Bashing Benedict: Networks Slam Retiring Pope

A new study by the Culture and Media Institute of Pope Benedict’s retirement reveals constant attacks, ridicule, and repeated allusions to scandals as ABC, CBS, and NBC reported on Benedict’s final days.

The survey reveals that the Catholic Church was repeatedly deemed “troubled,” the Church was attacked for not “modernizing,” the real-world Church was constantly compared to the fictitious world of novelist Dan Brown and his Da Vinci Code series of books, and late night TV hosts turned Benedict into a butt of jokes.

On February 11, Pope Benedict announced his retirement due to ill health setting off the big three networks into attack mode.

“From Benedict’s Feb. 11 resignation through the evening of Feb. 27, the day before it took effect, the networks referred to the Catholic Church as a troubled institution 122 times and aired the word ‘scandal’ 87 times in 112 reports. Anchors and reporters suggested that the Church must modernize (32 times) and pressed for change in issues regarding women (7 times) and gays (13 times). At times, they trivialized the first resignation of a Pope since the 1500s as ‘worthy of a Dan Brown novel’ (ABC’s Harris again.) and sensationalized it by entertaining theories about other reasons Benedict might be stepping down.”

On the lighter side, over the two-week period, network morning shows continuously aired jokes about Benedict staged by late night comedy shows such as Jimmy Fallon, David Letterman and Conan O’Brien.

In a strange turn, several network news shows compared Pope Benedict’s retirement to aspects of the fictional books by thriller writer Dan Brown. During one broadcast, ABC’s Elizabeth Vargas said that Benedict’s stepping down was a “Real-life ‘Da Vinci Code,” and Dan Harris said that the incident “provoked Vatican intrigue worthy of a Dan Brown novel.”

But the jokes and the allusions to Dan Brown’s novels were mild compared to the attacks on the “scandals” surrounding the Church.

The study finds, “In the three broadcast networks’ 112 reports since Benedict resigned, there have been 122 mentions of a church in trouble. Reports have referred to ‘scandal’ 87 times. By network accounts, nothing happened in the church during Benedict’s eight-year papacy except scandal, dysfunction and failure.”

With his announcement of retirement, Pope Benedict decisively pegged his reason for stepping down to his failing health, but the networks insisted that the real reason he was stepping down was because of the decades of sex abuse scandals that hit the Church before Benedict became its leader.

CBS, for one, plied the theme quite a lot. CBS Anchor Scott Pelley, for instance, claimed that the next Pope would be “inheriting a church in turmoil.” Then, in an interview with Norah O’Donnell, Georgetown College Dean Chester Gillis claimed that the pressure of dealing with the sex scandals contributed to Benedict’s decision to step down. On February 24, CBS correspondent Allen Pizzey again pointed out the “scandals” of the church saying, “The ex-Pope has to disappear during the conclave even if the scandals that plagued his reign will be in plain sight.”

The survey shows that Pope Benedict was widely viewed as a controversial figure, that his church was in “disarray,” that Catholicism is on the downturn, and that he was leaving not because of his stated purposes but because of “scandals” in the Church.

The China Debt
Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™
  • JWH

    To take a few items:

    Late night jokes. The pope is a public figure. He’s not only head of a major religious denomination, but also the chief executive of a country. His office demands that he wear specific clothes. He rides in a special car. Late-night comics are going to make jokes about him. Get over it.

    The Dan Brown comparisons. Kind of stupid, actually.

    The scandals. The scandals in the church — the pedophile priests, Vatileaks, recent allegations of a network of gay priests who were blackmailed — are all issues of public interest. They are newsworthy, and aspects of these scandals have defined at least the administrative aspects of Benedict’s tenure.

    Reason for his resignation. Benedict’s resignation is unusual, so people will naturally speculate on reasons for it. Political figures (and make no mistake, as pope, Benedict was a political figure) will often put the best face on their departures, whether the departure is ostensibly to spend time with their families, go into rehab, or attend to their personal health. With the controversies surrounding the church, I see nothing wrong with news media exploring his resignation, looking for the story behind the story, as it were.

    Aside from the Dan Brown allusions, I don’t see a problem here. The complaint basically boils down to a) the late-night comics made jokes about the pope and b) news reporters reported news regarding the pontiff and analyzed his departure.

