Saturday, August 27, 2011

Archbishop Chaput notes "ferocious public smears and legal threats" against Christians

CNS on Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput's speech at Catholic World Youth Day in Madrid:


Archbishop: New York Times, Newsweek, CNN, MSNBC Not ‘Trustworthy’ on Religion
Friday, August 19, 2011 
By Michael W. Chapman
(CNSNews.com) – The news outlets CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, and MSNBC do not “provide trustworthy information about religious faith,” said Philadelphia’s incoming Archbishop, Charles Chaput, at the Catholic World Youth Day ongoing this week in Madrid, Spain.

Chaput, the former Archbishop of Denver, made his remarks in an address on religious freedom to a group of more than 10,000 young pilgrims in Madrid on Wednesday. As initially reported in First Things, Chaput told the audience that, “In the United States, our battles over abortion, family life, same-sex ‘marriage,’ and other sensitive issues have led to ferocious public smears and legal threats not only against Catholics, but also against Mormons, evangelicals, and other religious believers.”

“And with relatively few exceptions,” he said, “the mass media tend to cover these disputed issues with a combination of ignorance, laziness, and bias against traditional Christian belief.”
"...ignorance, laziness, and bias..." The Archbishop left out raw hate. He understates the anti-Christian malice of the media.
The Archbishop continued: “We make a very serious mistake if we rely on media like the New York Times, Newsweek, CNN, or MSNBC for reliable news about religion. These news media simply don’t provide trustworthy information about religious faith -- and sometimes they can’t provide it, either because of limited resources or because of their own editorial prejudices.”

“These are secular operations focused on making a profit,” he said. “They have very little sympathy for the Catholic faith, and quite a lot of aggressive skepticism toward any religious community that claims to preach and teach God’s truth.”
Christianity has always been a bulwark against secular power. The mainstream media today identifies itself with that power, and hates the Church with remarkable passion.
Archbishop Chaput noted that the media gave a lot of coverage to the so-called “Arab Spring,” involving civil unrest in Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries. “But very little of that coverage has mentioned that the turmoil in Muslim countries has also created a very dangerous situation for Christians and other religious minorities across North Africa and the Middle East,” he said. “In Egypt, angry mobs have attacked Christian churches and monasteries, burning them to the ground and murdering the people inside.”
The media silence on the attacks on Christians in dar-al-Islam has been deafening.

In addition, he said there has been widespread anti-Christian violence in Iraq, Syria, and Tunisia, but little news coverage of this in the U.S. media, adding that it is illegal to wear a crucifix or own a Bible in Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, said the Archbishop, in Pakistan, “Christians face frequent discrimination, slander, beatings and even murder.”
For the media, anti-Christian bigotry doesn't count as bigotry. There is an incessant bleating about anti-Muslim discrimination in the U.S., but virtual silence about the pervasive and violent anti-Christian (and anti-Semitic)  policies in Muslim countries.
Archbishop Chaput also warned that it is dangerous for democracy to force religion out of the public square.
“Forcing religious faith out of a nation’s public square and out of a country’s public debates does not serve democracy,” said the Archbishop. “It doesn’t serve real tolerance or pluralism. What it does do is impose a kind of unofficial state atheism. To put it another way, if we ban Christian Churches or other religious communities from taking an active role in our nation’s civic life, we’re really just enforcing a new kind of state-sponsored intolerance -- a religion without God.”
Atheists worship state power, and a prerequisite for the rise of state power is the destruction of the Church. Atheists invariably devolve into totalitarians when atheism becomes the ruling ideology. History demonstrates-- from the French Revolution to the Bolsheviks to Mao to Pol Pot to Kim Jung Il-- there are no exceptions.

12 comments:

  1. So let me get this straight.

    In the Middle East, the struggle against authoritarian governments has unleashed populist religious majorities to persecute religious minorities and force their religious views on the population, and that’s bad.

    Meanwhile, in the United States, there is a conspiracy of government and media to suppress populist religious majority, hindering their ability to force their religious views on people that don‘t share their faith, and that’s bad.

    What an incredible double standard.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous,

    (Never comment on an iPad when tired, too many typos)

    Are you surprised at Michael's inconsistency?

    In Australia, there's a lot of reporting of religious intolerance in Muslim countries, such as Pakistan's odious anti-blasphemy laws.

    Archbishop Chaput is probably annoyed that the American mass media are biased enough towards his side of the debate.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anon,
    Once again you seem to leap off a ledge of paralogia, oblivious to the subject of the post.
    Maybe decaf time?

