the liberal media versus John Paul II

One of the predictable responses to the death of the Pope is being played out in the Mainstream (don't call us liberal) media. As documented by the Media Research Center, ABC and NBC are essentially lobbying for a less "doctrinaire" Pope. Katie Couric was quoted as asking an American Cardinal "Polls have showed that 60% of American Catholics want priests to be allowed to marry, and 64% want women to be allowed to become priests. Can we expect that the new Pope will institute some of these reforms?" I don't watch, so I can't vouch for the quote, but it sure sounds plausible.

The New York Times obituary spoke of how "John Paul's extraordinary effort to cleanse his church's conscience ... and his steadfast resistance to changes in church teachings on birth control, priestly celibacy, the ordination of women and other issues were among the fundamental traits of his pontificate." Today's times features an opinion piece from Thomas Cahill which derides the pontificate of John Paul II as "almost the polar opposite of John XXIII, who dragged Catholicism to confront 20th-century realities after the regressive policies of Pius IX."

John Paul II's most lasting legacy to Catholicism will come from the episcopal appointments he made. In order to have been named a bishop, a priest must have been seen to be absolutely opposed to masturbation, premarital sex, birth control (including condoms used to prevent the spread of AIDS), abortion, divorce, homosexual relations, married priests, female priests and any hint of Marxism. It is nearly impossible to find men who subscribe wholeheartedly to this entire catalogue of certitudes; as a result the ranks of the episcopate are filled with mindless sycophants and intellectual incompetents. The good priests have been passed over; and not a few, in their growing frustration as the pontificate of John Paul II stretched on, left the priesthood to seek fulfillment elsewhere.

Again, the point is clear. The Catholic Church needs to change its position to remain relevant in the modern world. We know better. The liberal modern world is right, John Paul II was wrong, the Catholic Church is wrong, if it feels good, do it. Etc.

Thankfully, we have the one-man global content provider, the invaluable Mark Steyn, addressing this attitude.

The root of the Pope's thinking - that there are eternal truths no one can change even if one wanted to - is completely incomprehensible to the progressivist mindset.

Amen. There it is. The Church isn't a social club. It isn't a democracy.

"And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it."
Matt 16:18

The Pope, the head of the Roman Catholic Church, holds a position that was first held by Simon Peter, and bestowed upon him by Jesus Christ himself. He has no responsibility to the Today Show or the New York Times editorial board. His responsibilities are timeless rather than transient. The desires and wishes of a liberal society means that members of that society need to make choices, not that the Church has to change to match it.

Steyn, again:

Indeed, if you look at the New York Times's list of complaints against the Pope - "Among liberal Catholics, he was criticised for his strong opposition to abortion, homosexuality and contraception" - they all boil down to what he called sex as self-assertion.

Thoughtful atheists ought to be able to recognise that, whatever one's tastes in these areas, the Pope was on to something - that abortion et al, in separating the "two meanings" of sex and leaving us free to indulge in one while ignoring the other, have severed us almost entirely and possibly irreparably from traditional impulses, such as societal survival. John Paul II championed the "splendour of truth" not because he was rigid and inflexible, but because he understood the alternative was a dead end in every sense.

As always, he not only sees the big picture, he sees it clearly and expresses it clearly...