Pope Francis ponders if and when TIME magazine might issue any fundamental changes in its ideological and illogical reporting. (Okay, we made that up. At least we admit it when we make stuff up.)
I'm still laughing at this one, recently posted on the TIME magazine site:
"Poll: Catholic Beliefs At Odds With Vatican Doctrine"
Really? Whatever does that
mean? That what the actual Catholic Church teachesthat is, her
beliefsis actually different from what the Vatican teaches? Huh. That
would be strange, to say the least, since what the Catholic Church
believes is, in fact, doctrinal, and it just happens to be the same
stuff about faith and morals that the dread Vatican is supposed to be
upholding, promoting, teaching, defending, clarifying, and such.
to think of it, Dan Brown, how did the Catholic Church express and
define doctrine before the Vatican was created centuries after the time
Yes, yes, I know. It's supposed
to means that what certain, special, and super-enlightened Catholics
believe is in opposition to "Vatican doctrine," which leaves us in a
silly pickle: people who are supposedly defined by being "Catholic" are
rejecting the very doctrines that, in fact, help identify and shape them
as Catholic qua Catholic. Of course, you can be a baptized
Catholic and say you believe adultery is wonderful, insist the Trinity
is a bunch of metaphysical nonsense, and crow you have no interest in
going to Massbut that actually makes you a certain kind of Catholic: a
And how do we know what constitutes being a
good Catholic? Sure. In fact, there's quite a paper trail on that,
beginning with the Bible, followed by Councils and such, not to mention
the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Specifics? For starters, belief in the Credo, being in a state of grace, attending Mass on Sunday, and giving proper assent to the teachingsthat is, doctrineof the Catholic Church.
How about a more accurate headline? Such as: "Poll: Bad Catholics At Odds With Vatican Doctrine"?
Too judgmental? Hmmm. The truth can hurt. Unless you don't believe in truth. In which case you might be a bad Catholic.
that's not all. The piece is typical MSM boilerplate, which is to say,
it employs the same old vacuous labels and confuses categories. Typical.
Pope Francis reaches out to Catholics around the world in an effort to
reinvigorate the Church, the Vatican faces a wide ideological gap
with popularly held beliefs in many countries, a new poll finds.
gap"? Sounds painful. Maybe it is painful. But it's pretty simple,
really: since the days of Judas and the nights of gnostics, the Church
has long been dealing with traitors, complainers, heretics, sophists,
fools, con men, schismatics, and snakes. There is quite often a gap
between what Joe Catholic likes or wants and what the Church teaches.
When Joe Catholic demands that Jesus be a bodiless spirit who is freed
from the contamination of dust and matter, he's called Joe Docetist.
When Joe Catholic denies the sacramental order, he becomes Joe
Anabaptist. When Joe Catholic denies that abortion is evil and sex is
meant for marriage, he becomes Joe
Relativist/Secularist/Hedonist/Cafeteria Catholic. He might well, in
other words, be a heretic, for heresy is "is the obstinate
post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine
and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the
same..." (CCC, 2089).
issues like contraception, gay marriage, divorce and women’s admittance
into the priesthood, the Church is at odds with a majority of Catholics
in many countries across the world, the poll shows.
is at odds? That's a strange way to put it since the Church didn't
break away from decades, even centuries, of clear teaching on these and
other matters. It's not as if the Church is the new kid in town,
assaulting the Western world's precious and ancient traditions about all
of these issues. But, as usual, the suggestion is that everything was
great until "the Vatican" started imposing outrageous beliefs on poor,
innocent Catholics who simply want to be just like everyone else and
ignore what the Catholic Church really believes (nevermind the reasons
for such beliefs; getting to that point is unheard of, really).
90 percent of Catholics in countries including France, Brazil, Spain,
Argentina, and Colombia favor the use of birth control, a position that
opposes official Catholic doctrine. And more than 60 percent of
Catholics in countries including France, Spain, Poland, Brazil,
Argentina and the United States believe priests should be allowed to
First, the Catholic Church is against contraception; it is
not against planning when you get pregnant. Secondly, the Church is not
against married priests, as evidenced by, well, the many married
Catholic priests out there. Rather, the Western Church is, on whole, for
the discipline of unmarried priests; all of the Eastern and Western
Churches are against priests getting married once they are ordained (in
other words, Eastern priests who are married are wed prior to being
Finally, TIME so (ahem) helpfully summarizes all
of this as follows: "As Pope Francis charts the course of the Church,
he has solicited the opinion of Catholics and opened up the Church with
more inclusive language but has yet to issue any fundamental changes in
"Has yet to issue..." It's just a matter of time! Right, Arius? Correct, Marcion? How about it, Zwingli? Can I get an "Amen", Hans Küng? Please. Bottom line: the Church is not a democracy. It is
not a club. It is not run by polls. (Yes, it is sometimes led by clueless or corrupt, men and it is certainly filled with sinners. Absolutely!) So, trying to report on the Church as if
is a democracy, a club, or a poll-driven political party is not
helpful. Quite the contrary. Unless, of course, your goal is not to be helpful, but to manipulate and confuse. But that's another rant for another day.
How about this headline: "Fact: TIME's Reporting About Catholic Church At Odds With Reality"?