    • JWH

      As an amendment to my comment, I note that the study accepts that late-night comics’ jokes are appropriate, but complains that the morning shows replayed the jokes. While I, personally, don’t see that much news value to replaying late night jokes, the fact remains that the late-night comedians’ comments are part of the cultural zeitgeist and are, thus, “news” in the sense that morning shows’ soft focus constitutes “news.” What’s more, the comics are popular.

      • Brucehenry

        Also, this “survey” is not a “study” at all, but Warner insists on calling it one. (Much like his previous article about a pro-gun advocacy group conducting a “study” that supposedly demonstrated anti-gun bias in the Lamestream Media[TM].)

        Morning shows are typically not “hard news” affairs, with segments on recipes, celebrity couplings, yada yada. It’s not surprising, or sinister, that they would run the late-night jokes. And I don’t think MRC (the parent organization of the authors of this “study”) have a problem when morning shows run jokes about Anthony Weiner or Michelle Obama, for example.

        BTW, what’s up with Hooson and his bashing of iconic historical figures? First George Washington, now der Popenfuehrer.

        • JWH

          Can’t speak to Hooson. I do think Benedict should have kept his old name, if only because “Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger” sounds like a great Hogans Heroes villain.

  • Paul Hooson

    I’m actually personally angry that the news media hasn’t been far more critical of this terribly failed spiritual leader. He wasn’t even honest enough to blame his resignation on all the scandals in his church under his watch that he was totally ineffective at dealing with, and cited old age health issues instead. In any average Protestant church, a terrible inept leader like this would be fired, if not arrested for obstruction of justice charges by local authorities. The remarkable thing is that more people of true faith didn’t have enough spiritual discernment to realize what a bad church this has become and leave for some church with a better grasp of God and the Holy Spirit.

    Somehow seemingly endless sex abuse scandals, two murder scandals, an abduction of a teenage girl scandal, a connection to an Italian mobster, a Vatican bank scandal, a butler stealing documents from the pope detailing financial corruption, a Gay sex scandal, and a few more negative items just didn’t seem to shake the faith of some true believers. Add to this the claims of this German-born pope who was a former conscripted member of junior military rank in the Hitler Youth and German Wehrmacht trained to shoot down allied aircraft who claimed that he never killed any Americans or allies until he was taken as prisoner of war by the allied forces, and you have a witches brew of reasons why this pope was hardly to be taken seriously as any successor to St. Peter’s church. If god chooses a representative on Earth, it would more likely than not be someone of good character who runs a church of good character, and not some breeding ground for horrible sex crimes and other serious moral sins.

    It’s a little bit empty feeling right now with no pope in power. Almost like God has abandoned mankind for a time. There isn’t any moral force in power to speak out against evil in the world or to warn nations not to war with each other. Hopefully, a man of deep prayer and character emerges very soon to become that new pope and that spiritual vacuum is soon filled. And this church gets the type of leader it truly needs to crack down on crimes and wrongdoing in this church to make it right in the eyes of God and mankind both once again. This church lost it’s moral and spiritual authority when Pope Benedict allowed it to drift into so much evil, and seemed to act so helpless to get a handle on all of the problems. The previous Pope, John Paul II, was almost saint-like, and a true spiritual leader, and I was deeply critical that his replacement was the wrong man, and not really God’s choice. I was certainly proven right. Benedict likely resigned partly because in his prayers, God clearly told him that he wasn’t really his choice either, and he really let God down. Never in the history of this church has one leader mismanaged God’s institution as poorly as this.

    This pope flying away from the Vatican on the helicopter was amazingly similar to the resignation of Richard Nixon in disgrace and his helicopter trip away from the White House, as a man of far more moral integrity, Gerald Ford, took over. This church sorely needs to find that better man right now to save it’s own soul.

    • The_Queen_of_France

      “He wasn’t even honest enough to blame his resignation on all the scandals in his church under his watch that he was totally ineffective at dealing with, and cited old age health issues instead.”
      Paul! I didn’t realize you were a mindreader!

      ” Almost like God has abandoned mankind for a time.”

      You have it backwards. Mankind has abandoned God.

      • Paul Hooson

        God will forever be disappointed in mankind. But, I certainly feel that he sets a bar much higher for those spiritual leaders that he entrusts to represent him on Earth. Many former Catholics left this church because they realized that it is not scripturally-based and often cult-like in it’s unusual emphasis on the worship of Mary, rather than God.

        Many Christians pray directly to God, while others pray to God through Jesus, but Catholics tend to pray through Mary or some saint to Jesus to God, a rather long chain of prayer command for some unknown reason. And, many other Catholic beliefs are in direct contradiction to scripture as well. For example, Catholics tend to believe that St. Peter was the founder of this Christian church after the death of Jesus, but that is only because Catholics also reject scripture that Jesus had half brothers and sisters, the offspring of the natural union marriage of Joseph and Mary, and that the apostle James, the half brother of Jesus, was the leader of the early Christians after the execution of Jesus. The Catholic Church is largely a Mary worship cult version of the Christian faith, somehow believing that her eternal virgin status makes her God-like. But, scripture certainly indicates differently about Mary and her natural union with her husband, Joseph. Whenever Catholic teachings contradict scripture, this cult simply teaches something different, and relies heavily on so few Catholics ever bothering to read the Bible from cover to cover, and never raising questions about this cult’s teachings. This is not to say that this church is not filled with many good prayerful Christians, just that this church has many believers who claim to love God, but seldom bother to read his Word in scripture and blindly accept many church teachings that aren’t from God, but written by mere men.

        Other Catholics left this church during these scandals, as yet another sign of spiritual problems in this troubled church.

        • retired.military

          Catholics dont worship Mary you idiot. They ask for her intersession with God.

          You are repeating nothing but old rumors with no basis in truth at all.

          • Paul Hooson

            Many Hispanic Catholics certainly have Mary shrines in their homes, as well as most Catholics have a prayer, “The Hail Mary” which certainly elevates her to some level above a mere mortal. “Intersession” is pretty much an interchangeable word to mean that Catholics pray through Mary to Jesus to God.

            My brother’s girlfriend is a Pentecostal Protestant Mexican American, so we don’t have a Mary shrine in our home like many Mexicans. Her mother was a Pentecostal evangelist much like Katherine Kuhlman or some others. My brother and I were raised as Catholics, although I’ve attended a Jehovah’s Witness Kingdom Hall in some more recent years. My girlfriend is Jewish. You would think that this makes for more than few interesting religious discussions.

          • jim_m

            As an evangelical Christian I am still able to recognize the difference between praying to the saints for intercession as both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches do and actually worshiping Mary as God.

            Anyone who attends a JW kingdom hall should tread lightly when criticizing other religions. Cultists don’t have much credibility when talking religion.

          • Paul Hooson

            Mary isn’t worshiped as God by the Catholics, but certainly is held on a higher plane than other mere mortals. But, she is certainly worshipped as a saint of high standing through shrines and other ways. I actually have a fondness for all Christian churches, but I recognize some odd quirks with each one, and some odd church teachings. For example, the Mormons needed to find something to ban, so they chose coffee and colas with caffeine, while the Catholics once banned eating meat of Fridays, but it is now optional. But, I’m a little old fashioned this way, and usually don’t feel right if I don’t eat fish on Friday myself, but it’s just another odd church law not supported by scripture.

            Christians are as a rule a type of cult based off the worship of Jesus as a facet of God himself, or his son, as they believe. It is an odd cult that included some former Jews and others to take the Jewish Old Teastament and to add a New Testament about the followers of Jesus to the old Jewish scriptures.

          • jim_m

            Just keep digging. Mormons are not considered by the rest of Christianity to be Christian. This is primarily due to their refusal to acknowledge the existence of the Trinity and their claim that “as man is God once was. As God is, man may become.” This is pure heresy and renders them non-Christian regardless of what else you may think about them. I consider them to be a non-Christian religion and not a cult.

            However, the JW’s are. They are decidedly unorthodox and far from the mainstream of any historical Christianity. They believe a lot of crazy things such as

            They believe that all true Christian churches are of the devil.

            They believe Jesus is not God, but is the Archangel Michael – the first being created by God.

            They deny that God is a Trinity.

            They believe Jesus died on a stake, rather than a cross.

            They deny that Jesus rose bodily from the dead.

            They believe that only 144,000 Jehovah’s Witnesses will go to heaven. The rest will live forever in a paradise on Earth, never meeting the person who died for them – Jesus Christ.

            They believe that salvation is impossible outside of the Watchtower.

            They are not allowed to question the Watchtower leadership or teaching.

            They claim you need to read the Watchtower’s magazines and other material in order to understand the Bible correctly. If you don’t read the Watchtower’s books, you will “fall into darkness” – what they call reverting to normal Christianity.

            They have falsely predicted the end of the world five times.

            They have just changed a major Watchtower prediction that the end of the world would come before the generation of Witnesses born before 1914 died.

