24 November, 2010

Deflating the NYT Condom Scoop - George Weigel - National Review Online

Deflating the NYT Condom Scoop - George Weigel - National Review Online

15 comments:

  1. sensational falsehoods always sell more papers than the Truth and all we can do is instruct when the opportunity arises

    ReplyDelete
  2. Another one on the "media is out to get us catholics" band wagon. This whole ploy was created by church leaders as a tactic to obscure the facts reported by the media.
    It actualy has the inadvertent (or not) effect of giving rise to division, hate, fear , anxiety and chaos. It is an attitude that in any time and much more so in a time of deep spiritual turmoil among very many catholics, provokes conflict and strife.
    It is a very sorry indication that the church is reacting to a ligitimate fear of collapse. And just as human beings often do in a time of panic, they do the oppossite of what should be done.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for posting that Tim.
    I did a double take when CBC blasted the headlines, "Pope approves condom use in some cases to fight AIDS". But having worked in the mainstream media for years and knowing their track record of theological ignorance, I suspected another media hack job. Weigel did an awesome job correcting the situation.
    Hope your feeling better Tim. You have my prayers.

    Cheers
    Paul

    ReplyDelete
  4. The catholic church is the least credible of any teacher in the world as to what is morraly right or wrong with rgard to human sexuality.
    Paul, if have worked in mainstream media for years, then according to your own terms, your theological ignorance leads me to suspect that your opinion on this matter is nothing more than another hacky one.
    All the rhetoric in the world will not redeem justify or excuse the predators (past, present and future) of sexual violence against innocent children. Preditors are those who have sexualy molested and tortured their victims and equally evil are the preditors who have and continue to cover up and enable the terrible violence over and over.
    It isn't "the media" who are the enemy of the church as they claim it is.It is - democracy - the worlds increasing desire to demand respect for human rights, dignity and equality - and indeed freedom of the press who have become the enemy.Their is an ever increasing collective determination in the world to penetrate walls behind which oppression and oppressor lay hidden and in silence. I agree that this new attitude is no freind of those wish to remain hidden behind the walls of the church or of any ideology. But their is no doubt that this new collective attitude has not been awakened by any human being. It is a sure sign that Jesus has not lost HIS influence on mankind.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Larry

    Stick to the script. Weigel is talking about how the media has twisted the popes reference to condoms, as they so often do with many statements he has made. Are you saying they haven't got his comments wrong and have presented them correctly and in the context he was speaking or do your really not give a crap and would like to use the opportunity to regurgitate the usual anti-catholic pap?

    Cheers
    Paul

    ReplyDelete
  6. I just registered for The New York Times and looked back at what it said on November 21st, which is what Weigel was referring to. Weigel's commentary is confusing because he says the New York Times is wrong because the Pope did not say he approved the use of condoms in his book. But the New York Times does not say it got the information from the Pope's book. It says the following:

    "ROME — Pope Benedict XVI has said that condom use can be justified in some cases to help stop the spread of AIDS, the Vatican’s first exception to a long-held policy banning contraceptives. The pope made the statement in interviews on a host of contentious issues with a German journalist, part of an unusual effort to address some of the harshest criticisms of his turbulent papacy.
    The pope’s statement on condoms was extremely limited: he did not approve their use or suggest that the Roman Catholic Church was beginning to back away from its prohibition of birth control. In fact, the one example he cited as a possibly appropriate use was by male prostitutes. Unquote

    From this, it is hard to see how Weigel's criticism of the New York Times is justified. Maybe somebody could explain what the New York Times said that does not accurately reflect what the Pope reportedly said in interviews.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/world/europe/21pope.html?scp=9&sq=November%2021,%202010&st=cse

    ReplyDelete
  7. Paul

    My response addresses "the script" directly,frankly, profoundly and honestly.You don't get to be the one who stipulates the definition of "sticking to the script." Feelings of authority linger probably from the media days Paul.
    If you wish to have any kind of meaningful dialogue at all, you will need to set your thought process a little deeper and a tad less subjective perhaps than you are accustomed to.
    I commend you for your courage to voice your stance in regard to the perceived " vomit " above. I challenge you to face the same within.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm pretty sure that the Pope wrote in his new book that there are situations where a person is not only allowed to use a condom but obligated by good conscience to do so. He also intimated that this may only be a first step and that he may have more pronouncements on this subject in the future.

    Weigal is simply paw licking and looking away like any abashed feline.

    Without reading too much into this and realizing that this allowance in no way condons contraception, it is different than anything any Pope has said, Cardinal or bishop has parroted, since Paul VI put the quash on half a century ago. It is worthy of note.

