VOA Focuses on ‘Ordained’ Catholic Women Before Papal Visit

Photo of Matthew Balan.
By Matthew Balan | April 11, 2008 - 16:18 ET

Pope Benedict XVI hasn’t even arrived in the United States, and mainstream media outlets are featuring feminist Catholic dissenters in their reporting of the upcoming papal visit. In one such example, the Voice of America, the "international broadcasting service funded by the U.S. government," decided to cover a former Catholic nun who has been "ordained" as a priest. As the report by Jeff Swicord stated, "Bridget Mary Meehan is one of 24 Roman Catholic women in the United States conducting mass [sic] in defiance of church doctrine... In July 2006, a woman bishop not recognized by the Vatican ordained Meehan with seven other women."

Swicord also featured in his report Father Arne Panula, "a member of Opus Dei, a conservative Catholic organization." On the one hand, Swicord and the Voice of America identify Father Panula as being part of a "conservative Catholic organization," but doesn’t identify Meehan and the "Roman Catholic Womenpriests" as not only supporting the ordination of women, but also active homosexuality and contraception.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Meehan is part of a organization calling itself "Roman Catholic Womenpriests" [one word]. In 2002, seven Catholic women were "ordained" by a dissident Catholic priest who himself was "ordained" a bishop by a now-deceased former Catholic bishop excommunicated by Pope Pius XII in 1945.

Swicord juxtaposed his quotes of Meehan with Father Panula. In doing so, the VOA reporter made some gross spelling and terminological errors. First, Swicord, in explaining Fr. Panula’s position on why the Catholic Church doesn’t ordain women, stated that "it was a man, Jesus who stood at the alter [sic], broke bread, and said, ‘This is my body,’ a ritual that priests recreate during mass [sic]."

In the two paragraphs that follow, as Thomas Peters of the blog American Papist pointed out, Swicord garbled Latin terminology, first in quoting Fr. Panula and then quoting Meehan. "'The church teaches that he [the priest] does this in what is called insomnia nomini Christa, that he does this in the name and the person of Jesus,' says Panula.... Meehan disagrees. ‘A priest is suppose to be in personi Christa,’ she says." In the video version of the report, the Latin term that Panula used was in persona et nomini Christi, "in the name and person of Christ." Meehan used a shorter version of this term, in persona Christi, "in the person of Christ." But this was transcribed as insomnia nomini Christa and in personi Christa in the web/text version of the report.

The above is only one example of the mainstream media’s poor reporting on religious issues in general, and its promotion of dissenters in its reporting of the Catholic Church. On Wednesday, Father John Trigilio of The Black Biretta blog predicted that "the mainstream liberal media will be bombarding the airwaves, internet and blogosphere with the rantings and ravings of the heterodox spin doctors and dissident pundits once B16 [Benedict XVI] lands on US soil." This is a prediction that can only be destined to come true.

Graphic via VOANews.com

—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

What's My Line

Makes perfect sense.  A woman pretending to be Catholic Priest is reported on by a man pretending to be a religion journalist.

Ouch, nice.  LOL  The

Ouch, nice.  LOL 

The Avatar

Ouch, nice.  LOL  The

Ouch, nice.  LOL 

The Avatar

Why is it that every time a

Why is it that every time a Papal visit occurs, the focus of the media has to be on the dissenting Catholics, the ones who rebel against Church doctrine and Canon Law?

Widow of opportuntiy

Your question raises a good point, Motherbelt. The Catholic haters see a window of opportunity with the Pope's visit.

NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"

That's easy, MB. And you

That's easy, MB. And you know the answer already.

It's because the Church is about tradition, values, and ritual. It's not about to change it's doctrine to accomodate whatever "modern, free-thinking" liberals think it should be.

Therefore, it is up to the liberal media to "enlighten" the RCC... or tear it down, whichever works. But NEITHER has worked.

And it drives them bonkers.

The MSM will never wise up

So she was "ordained" by a bishop whose authority is not recognized by the vatican, who in turn was "ordained" by a bishop ex-communicated in 1945; why would anyone think that her priest status is worth anything more than a warm bucket of hamster vomit? Being ordained by the dishwasher at Denny's would be about as valid.

 

"Being ordained by the

"Being ordained by the dishwasher at Denny's would be about as valid."

Maybe more valid. I mean, he is a real dishwasher, right?

;^) 

Doesn't it take 3 bishops

Doesn't it take 3 bishops to ordain a bishop under canon law? Dishwashers at Deny's or excommunicated or not.

It's been a long time since I looked at canon rules. But it's my understanding that that was one of the problems in ending the schism between the Roman Catholic Church and the Anglican church. When Henry broke away he took only one bishop with him. 

"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT

You can have 100 Bishops

Sacraments require certain matter in order to be
valid. The Eucharist requires bread and wine, Baptism requires water,
Marriage requires a man and a woman and Holy Orders REQUIRES an man. These requirements cannot be changed, not
even by the Pope. This is a small matter
that VOA and the press cannot seem to understand.

Where are the libs . . .

screaming about the separation of Church and State?  VOA is an arm of the government, after all.

 

(I know it's a rhetorical question.)