            Obviously, I could go on. It’s a cult. Deal with it. Denial of basic Christian doctrine, claim to special revelation, false prophecies, separating members from families and society to isolate them, shunning members who leave… These are all signs of a cult and things that JW’s participate in.

          • MartinLandauCalrissian

            Hey, Jim, is there a way we can set Disqus to put the “see more” tab right under everything Paul Hooson writes so that we don’t have to see any of it at all? 🙂

          • jim_m

            if only

          • If you don’t like what Paul says, then just don’t read what he says.

          • MartinLandauCalrissian

            Get a sense of humor, D.R.

          • Paul Hooson

            Hello Jim, I never said that I believe in the JW philosophy, but I attended a few JW services after a personal friend of mine who was a JW minister was killed in a terrible machine shop accident.

            Religion is a funny thing. Many things are very difficult to prove with it and mostly completely irrational and fantastic. It takes a real leap of faith to accept many of the concepts of religion as actual events, but it’s all fascinating. Some Jewish historians believe that the story of Jesus had it’s roots in the account of Yeishu, a controversial rabbi considered to be a sorcerer who was despised by many more orthodox rabbis who considered him to be evil by leading many Jews astray. He was put on trial and for forty days character witnesses were sought to defend his character, but after few could be found, he was stoned to death and his body put on display over Passover. Instead of 12 followers, he had just five followers. Other Jewish accounts claim that the body of what was popularized as Jesus was merely stolen by his followers, and the story of his followers only continued to take on fantastic proportions over time. It is not known whether these Jewish accounts are accurate history either, by early Christian historians made good attempts to quash these stories because they were so damaging to the story of Jesus that they both believed and promoted to followers.

            But, it is known that the Bible is filled with much information, some of it very good history, and some of it very confused, wrong or just plain fantastic. As one example, did early architects actually build the tall tower of Babel, but God confused the languages when they attempted to build a structure into the heavens? The fact of the matter is that many buildings today are probably far higher than that tower, and planes and spacecraft have ventured far above the clouds, never finding God living in those clouds. And there’s no evidence that all language actually originated in just one place, etc. Many of the stories in the Bible may be rich literature, but they present an absurd explanation that defies logic, science and fact.

            Religion often becomes a strange entity where persons believe what they will and are even willing to kill for those beliefs in some extreme cases, although the entire basis of what they believe may be irrational and in fact false.

            I find religion fascinating, and enjoy many of the sermons and inspirational stories that go along with it. And I like to support organizations like The St. Vincent DePaul Society, The Salvation Army and The Daughters Of Haddasa, and have long been friends of these organizations.

            Back to the first point, when some Protestant evangelists screwed up, they took a fall. This pope should be no different just because he’s a Catholic. His inept handling of so many serious problems in his religious organization simply brought down his church government. And that’s only fair. This church needs a better leader. Someone younger and a better manager able to better delegate responsibility and demand better accountability from his appointed managers. Something good should come from this church shakeup.

          • Hawk_TX

            A Christian is somebody who follows Christ teachings. As such members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons) are most definitely Christians. There are many teachings in the Bible that support the belief that men can become like our heavenly father. Here are a few.

            Deuteronomy 14:1
            Ye are the children of the Lord your God…..

            Psalms 82:6
            I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

            John 10;34
            Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

            Acts 17:29
            Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.

            Romans 8:17
            And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

            1 John 3:2
            Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

            Revelation 3:21
            To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

            Matthew 5:48
            Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

            I would also recommend reading this post from a Wizbang article from last year. In it dhrogers elaborates further referencing the Bible and records of early Christians. Or for more information or questions you could visit .

          • jim_m

            Sorry but that is just plain ignorant.

            Mormonism denies the Trinity. Maintains the God the Father has a physical body contrary to Christian teaching, Teaches that Christ is a created being, Denies original sin, teaches that faith does not save, but only works save, etc etc.

            I could go on at length, Add to the above my previous quote that mormons believe that God was once a man and that every man can one day be a god (that is to BE GOD, not be like God).

            Mormons can claim to follow Jesus Christ, but they do not follow the Christ of the Bible. They do not believe in anything similar to the historic Christian faith as practiced by protestants and Catholics. They do not believe in the same Christ or in the same God as defined by the historic Christian faith.

            I can call myself a US Marine, but claiming does not make me so. Mormons can call themselves Christians all day long, but that doesn’t make them Christians. The only people who think that Mormons are Christian are mormons and the ignorant people who don’t know the first thing about the Bible, Christianity or theology. Demanding that your ahistorical bs trumps reality isn’t terribly convincing.

          • Hawk_TX

            You call me ignorant of the Bible, but I have cited many passages from the Bible here.These passages state plainly that we are children of God not just creations of God. As such we have the potential to grow and be like him, as several of these passages command us to be. Including a passage were Jesus states ” Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?” (John 10;34), If Jesus Christ stating it is not enough for you to believe it is a Christian doctrine then I don’t know what could be. And all you have done is assert the infallibility of your beliefs.

            The fact is we are both Christians attempting to follow his teachings to the best of our abilities. We simply have a different understanding of what those teachings are.

          • jim_m

            John 10:34 refers to Psalm 82:6 “I said, ‘You are “gods”;
            you are all sons of the Most High.’

            So in context what Christ is saying is not what you claim He is saying. See the broader context of Psalm 82:

            5 “The ‘gods’ know nothing, they understand nothing.
            They walk about in darkness;
            all the foundations of the earth are shaken.

            6 “I said, ‘You are “gods”;
            you are all sons of the Most High.’
            7 But you will die like mere mortals;
            you will fall like every other ruler.”

            And here is the context for John

            31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

            33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

            34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’[d]? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside—

            Note the difference in the use of God vs gods. There is a distinction made here that we do not find in Mormon theology.

            I am no great student of the Bible, but I know enough to know that your citations are ignorant and it therefore comes as no surprise that you are incapable of recognizing what is Christian doctrine and what is not.

          • Hawk_TX

            Mormons believe that when God said ” This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”(Matthew 3:17), he actually meant that. And that when Jesus said that God was his father he actually meant that. And that when the Bible states “we are the offspring of God”( Acts 17:29) , that that actually means that we are his children. And that when the Bible says “And there was war in heaven” (Revelation 12:7), there actually was a war in heaven in which Lucifer was cast out. And finally that when the Bible says “heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ”(Romans 8:17), that that means we can become like him.

            These are all Christian doctrine that can be found in the Bible. Clearly your religion has simply been more creative in their interpretations.

          • jim_m

            There is the simple fact of what Christian doctrine has been for the last 2000 years. (technically ~1980 years) and that is the belief that Christ is not a created being, that God the Father is not a created being, that the Godhead exists as a trinity of Three co-equal ‘persons’ and that the cannon of scripture is closed. These are all things denied by the LDS.

            Once more. You can claim to be anything you like. Claim does not make it so. obama can claim to be a conservative, but he is not.

          • jim_m

            And if you have difficulty figuring out that these following doctrines are not Christian then I really cannot do much to help you.

            There are Three Gods: Father, Son, Holy Ghost.

            The Father (Heavenly Father) is an exalted “Man” who lived on an earth like us and progressed to godhood. He is married to “Heavenly Mother” and together they procreate spirit babies to be born into physical human bodies on earth.

            Jesus is the “spirit brother” of Lucifer and all mankind. He was created by a procreative act between Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother.

            Jesus and Lucifer each offered competing plans of salvation.
            When Jesus’ plan was chosen over Lucifer’s plan, 1/3 of God’s spirit children followed Lucifer in rebelling.

            Mankind had a pre-mortal, pre-existent life in a spirit world
            prior to being born into human bodies on earth. Those who fought with Jesus in the battle against Lucifer and the rebellious spirit-brothers were rewarded – those most valiant with white skin. (an ugly truth about Mormonism is its historic racism)

            Call Mormonism anything you like. Just don’t call it Christian. You might get away with it among the ignorant, but not with anyone who knows anything about theology.

          • Brucehenry

            When I was a little Catholic kid going to public school I first heard that “Catholics worship Mary, not Jesus” nonsense. It was boneheaded ignorance in 1962 — and it was already hundreds of years old then — and it’s boneheaded ignorance now.

            Not Catholic any more but that one still grates on my nerves.

    • RichFader

      Benedict is 85, almost 86. If he weren’t pope, he’d have been required to put in his resignation, and aged out of being eligible to vote in conclave, when he turned 80. He’s older than John Paul II was when he died. When a senior clergyman that age says he’s thought it over, prayed it over, searched his conscience and he doesn’t think he’s physically and mentally in condition to continue in office, and (at least physically) he looks like it, even the press tends not to second-guess him on that. They might second-guess him on everything else, but not that. This is a “teh stupid, it burns!” moment, even for you, Paul.

