It’s painfully clear what the media is attempting to do. Here are excerpts from an AP article which, you guessed it, is printed on the NY Times Web site today (emphasis added):

“VATICAN CITY (AP) — The Vatican is facing one of its gravest crises of modern times as sex abuse scandals move ever closer to Pope Benedict XVI — threatening not only his own legacy but also that of his revered predecessor [Since when do we judge a leader’s legacy by their previous jobs? Do we judge Obama’s legacy by his successes or failures as a community organizer?].

Benedict took a much harder stance on sex abuse than John Paul II when he assumed the papacy five years ago, disciplining a senior cleric championed by the Polish pontiff and defrocking others under a new policy of zero tolerance [The pope is clearly trying to correct the wrongs of the past. Why the desperate call for his blood?].

But the impression remains of a woefully slow-footed church and of a pope who bears responsibility for allowing pedophile priests to keep their parishes [Allegedly].

In an editorial on Friday, the National Catholic Reporter in the United States called on Benedict to answer questions about his role ”in the mismanagement” of sex abuse cases, not only in the current crisis but during his tenure in the 1980s as archbishop of Munich and then as head of the Vatican’s doctrinal and disciplinary office [The National Catholic Reporter? This is the source they turn to? The newspaper which is constantly attacking the Church and the Holy Father…?].

It all comes down to the question of what the pope knew and when. The answer will almost certainly determine the fate of Benedict’s papacy [I’m pretty sure that the media already knows everything that it’s going to know about this crisis. They might as well just come forward with what they know, instead of staggering the stories in order to create constant press and buildup. Watch in the next couple days, you’ll probably see headlines like “The plot thickens” or “Fr. Anonymous comes forward with super secret Vatican memos.”].

As he approaches Holy Week, the most solemn period on the Christian calendar, victims groups and other critics are demanding Benedict accept personal responsibility. A few say he should resign [Another Obama example… Should Obama have to resign because there are no weapons of mass-destruction in Iraq? Why blame the sins of previous leaders on this pope?].

…

For Benedict, a quiet intellectual who will be 83 next month, the scandal must be trying.

Until recently, Benedict had received high marks for his handling of sex abuse — seen as a bright spot amid turmoil over his remarks linking Islam to violence and his rehabilitation of an ultraconservative bishop who denies the Holocaust [I hardly would characterize Pope Benedict’s pontificate as “turmoil“, but that’s how those on the left view it, and wish for it to be viewed. They control history with their pens and keyboards].

…

While church law allows for the resignation of a pope, there are few precedents over the church’s two millennium history. The last was by 15th-century Pope Gregory XII, and that was not over scandal but rather a schism in the church [Isn’t it painfully obvious that this is what the media is dieing to see happen? They don’t want the sex scandal to be cleaned up, they just want news makers such as a pope resigning for the first time in over 500 years].

The Church is now doing its penance for the crimes of the sexual deviant priests. Hopefully this crisis will make us stronger, as well as clean out the problems from our Church.

Tags: News and Media, Progressive Drivel

This entry was posted on Friday, March 26th, 2010 at 6:35 PM . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.