catholics for any reason—even (especially?) reasons based on innuendo, allegations, and outright lies—rather than give a damn about facts. George Neumayr's very direct editorial, "The Pope and His Pharisaical Attackers," for Catholic World Report is right on the money:

The moral authority of these Church-hating ideologues is nil. We are witnessing the repulsively absurd spectacle of a culture drenched in depravity lecturing the Vicar of Christ on moral responsibility. One doesn’t even have to agree with every action or inaction of Benedict's ecclesiastical career to see that these attacks on him have been appallingly stupid, glib, and Pharisaical.

Fr. Dwight Longenecker has an excellent post today, "Birds of a Feather," in which he states:

Just for the record, the observation by Fr. Cantalamessa's Jewish friend was that two things are similar in the present campaign:

1. The use of stereotypes- this is typical of all forms of religious and racial abuse, and it has been part of the anti-Catholic arsenal from the very beginning. Anyone who was brought up as a Protestant will be used to language that put all Catholics into the same category and condemns them all.

2. Jumping from individual guilt and responsibility to corporate guilt - Notice how the journalists spend a bit of time outlining the crimes of the few offenders and then jump seamlessly to speaking about 'The Catholic Church' or 'Catholic hierarchy' or 'The Vatican'.

And a couple of weeks ago, Elizabeth Lev wrote a very relevant post about Edmund Burke, the French Revolution, and anti-Catholicism:

While no one denies the wrongdoing and the harm caused by a small minority of priests, their misconduct has been used to undermine the reputations of the overwhelming majority of clergy who live holy quiet lives in their parishes, tending to their flocks. These good men have been smeared with the same poisonous ink.

The brutal reality is that there are an estimated 39 million victims of childhood sexual abuse in the United States today. Of these, between 40 and 60 percent were abused by a family member (for the most part uncles, cousins, stepfathers and live-in boyfriends). Carol Shakeshaft and Audrey Cohan have produced a study showing that 5 percent were molested by school teachers, while the New York Times published a survey showing that fewer than 2% of the offenders were Catholic priests. But to read the papers, it would seem that Catholic clergy hold a monopoly in child molestation.

Burke's explanation for the furious anti-clericalism of yore could have been written today: The denigration of the clergy was "to teach them [the people] to persecute their own pastors....by raising a disgust and horror of the clergy."

If Burke were alive today, he would perhaps discern another motive behind the selective assaults on Catholic clergy, besides designs on Church property: namely to destroy the credibility of a powerful moral voice in public debate. The most recent example concerns the heated battle over the health care reform bill. The vocal opposition of the United States Bishops' conference (particularly in regard to tax-payer -funded abortion) has proved especially annoying to the proponents of the legislation. As the final vote approaches, the clerical sex abuse drumbeat has risen to a frenzy.

Read the entire piece. And remember: if and when you see a headline that says, "Pope lauds pedophile priests, hates Jews, and sings the hot praises of gin and so-so trains," it very well could be the result of the Catholic-Bashing Telephone Game.

Comments

[Thomas Aquinas]

A gay website complaining about using bad analogies? Wow! That's like comparing same-sex marriage to interracial marriage or sodomy to sexual intercourse.

Carl, check this out: the gay site apparently had a hissy fit when conservatives went ballistic about the fact that Kevin Jennings (Obama's safe school czar) praised pedophile advocating Harry Hay and ran a group (GLSEN) that offered sexually suggestive materials to minors: http://www.towleroad.com/glsen/

Just replace "Kevin Jennings" with "Fr. Whomever" and it becomes a "scandal." But when it's just an Obama man-date extolling the virtues of hooking up with "young dudes," it's gay bashing and a hate crime. These people are sick.

[Dan]

Thank you for this Carl. What the press is trying to do to the Pope is starting to spook me. It is incumbent on all of us to stand up for him and fight all the falsehood.

I commend to everyone the following Mecatornet article that gives a sociological analysis of what is happening:

http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/mora/

[Howard]

Another commenter said, somewhat earlier, "Blessed are ye when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake: Be glad and rejoice for your reward is very great in heaven. For so they persecuted the prophets that were before you."

