Anti-Pope protest in UK. Photo by Catholic Herald.
So we got a new pope today, Pope Francis, the first Jesuit and the first Latin American.
And that means a deluge -- a veritable tsunami -- of hate, vicious rumour, false claims, bigotry, hysteria, insanity -- nearly all of it revolving around the ever-popular themes of gay rights and women's reproductive rights, and the hypocrisy of an old institution that opposes these rights as a matter of ancient doctrine, yet is found itself to have clergy members who committed the crime of sexual assault of children.
We get all that, truly we do. But how many priests out of the millions of priests in the world -- what percent -- are caught in pedophilia or cover it up? It's not some huge percent. The Church combats this vigorously nowadays as do Catholic schools -- I know, I've raised my children in them. What is this really about for you? Isn't it really more about the fear that your own personal freedoms might be in jeopardy -- and your externalization of this on to an easy target? But why?
On Twitter, when one of the faithful tweeted the news about the post and made little stick figures with their arms upraised, rejoicing, some twit claimed this was six little boys with their buttocks spread for pedophiles.
Sick.
That's how gross it gets -- that's how constantly sick, gross, and obsessed it gets, and never stops.
I joked that Google's servers probably fell over today with frantic searches of the terms "Jorge Bergoglio" and "pedophilia".
I had to endure Facebook friends instantly typing that they hoped the new Pope would be better to gays.
But why? It's not a position of the Catholic Church to validate homosexuality and bless LGBT marriage.
That may not square with the views of many people, particularly in the United States, and my personal views, but it's the Church's position. Why the zeal to reform it when it does not affect you?
As I wrote very bluntly to one of the many zealots on this score sounding off:
I assure you that the new Pope, just like the old Pope, will not get in the way of any of your orgasms or uses of birth control, Draxtor -- or indeed, anyone else's. Rest assured. He has no army.
And that's just it. Whenever someone starts in about gays and the Catholic Church, I ask them if they personally had any Catholic official stop them from being as gay as they wished. They never can come up with any real stories. I ask anyone if they couldn't buy or use birth control as they wished. They never come up with any real stories. Then...what's this really all about?
As for pedophilia, when are we going to stop the hysteria on this? Yes, it's a real issue -- but it's a real issue being prosecuted, and first and foremost, addressed by very active Catholic parishioners themselves. Why do *you* need this?
Here's how I answered this hysteria on the Daily Beast from Geoffrey Robertson, a lawyer with a political axe to grind -- he called for declaring 100,000 cases of pedophilia to be a "mass crime against humanity". I urged that all cases be prosecuted, most certainly. But who is he to demand that the church change the age for the administration of the sacraments to 13 or older, simply because of his theory that fear and reverance cause young children to be molested?!
There may not be that many cases; there may be more. But seriously, guys? A mass crime against humanity, when it is not a policy and not endorsed and in fact combatted? If the superiors moved the offending priests around and didn't help prosecute them -- and we know that's what they did -- then sure, that's wrong and that's to be vigorously fought. But mass crime against humanity? And you never show up -- ever -- to talk about hanging of gays in Iran or killing of women who go to school in Afghanistan. That's just the problem. There are real mass crimes against humanity in the world, and it is not the Catholic Church that perpetrates them. You know that in your heart. Why the obsession about Catholicism? Because you can?
I called for Pope Benedict to resign when I heard that he suppressed information about pedophiles and prevented prosecution. Not many Catholics did that. But later I was told that Christopher Hitchens, whose articles on this I believed, were not correct about this. I will have to study up on this, but I still think that the appearance of impropriety still matters even if there was not any criminal act. In that thread, you can see one of the faithful taking the position that "Popes don't resign". Well, they do. Benedict did, in the end. He faced not only infirmity and the scandals of pedophile cases but the financial scandals of the Vatican as well. The institution is coping with it and has now elected a new Pope. It isn't about you -- if you aren't Catholic and don't wish to remain Catholic -- something you can opt out of, like other major religions who keep you in thrall -- with the help of government goons.
I wrote a complaint recently to the New York Times about an oped piece urging Catholics to give up the Church itself for Lent. I just thought it was one too many straws of hate and bigotry and ridicule that the Time has endlessly indulged -- especially with Frank Bruni and Maureen Dowd. They would never run a piece like that about Judaism or Islam -- it's just not on. Catholicism has to serve as the whipping boy for every modern "progressive's" need to reform -- or eradicate! -- religion because, well, it can. The costs for bashing it aren't as great. You won't face an angry mob ready to burn down your house. Happy?
The zeal to reform the Catholic Church by those who aren't in it, or have lapsed from it, always puzzles me. Why the obsession? Frank Bruni, who is openly gay, is particularly notorious for putting out column after column fretting about Catholic policies. Join the Episcopalians, Frank! The new Pope is not about your penis! You are free! Why not appreciate that you have that freedom, unlike people who live under theocratic states, and appreciate that the new pope is focused on helping the poor, and call it a day?
No, it's not about silencing criticism of the Church, or telling people they can't have freedom of expression critical of the Church -- which of course, they don't need my permission to enjoy in vast quantities. Not when the din, the roar, the screeching, the fury, the tsunami of social media are all so amplified and pervasive against Catholics and the Catholic clergy. No, it's about something else at this point: conceding that Catholics who support their church, critically or not, have a right to do so, and you can find another church or group or no group at all if you are not happy with it. They will either opt out of their church and move to other religious institutions that are more modern on social issues -- or they won't, for various spiritual and private reasons. It was supposed to be about choice always, remember? Your pro-abortion stances? Remember how Clinton put it, "Safe, legal, and rare?" Now you've dumped that stance, and converted it to "health".