    ReplyDelete
  9. A fact many journalists seem to be ignoring or are ignorant of is that the church does not make pronouncements of church teaching in casual interviews between the pope and a journalist. No "pronouncement" was made here.
    The context that the statement was not understood or worse, twisted to create a sensational piece of "gotcha" journalism. Wiegel's article explained it properly including the parts of the interview leading up to the statement.
    In fairness the vatican has its own newspaper to blame for much of the confusion sown here. Many liberal catholics will grab this bit of bad journalism and run with it but the churches teaching remains the same.

    Cheers
    Paul

    ReplyDelete
  10. It may be the Pope never meant to say that stuff about the condoms the way it was reported.

    Fr. Tim said yes...that some nuns were given special papal permission to protect themselves by using artificial birth control because of the high risk of being raped in those chaotic areas.

    It still a small door opening to using artificial birth control.

    Don't tell me that in no way this condones using artificial birth control because these are special cases...Catholic folks will NOT see this that way, especially the YOUNG.

    They will see the Church (in true bigotry colors) is protecting their own people..the nuns. Like the Catholic Church protects their other special clergy..the immoral priests who do criminal acts against the innocent.

    People know the Catholic Church cover up many of those crimes perpetrated by their molester pedophile priests against children and vulnerable youth all over the world.

    So the nuns are using birth control with permission.
    Why would anyone be surprise if this present Pontiff gives permission to use condoms for special folks as he sees fit. It's not that unbelievable.

    I couldn't care less who uses birth control.

    I DO care about the clergy abuse VICTIMS.

    Impunity means "exemption from punishment or loss or escape from fines". In the international law of human rights, it refers to the failure to bring perpetrators of human rights violations to justice and, as such, itself constitutes a denial of the victims' right to justice and redress.

    It does sound like the Catholic Church when it comes to issues concerning clergy abuse victims.

    Will Pope Benedict XVI be known as the Pontiff with his entourage of troubling pedophile priests?

    Stay tuned next week for another exciting & enlightening episode of:

    "The Catholic Church & their Restless Followers"

    ReplyDelete
  11. Lina: Normally I'm with you in these matters, but if you're trying to say that the Church 'favored' these nuns by allowing them to work where their very lives and chastity would be daily menaced... you have gone over the edge. What evil spot are you beginning from when you insult those women (of whom you are not worthy to judge) whose most menial of musing contains more authenticity and sanctity than anything either you or I have ever posted here or elsewhere?

    It's time to talk to your husband again and dial back the 'internet' time.

    Fr. Tim

    ReplyDelete
  12. Fr. Tim, please check my post that I replied to you about the nuns on "Open Forum".
    (30 November, 2010) It is the last post there so far.

    My quote: "I do not have any problem with the nuns you spoke of Fr. Tim."

    As for you saying to me:

    "if you're trying to say that the Church 'favored' these nuns by allowing them to work where their very lives and chastity would be daily menaced... you have gone over the edge. What evil spot are you beginning from when you insult those women (of whom you are not worthy to judge) whose most menial of musing contains more authenticity and sanctity than anything either you or I have ever posted here or elsewhere?"

    You are mistaking Fr. Moyle, that was not what I was trying to say. That was YOU trying to say that about me. Shame on you Fr. Moyle, for falsely accusing me.

    As for that low blow comment of yours about my husband...you should really loosen that collar around your neck and lighten up.

    If you want me to stay away from your blog just say so. I will delete your blog site from my bookmark list.

    I know we may not agree on everything.

    Fr. Tim, are you going to ignore me or deal this situation were in like an adult?

    Good night

    ReplyDelete
  13. Lina,

    I urge you to watch the video "Testimony of a Former Catholic Priest". Richard Bennett was a very devout Irish RC priest. He tells how God revealed through the Bible certain basic truths, and how this affected him in his work as a priest. He tells of the conflicts with his superiors and others within the RC church as a result of him beginning to preach within the RCC what he believed the Bible said. This is his story of how the Lord gradually converted him and brought him to the knowledge of the truth. It is the story of his painful personal struggles as he discovered the truth of the Bible while he worked within the Catholic church, but ultimately how God brought him to Christ. It is very interesting to hear him tell of his experiences.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvID3lRyYIc

    ReplyDelete
  14. Small Town Guy,

    Thank you for that link.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Paul,

    Did you read the actual New York Times article. It does not appear to twist anythng. It simply reported what the Pope reportedly said in some interview.

    One would think some are trying to create the impression that the New York Times is twisting what the Pope said when it simply reported the facts. Could be a case of paranoia. It is the media's job to report what officials say regardless whether it has been proclaimed as official dogma or not.

    The media does not have to act as a spokesman for any institution and only report what the institution wishes it to report. Politicians often run into this same situation and wish the media would only report what they wish them to report, but that is not how the media works. So this should come as no suprise that the media reported what they did.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/world/europe/21pope.html?scp=9&sq=November%2021,%202010&st=cse

    ReplyDelete

Followers of this blog:

Blog Archive

Google Analytics