[Charles E Flynn]

Dan,

Thanks for posting the link to the Mercatornet article. It is not necessary to agree with every point it makes to find the article worthy food for thought. There is much of merit on the entire site.

[joe]

Those who see the Church through gay- or libertine-tinged lenses will not see it with much if any clarity. Sin makes you ... well, let's just say it clouds your perception. Andrew Sullivan and Maureen Dowd would be more mainstream examples of people considered respectable who are hardly genteel, for lack of a better word.

[BillW]

Hey, great idea - refusing to confess to your sins, and then blaming everybody else for bringing your trespasses out into the open. That's a surefire way to get the respect of the rest of the world!

[Manuel G. Daugherty Razetto]

Reading such hateful, filth impregnated messages in the Towleroad website, convinces anybody how much antipathy is there against Catholics. Deep feelings like these go beyond animosity; they intend to propagate Ideology. It's obvious gay activism is controlled and directed by marxist, non-Christian propaganda.

[skyhawk]

"Hey, great idea - refusing to confess to your sins, and then blaming everybody else for bringing your trespasses out into the open. That's a surefire way to get the respect of the rest of the world!"

Who is refusing to confess their sins? Certainly not the Church.

Talk about a statement that reeks of bad faith...

[Justin N]

While I certainly didn't find anything "wrong" about the comments of the Preacher to the Papal Household, I can say that he should have been wise enough to see what such comments would have brought, whether justified or not. Such temperance is just part of reality, whether we like it or not.

That said, the media has certainly milked it for all it is worth. Personally, I take in most of my news from NPR (no television, and I don't read a lot of news papers throughout the week). The commentary from "specialists" have been awful, and the "callers" have been even worse. If I have to hear one more person justify their weak and inept opinions about the Church or the sex abuse scandal by first explaining that they "were an altar boy" or "went to CCD" I am going to scream! I call these impotent arguments the "I was an altar boy..." argument (they are often brought up in classes I teach by older people, typically, as a way of stating that "they know...").

Anyway... The thing that I have been appalled by is the fact that the media often will completely leave out the context of the statement and they have often not even mentioned that Father C. was actually quoting his "Jewish friend". Again, I don't think it was a smart idea to say what he said, but the media obviously (obvliously!) has an agenda here and passing such an agenda off for "news" is pathetic.

The only voice that I have heard that is somewhat reasonable is that of John Allen Jr.'s who is often brought onto NPR as a consultant. It is interesting to note that since the election of BXVI I haven't heard Weigel on the radio at all.

Anyway... if you really want to get angry about the issue just listen to NPR and their "callers" and "expert commentators".

jn

[Justin N]

Who is refusing to "confess their sins"?

Perhaps I should crawl on my knees over to my black relative's home (we have a multi-racial family) and apologize profusely that my white ancestors tormented them? Perhaps I should acknowledge my sorrow by paying for their college education? I can find fault with my ancestors for their crimes, but I have no fault of my own.

Likewise, Catholics or "Catholicism" has nothing to do with the problem at hand. There are "people" who are at fault. Father C's note, while not, perhaps, the best thing to say in the world is simply that the sins of a few should not lead to a collective guilt by the many: "priests" and "bishops" who are innocent have nothing to apologize for, neither do I. The sins of a few priests and a few bishops are terrible, and they should be punished for it, but it has nothing to do with the faith as a whole.

Furthermore, the entire notion that "nothing is being done" about this issue is rediculous. Having worked in a Parish I can tell you this: the amount of time, energy and attention that is being paid to this issue almost amounts to paranoia. I can't remember one weekly meeting where the issue wasn't brough up, and where the Dioceice "Safe Environment" program wasn't discussed and wasn't being implemented. To be quite frank: the response is almost overbearing... to the point that other important things are not getting done... to the point to where good priests are actually frigtened to show any normal human interaction with children... interaction that is an important part of their job and important part of the faith.

But there is no reporting about that is there?