    You state:
    "..in the United States, there is a conspiracy of government and media to suppress populist religious majority, hindering their ability to force their religious views on people that don‘t share their faith..."
    First you suggest there is a government and media conspiracy to suppress religion.
    This is not Egnor's suggestion - so either:
    A. YOUR idea or
    B. STRAW MAN
    I'll argue A, while suspecting B.
    Benefit of the doubt and all.
    So as to A: I disagree. I think there is no conscious conspiracy amongst politicians and media to push monistic materialism. Like a resurgent IBS, this runny ideology simply purges itself upon society on occasion.
    The conspiracy (YOUR term), if there is such, is within the pretentious and ambitious academic chattering classes. They in turn could be described as tools (in every sense) for more pragmatic types. These other folks may be well placed in political, economic, or even military and religious circles. They would be those who seek to replace what has been suppressed with a more favourable (to them) aparatus. A new religion, a religion of the state etc.
    A brave new world. Their own utopia.
    But that is all IF there is an actual conspiracy of minds.
    Secondly you suggest the role of the US federal government is one of mob control. That it does and should repress the majority of people due to membership in religious groups (inside the nation), so that folks who do not share 'views' are not somehow upset of feel somehow as if they are in a minority (they are!).
    That is a very bleak view of US Federalism, and of nationhood altogether.
    I have never even heard Blue Québécoise slam the US feds so hard. Ouch! I suspect you're being a little hard on the US public. Perhaps even a little arrogant?
    I don't see them as anything near as pushy or ignorant as the mob you seem to imagine.
    Most Yanks seem well enough educated and of the 'live and let live' . 'hail fellow, well met' variety. I'll admit the urbanites seem a little insulated, rather like modern Euros. The whole 'centre of the universe is _____ (insert city)' and 'this is the 21st century!' bit...you know. But for the most part I would say Americans rank amongst the people I am MOST happy to encounter on my travels, and the USA definitely in my top five places to live/be.
    Double standards? Big deal. They exist.
    But what standard are you saying is being violated? A democracy that ignores/oppresses the voting majority is somehow the same as a military dictatorship/theocracy that oppresses MINORITIES with lethal force?
    No double standard apparent.
    Rather, I see a complex comparison that was completely out of range for an overly simplistic 'view'.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Bach,
    you wrote:
    "Are you surprised at Michael's inconsistency?"
    You buy into that childish nonsense? WOW!

    Then,
    "In Australia, there's a lot of reporting of religious intolerance in Muslim countries, such as Pakistan's odious anti-blasphemy laws."

    We also do in Canada. Quite a bit of coverage of the horrors in Africa, the Middle East, The Sub Continent, Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia etc. We have had an influx of Assyrian, Chaldean, and Coptic Christian refugees over the last few years. Those folks combined with a large second generation Indian group have made for a very loud anti-Islamist lobby that is not so easily dismissed as 'racist' or 'right wing' or 'Islamophobic'.

    You posit:
    "Archbishop Chaput is probably annoyed that the American mass media are biased enough towards his side of the debate."
    I think he states his own motives rather well. Besides, who is debating the correctness of killing innocents because of their faith? There is no debate. He makes an observation.
    Would he like more media sympathy for this cause? I should hope so! He is a Bishop.
    I should hope we should all like to see this side of the 'Spring' exposed for what it is before it metathesizes.

    ReplyDelete
  6. metastasizes **
    Damn spell check/tablet :P

    ReplyDelete
  7. “Secondly you suggest the role of the US federal government is one of mob control. That it does and should repress the majority of people due to membership in religious groups”

    Yea, and I'm the one guilty of straw man arguments? I do believe it was Dr. Egnor that suggested the grand atheist totalitarian campaign to destroy the church. Think Man!

    ReplyDelete
  8. You have heard that it was said, "Love your neighbor and hate your enemy." But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
    Matthew 5:43-48


    I don't know why but I somehow welcome the hate of the new militant atheists!

    This life is short, but eternity is for very long...

    ReplyDelete
  9. I will add that I leave it to my Father in heaven to sort things, and people, out.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anon,
    YES it is YOUR straw man.
    **Readers may want to skim Dr Egnor's post again at this point**.
    Dr Egnor is relating and opining on a statement made a by a Bishop about recent excesses against the Christian community and the apparent lack of interest in that by a profit (prophet?) driven media in a culture of apathy and gross materialism.
    You use the words conspiracy.
    You introduce the concept here. Why? Straw man. Perhaps to avoid the awkward questions about apathy and the enabling of evil.
    But let's dig into this man of straw! Even if just for a moment. I'll try not to whistle 'If I only had a brain' as we do.
    I find it fascinating that such a 'double standard' should be allowed by a monism such as yours, Anon.
    Conspiracy eh?
    In a deterministic universe? Must be one of those desperate 'just so' (aka Sh!t happens) moments eh? Maybe.
    But I reserve the hope you are simply connecting dots to see a pattern in something you just do NOT get. Something that eludes your 'view' entirely.
    Look:
    You misunderstand the nature of Evil completely, Anon. Puzzled and terrified by it perhaps? You pretend it is not there (and good along with it). Hide behind 'science' (actually monism) all you want, Anon. It's still there - Real and palpable.
    You are deliberately blind to teleological (top down) thinking; refusing even to consider that aspect of existence/order.
    Given that purpose and meaning are illusions, and thus a disregarded sense/notion to you; I assume that your perceived 'conspiracy' is actually the natural workings of the universe and that you see/regard observations of that functioning as adherence to some sort of 'conspiracy theory'.
    To be short and sweet, you have missed the plot entirely.
    But, you command me 'Think, man'.
    What you mean is 'Think like ME!'
    My response to that is the only one I see as sane: No. I am an individual with free will. That is how I am made and what I am made for. I am glad we are different. You are allowed to agree on THAT aren't you? Or is 'agree' too much like free agency?

    ReplyDelete
  11. "I don't know why but I somehow welcome the hate of the new militant atheists!"

    An honest and naked display of such raw contempt is much easier to deal with than the subtle and polite variety, Pépé. I think I get what you mean. I acts as a whetstone to the intellect and tempers faith.

    ReplyDelete
  12. CrusadeREX,

    This, in part, is what Doctor Egnor Said:

    “The Archbishop left out raw hate. He understates the anti-Christian malice of the media….Christianity has always been a bulwark against secular power. The mainstream media today identifies itself with that power, and hates the Church with remarkable passion…..For the media, anti-Christian bigotry doesn't count as bigotry…Atheists worship state power, and a prerequisite for the rise of state power is the destruction of the Church.”

    For the life of me I can’t see how you can argue that I’m making a straw man when I suggest that Doctor Egnor sees a conspiracy to destroy the church. Your ranting is bordering on delusional gibberish. Seek help.

    ReplyDelete