What is it about the Papal Eulogies?
True, today the world lost a pope, but it's always nice to know that when it comes to the faceless orthodoxy of major American newspaper op-ed authors, the old-time religion is alive and kicking. Just look at the New York Times:
The long, bitter fight over the unknowing Terri Schiavo was a stark contrast to the passing of this pontiff, whose own mind was keenly aware of the gradual failure of his body. The pope would certainly never have wanted his own end to be a lesson in the transcendent importance of allowing humans to choose their own manner of death. But to some of us, that was the exact message of his dignified departure.
"Some of us" obviously meaning "editorialists who just can't resist getting our licks in, no matter how nonsensical." Since when was "the transcendent importance of allowing humans to choose their own manner of death" the value of any major religion, much less Catholicism? Death is, if anything, the great despiser of choice, showing little care to any man's wishes as to his "manner of death." That's hardly a Catholic concept: ever since the days of Norns or Moire, man has known that Atropos is not a gentle mistress.
But hey, the New York Times will draw its own lesson, and that's not going to stop them from singin' that old time secularism, even if they could have had the grace to shut up.
Worse yet is the Washington Post:
He could be -- and was -- called conservative in matters of Catholic doctrine, in his determination to maintain such institutions as the male celibate clergy and in his strict adherence to the church's positions on birth control and abortion. He provoked debate and dissent within the church with his stands in these areas, as well as opposition from outside, including from these pages, for policies that affect the temporal realm, especially in matters of population control.
(emphasis added) In the obligatory "conservative" paragraph, the Post can only focus on one thing: sex and its consequences. H. L. Mencken once wrote that Puritanismwas "[t]he haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy." When did modern liberalism become the haunting fear that someone, somewhere might disapprove of some act of sex?
Comments
Posted by: Terrance | April 3, 2005 8:32 AM
Posted by: Tony the Pony | April 3, 2005 3:56 PM
Posted by: A. Rickey | April 3, 2005 4:02 PM
Posted by: martin | April 4, 2005 9:19 AM
Posted by: Fr. Bill | April 5, 2005 1:46 PM
Posted by: martin | April 6, 2005 8:09 AM