Why The Pope Is Not Heard

megaphone

In a rather interesting article appeared here, the author remarks on the rather clear words the Pope has been speaking in the last few weeks (particularly concerning “gender” issues), and notices with dismay the Holy Father’s words have been uniformly ignored by the media. As the author appears frustrated at the lack of attention given from media outlets to the Pope’s utterances, I dare to hazard a couple of explanations as to why this is so.

1. The secular media mention the Church only if they think it is the right time to attack Her. If, therefore, the Pontiff’s words had been picked up by the press, they would have been picked up with the exclusive aim of criticising the Pope and slandering the Church, and with the usual procession of offended lesbians and convicted pedophile priests thrown in as an added bonus. This time it did not happen, another time it will…

2. The Pope’s words are not picked up, because they aren’t news. “Pope is Catholic” isn’t going to win any Pulitzer Prize. Generally, the Press needs an angle they can exploit, like “Pope preaches against gender equality” so you can trumpet the story of “equality”, but again only if you need a story. If, say, BO’s inauguration and the anniversary of Roe vs Wade are considered news enough, no news will be built around the Pope’s words.

3. The world at large doesn’t consider a warning Pope relevant, but it would immediately notice a roaring one. As long as the Pope isn’t considered a real obstacle for the advancement of the secular cause, he will be either attacked for the fun of it or, more often, happily ignored. If,  though, they should see that the Holy Father means business and is set on a frontal attack on secular society, you would experience a huge wave of abuse and slander, then the secular, abortionist, perverted euthanasia Nazis would soon understand they are now fighting for their existence as a meaningful, society-shaping social group.

Let us imagine the Vatican were to announce the removal, on the same day, of a dozen among the worst English bishops and their replacement with young hardliners with spotless reputation. Do you think this would not make headlines? Not even when he repeats the exercise in France, Germany, Italy? Really? How would the reaction be if the Pope were to say every politician promoting the homosexual agenda is a tool of Satan, and those who vote him might well pay for it with their soul? Would this attract attention? Or imagine the Pope would announce the return – after a transition phase for training – of the Mass of the Ages as the Standard, leaving the NO to those priests too old or thick to (re) learn it. Would the world start to notice that something is happening? My answer is: yes it would, and the hounds of hell would be unleashed against the Church; but even if the secularists preferred to be in denial for a while (basically, the behaviour the Catholic hierarchy has been exhibiting for now several decades) the time will soon come when a wave of new bishops and new priests, a new assertiveness or (much better) an outright crusade would force them to notice that they only have the choice between fight and death; which is, by the way, what the Catholic hierarchy will understand very soon concerning their existence in more than some Western countries.

This is, therefore, why the Pope is ignored. This is a time whose needs will not be satisfied with eloquent preaching, but with a war cry to make the blood within every elected politician in the West freeze. This is what works, not speeches in the Vatican only picked up by Catholic agencies,  blogs and magazines (some of the latter, of course, very critical of the Pope for being Catholic).

Alas, and said with all due respect, you can’t teach an old Pope new tricks, and I very much doubt Pope Benedict (whose later utterances seem to indicate he is becoming increasingly more aware of the enormous threat hovering over the Christian West) will ever be ready,  let alone willing, to transform himself into a roaring lion.

We must hope his successor will be made of a stronger cloth, and will perhaps trade some of the intellectual finesse for a desire to really act (in the dioceses, in the seminaries, in the religious orders; in the eradication of heresy made without waiting a couple of decades; in the excommunication whenever possible of bad Catholic politicians and in the relentless, assertive confrontation of head of states and governments). Only an open fight, and a Pope ready to really fight it, can change the narrative and lead to the turning of the tide.

Catholicism is under attack and has been for some time, and the new generation of mini me antichrists like Obama and Andrew Cuomo are becoming more and more brazen in their hostility to Catholicism; they see very well they have really nothing to fear, and the fat Cardinal will invite them to a prestigious dinner for a photo-op and a good old guffawing between friends.

After all this, should we surprised that the Pope’s words are largely ignored?

Mundabor 

About these ads

Posted on January 28, 2013, in Catholicism and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 2 Comments.

  1. You’re so right. I’m afraid I didn’t sign a copy of yesterday’s letter, although I did sign last year’s online petition for marriage. Why didn’t I sign yesterday’s letter? Because having read it, I was annoyed for reasons similar to those you point out above. It was so wishy washy, based entirely as it was on a defence of the institution of marriage. Fair enough some might say, but where was the condemnation of homosexual acts?

    The entire Bishops’ campaign against gay ‘marriage’ seems devoid of any reference to homosexual sex as being sinful. Surely the strongest argument against gay ‘marriage’ comes from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, para 1867 which lists the ‘sin of the sodomites’ as one of the sins that ‘cries to heaven’. Gay ‘marriage’ is wrong because sodomy is wrong. Pure and simple. Catholic bishops, priests and lay commentators are just to scared to say so.

    Many people undestand this but are reluctant to stand up to the general current of opinion that predominates in the media. More soft and inoffensive language from the men of the Church is the last thing we need, quite frankly. All it does is give the impression of action. But without the hard-hitting and uncomfortable Truth, it will achieve nothing.

    • “Many people undestand this but are reluctant to stand up to the general current of opinion that predominates in the media”.

      Exactly my thoughts.

      Personally I’d say a wishy-washy letter is better than no letter, and a strong email is better than a wishy-washy letter ( I sent both), but the way our clergy is doing this is pathetic and one has the impression many of them really want to lose, but without losing face.

      M

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,900 other followers

%d bloggers like this: