Time magazine's Jeff "The pope's a Scrooge" Israely is at it again, lecturing Benedict XVI on his "inflammatory rhetoric."
Israely joins CNN's Jack Cafferty, Washington Post/Newsweek's "On Faith", and PBS's Bonnie Erbe in the bash-Benedict choir's latest oratorio. His March 19 article evaluated the pontiff's recent comments on condoms and HIV/AIDS as "candor over P.R.", lamenting Benedict's word choice and seeming lack of concern about how liberal secular media outlets parse his statements (emphases mine):
Amidst the outrage and consternation lies the question: Why? If we already know the basic tenets of church teaching — not to mention the extent of the AIDS epidemic and disproportionate ignorance about condom use in Africa — why did the Pope say what he said, when and where he said it? What do this and other recent episodes tell us about how the modern papacy operates at that unique nexus where philosophy meets public relations? And why, nearly four years into his reign, does this hyper articulate and well-versed Pope continue to see his attempts at mass communication blow up in his face?
Story Continues Below Ad ↓First, to be clear, the Pope was responding to a reporter's question during the brief press conference that regularly takes place aboard his Alitalia jet just before take-off, on what have now been eleven trips abroad. But he could have hardly been taken by surprise, as the questions are submitted ahead of time. Benedict might have easily opted for a pat response along the lines of: "Church teaching is clear on contraception. We must instead focus on education, abstinence and caring for those already infected."
Instead, the Pope chose to favor the letter of his philosophy over a smooth pr ride. Again. As with the recent controversy about his lifting the ex-communication of four ultra-traditionalist bishops, including a Holocaust denier, Benedict plowed ahead with what he believes is the right thing to do even if it may bring a maelstrom of bad press.
In other words, Israely is confounded that the pope is unapologetic --you might say he doesn't "behave" like Israely would prefer -- and that he doesn't mince words about church teachings on sexual ethics. The Time writer goes on to insist that "rigid" Catholic doctrine runs counter to "reality" and risks making the Church irrelevant to modern life (emphases mine):
Benedict's comments on Tuesday are the clearest sign that little if anything will change, as the Pope continues his quest to challenge secular trends both inside and outside his church by adhering to — and openly pronouncing — rigid stands on sexual and moral matters.
Of course, his philosophy runs straight into reality. Catholic missionary groups are at the center of efforts to reduce the rate of HIV infection in Africa, which accounts for just over 12% of the world's population but has more than 60% of its AIDS cases. Speaking on French radio, European Parliament member Daniel Cohen-Bendit called the Pope's latest comments: "close to premeditated murder."
It is gospel in this information age that Benedict, for better or worse, should have learned by now: inflammatory rhetoric begets inflammatory rhetoric. What is less clear is whether this and the other recent firestorms he's sparked make the Pope more, or less, relevant to the citizens of the world — and members of his own flock.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
"And why, nearly four years
March 19, 2009 - 13:47 ET by HockeyKid"And why, nearly four years into his reign, does this hyper
articulate and well-versed Pope continue to see his attempts at mass
communication blow up in his face?"
Um, because of morons like you in the press? Just a guess.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
exactly
March 19, 2009 - 20:16 ET by lotrAnd one by one dropped the revellers in the blood-bedewed halls of their revel, and died each in the despairing posture of his fall. -- Edgar Allan Poe
Could be me, but I'm pretty
March 19, 2009 - 13:51 ET by CaligulaCould be me, but I'm pretty sure that the Pope really doesn't give a rat's rear-end what these people think, because.....HE'S THE POPE AND DOESN'T HAVE TOO!
Only they would think that they are remotely important enough to spark any attention from the Vatican. Which they can't. But God bless them for trying.
"Instead, the Pope chose to
March 19, 2009 - 14:10 ET by KC Mulville"Instead, the Pope chose to favor the letter of his philosophy over a smooth pr ride."
Well. The journalist's assumptions are:
"And why, nearly four years into his reign, does this hyper articulate and well-versed Pope continue to see his attempts at mass communication blow up in his face? "
precisely
March 19, 2009 - 20:23 ET by lotrAnd one by one dropped the revellers in the blood-bedewed halls of their revel, and died each in the despairing posture of his fall. -- Edgar Allan Poe
The MSM, duh!
March 19, 2009 - 15:23 ET by moderncommentaries83Perhaps it's because the members of the media have no journalistic integrity or the presence of mind to actually research Catholicism and understand its teachings? Rather, they intentionally misquote or agenda-ize everything the Pope says and does.
This is the same media that told us, in all seriousness, that the Pope wears green vestments to show solidarity with environmentalism. When, in reality, green is the liturgical color for Ordinary Time, worn a significant portion of the year by clergy at Mass, and signifies hope in eternal life.
Also, they have no clue that the Catholic Church does not operate according to popular culture, as this journalist clearly demonstrates:
Which, if these fools had brain one in their heads, would be a good thing. The Pope's job is to teach, adhere, and enforce the "letter of his philosophy" - henceforth known as Catholicism. That doctrine doesn't change because the MSM says it should. It never will, which they also recognize:
Boo hoo. Cry me a river, build a bridge, and get over it.
Nothing will change because the teachings of the Church are not created by mankind or subject to the whims of popular opinion. Once again, hack journalism proves that if the reporter had done his research, he'd know that the teachings of the Catholic faith have remained unchanged for two millenia. It may be clarified, perhaps, as modern culture comes up with new sins that cry out to Heavan for vengance, but we do not make up things as we go along.
And it always boils down to sex. Journalists never have quibbles or criticisms about the Rosary. They're always hacked off because the Catholic Church says your libido should not be your motivating force nor should you be defined by what you do with your genetalia. They reduce us to sex toys and the Catholic Church says we're so much more than that.
In my book, that's a pretty awesome - and counter-cultural - teaching.
And all of this would be rather comical, if it weren't so downright sickening.
You all DO know what this is building toward, right? Some action by the EU, or UN, or US condemning the Pope, and the Vatican, and attempting to quell the rights of Catholics in Europe and throughout the world. This dissent will not be tolerated in an age of "enlightenment"...funny thing is, for the past 40 years, people have claimed to be enlightened and free from the oppression of religion and I don't see condoms or an array of sexual proclivities or relative morality making people happy or enlightened. In fact, they're pretty darned miserable. And, on the other hand, the faithful, orthodox Catholics I know are content, happy, and fulfilled with their lives.
Could it be because the Truth of Catholicism always wins out?
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam
Your comment is beautifully
March 19, 2009 - 19:31 ET by EugeniaYour comment is beautifully stated, moderncommentaries."
"And why, nearly four years into his reign, does this hyper
articulate and well-versed Pope continue to see his attempts at mass
communication blow up in his face?"
Because this courageous pope doesn't know political-correct speak. He speaks truth. If what he says so-called "blows up," it's because radical relativists don't like what he's saying. The left would love him to speak perversities as truth, to say what's black is white and wrong is right, but you're not going to get it from this pope or any pope. Speaking truth is not up for change.