      • Heh.

        This is a “teh stupid, it burns!” moment, even for you, Paul.

        Around here we refer to those as days ending in “y.”

  • The_Queen_of_France

    Nonbelievers and Catholic-hating people in general have been calling us a
    “Church in trouble” since the Resurrection. We’re still here. Let
    them do their worst. We’ll *still* be here long after they’re dust.

  • stan25

    The whole left wing diatribe against the Catholic Church revolves around two things that are the special pet causes of the left. Abortion and homosexuality. In that order. The rest is all a huge smokescreen for their real crusade. That is the total destruction of the Church as we know it now.

    The stance of the Catholic Church on abortion is known worldwide and is reviled by the so-called progressives as being out of the mainstream. They think that the Church should change its stance and go along with the flow. We all know that is not going to happen anytime soon.

    As for homosexuality, the Church has preached for centuries that it is a mortal sin for men to be married to men and women to women. The early founders of the Church had a lot of experience with this during the last days of the Roman Empire. They saw what happened to a functioning society when the family structure dissolved.

  • I suspect that the Roman Catholic Church will survive whatever is said about it on American television. If Protestant Christians can survive criticism by non-Christians, then Catholic Christians can, too.

    • jim_m

      Indeed. Since the main growth in the RCC is found in Africa and South America, the US is nearly meaningless. I particularly enjoy the pompous pronouncements of American pundits who claim the NOW is the time for an American Pope. Not likely. Now may be time for an Asian, African or South American Pope, but the ship has sailed on a US Pope. Good thing too.

      • To me, anything pertaining to the Catholic Pope is an internal matter within the Roman Catholic Church. Nothing pertaining to the Catholic Pope pertains to Christians who are not Catholic.

  • SteveCrickmore075

    repeated allusions to scandals as ABC, CBS, and NBC reported on Benedict’s final days. no more so than the retiring Pope, in his final address: “There were moments of joy and light but also moments that were not easy … there were moments, as there were throughout the history of the Church, when the seas were rough and the wind blew against us and it seemed that the Lord was sleeping,” .

  • herddog505

    Anybody notice that lefties, who constantly lecture and hector about “tolerance” and “acceptance” and “understanding” and “multiculturalism” and “h8” are the first ones to disparage Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular?

    Tell you what, lefties: go make your little jokes about Mohammed. Oh, that would be “insensitive”, would it? You don’t want to disparage other cultures? You don’t want your head sawed off?


    • jim_m

      The bottom line is that if Christians murdered people who criticized them the left would be in love with Christianity.

  • Paul Hooson

    The top UK Roman Catholic church leader, Cardinal Keith O’Brien admitted to sexual misconduct today, after at least four priests claimed that the church leader made sexual advances on them. In one case, O’Brien had been drinking heavily, and then attempted a sexual advance on another priest. In another incident, he took advantage of a counseling session for a troubled priest, and tried to make a sexual advance.

    This cardinal is one of the men who would have decided the next pope or been considered for the post of pope himself. It’s another sign of a troubled church with more problems not resolved by simply the resignation of the pope.

    Unfortunately, when a fish rots, it rots from the head down.

    • jim_m

      Nice job conflating sexual advances on adult priest with child molestation.

      I’d call you a dishonest liberal but that is redundant.

      • If he’s ever been intellectually honest, I haven’t seen it.

      • Paul Hooson

        No, it’s a sign that more people need to be replaced in this organization’s leadership than just the pope. Getting drunk and putting sexual advances on a priest or taking advantage of young seminary students using his authority is hardly acts of the Holy Spirit.

        The cardinal was honest enough to be admit that he’s wrong. – Admitting that you’re wrong. – Now, there’s a concept a few should learn something about. I see a lot of apologists around here who seem to be downplaying the sins of this troubled organization.

        When the Apostle Paul wrote about the “Seven Churches”, wouldn’t this be one of the troubled one’s, and not really under good guidance of the Holy Spirit? How bad does some troubled organization need to actually be to get a consensus that’s it’s spiritually troubled around here? Where’s any sense of spiritual discernment that this organization is very spiritually troubled? What more do the leaders of a troubled organization have to do to prove that an organization needs spiritual renewal?

      • Paul Hooson

        I have two relatives who are Catholic nuns, and one relative who was an archbishop. None of them would do some of the awful things that some of these other church representatives have done. This organization needs to separate the “wheat from the tares” to spiritually renew this organization.