I got into a debate with an ardent Planned Parenthood pro-abortion rights woman the other day who was hysterically flogging the "war on women" narrative and producing as evidence a study that said...about 100 women who waited until late in the third semester and couldn't then get legal abortions were stuck having kids and most regretted it. Well, that's unfortunate, but...why did they wait? Did their birth control fail or did they not use it? Did they think they could hold on to a man this way? And they're a small sample. Nine out of ten abortions take place in the first semester -- the drop-off is sharp then to the second, and a very small minority are in the cutting off point of 24 weeks. So why are we having this hysterical outrage? What would you talk about if you didn't have these tiny edge cases to flog? The huge cost of Obamacare, maybe?
Then there's always the person who says, but there was that rape victim who couldn't get treatment at a Catholic hospital, or couldn't get a needed partial-birth abortion during a miscarriage. Well, just 11 percent of the hospitals in America are Catholic-operated. Most of the time, you have a choice. In those very, very few -- one? two? three? -- cases you've read about from the screaming leftist media, was there really no choice? Really? And would it really be a widespread problem given that the cases are rare in the first place, and the number of Catholic hospitals in fact dwindling? (The one in my neighbourhood was closed, for example).
Oh, and now you're going to say the Pope is responsible for AIDS in Africa, having been thwarted from moving me with your hysteria about the "war on women". But...there are under 10 percent of Africans in the Catholic Church. Even those who are Catholic don't follow the Pope on the question of birth control. You're going to tell me with a straight face that non-Catholics, and people who are no different than Catholics in America in terms of using birth control if they can access it, are scared into not using condoms and get AIDS *because of the Pope*? That ordinary Africans who aren't Catholics and maybe not even religious at all are scared of...the Pope?
That's just insane. The real problem is African men who feel it diminishes their manhood to use trojans, and feel women aren't spontaneous if they use birth control -- and some of them who still believe that having sex with virgins or underage girls will cure them of AIDS. Is that the Pope's problem?! If the Catholics don't offer you birth control, other US-funded programs under Obama in Africa *do* -- not to mention many other programs from private charities, other countries, and the UN. What is this really about? It's about hate and hysteria. The Church is not going to change their views on this. They are going to continue to help people in Africa. They are not what prevents Africans from getting and using condoms. Next.
If you fail on the sex front -- and really, the new Pope is not about your personal penis and your personal vagina and you remain absolutely free from interference in their use, I assure you -- then perhaps you can dig up something on the political front? Argentina was the site of a bloody war against communists and socialists in the 1980s, known as the "Dirty War" that defined for many people their understanding of human rights, justice, and the complicity of the US in human rights abuses abroad.
The New York Times worked furiously to dig up some dirt on the new pope in that regard, and waved the "Dirty War" flag around -- as many did, but in fact the cardinal was not found to have done any wrong-doing. The human rights movement is strong in Argentina. If they had a case, they would make it. That doesn't stop legions of Anonymous -- who else -- from retweeting the claim -- false -- that this Pope is responsible for kidnapping two Jesuits. WikiLeaks re-upped their release of all cables on this Pope -- he was a runner-up in previous elections. Guess what -- the cables don't show any wrongdoing.
Naturally, the fact that this pope is an anti-communist and opposes liberation theology is going to be mined for all it's worth. Keep mining! It will not affect the ability of anyone to ascribe to communism or liberation theology if they wish. Politics in Argentina are fairly free and I think they've got it covered. Meanwhile, what about women who get shot and killed in Afghanistan for administering vaccinations to children?
I expect endless raging and ranting about the Pope now, until everyone moves on to the next thing -- maybe the Kardashians will get pregnant or married or something.
What I didn't expect was this nasty exchange with Katrina Vanden Heuvel, who I know socially, with a high degree of venom and even craziness. What spawns this in people? Being told the truth? Getting a push-back on their closely-held narratives like "the war on women"?
Read it, if you want to see why the left, or at least more immediately the Nation, is doomed.
Meanwhile, it's interesting that the new Secretary of State, John Kerry, had this to say:
The United States offers our heartfelt congratulations to His Holiness Pope Francis, who will lead and guide the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics and serve as a symbol of faith and hope to all. For Teresa and me, our Catholic faith is a source of strength and comfort every day, from Sunday to Sunday, in moments of difficulty and moments of joy, and an inspiration to act on issues of social justice and global responsibility. Teresa and I will keep the Holy Father in our prayers as he begins a new era for our Church. On this momentous day, the United States renews our commitment to working closely with the Holy See to advance our shared belief in peace and humanity. We offer the Holy Father our warmest wishes of success in advancing peace, freedom, and human dignity throughout the world.
That's the position supported by Obama, whom I didn't vote for, by a new Secretary of State, about whom I've been critical of (on Magnitsky). I was surprised to see him reference his own faith and it even felt inappropriate to me, but that's how he did it. He engineered it to fit in with Obama's secular socialist agenda, "an inspiration to act on issues of social justice and global responsibility".
But that's okay. The Catholic faith is that, for many people, including me. And it does have 1.2 billion adherents, and some 20 percent of the population in the United States. Why can't that be respected? Take what you will from it, and leave the rest alone. Kerry did this diplomatically and respectfully. The State Department has an elaborate program in defense of LGBT rights. They didn't feel they needed to flog it in the message to the Pope. The US now opposes the Vatican at the UN on these issues. But they still could feature working together on some humanitarian causes.
No, it is not about your sexual organs. They are intact and untouched. The Pople doesn't have an army. What he has is an ancient doctrine of dignity that does not suit modernity.
Recent Comments