POINTLESS FUROR OVER HOLOCAUST

"At a solemn Good Friday service, Pope Benedict XVI's personal preacher likened the tide of allegations that the pontiff has covered up sex abuse cases to the "more shameful aspects of anti-Semitism." But within hours, facing a storm of criticism at the comparison, the Vatican felt it necessary to distance the pope from the preacher's remarks.

Both Jewish and victims' groups responded that it was inappropriate to compare the discomfort being experienced by the church leadership in the sex abuse scandal to the violence that culminated in the Holocaust. The Vatican has been on the defensive in recent days, saying the church has been singled out and collectively stereotyped for the problem of pedophilia, which it says is a society-wide issue."
Fox News

Six million Polish citizens were killed in the Holocaust—three million Jews and three million Catholics. Poland was the only country where the Germans gave official death orders for any Pole who helped a Jew. And more Poles were killed for helping Jews than anyone else in the world. The current Broadway play, “Irena’s Vow,” is a dramatic production that accurately tells how Polish Catholics risked their lives to save Jews.

The SS did not take note of the religious affiliation of its prisoners, with the exception of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. But this does not justify dismissing Catholic victims. After all, the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum pays tribute to Polish Catholics, and so should all memorials.

To put all Holocaust victims on an equal plane with Jews is wrong, but it is equally wrong to pretend that Catholics, especially those of Polish descent, weren’t among Hitler’s many victims.
Catholic League

So, if somebody really wanted the Pope's preacher to say something to get everybody even more pissed off could they possibly come up with a better way to do it? What about a joke about child molestation? You know, something like, " So, a priest and a rabbi walked into a day care center...". Could the Vatican maybe sell one painting to get together enough money to hire a good P.R. guy?

Look, I understand that the Jews own the Holocaust, and for good reason. But, they weren't the only ones affected by it. Millions of Catholics were killed, too, along with Gypsies, political dissenters and anyone else that achieved a certain level of inconvenience to the state. A big percentage of my friends growing up were Jewish and I knew people with the numbers tattooed on their forearms. I'm completely aware of the price paid by the Jews and I understand the awareness that the experience built into them.

It's this awareness that prompted the letter to Father Cantalamessa. His words were based on a letter he received from a Jewish friend regarding the current attacks against the Church and their similarity to the attacks against the Jews prior to the beginning of their long, dark night.

"Cantalamessa, in his reflections for the pope on the Catholic church's most solemn day, said he was inspired by a letter from an unidentified Jewish friend who was upset by the "attacks" against Benedict.

Jews "know from experience what it means to be victims of collective violence and also because of this they are quick to recognize the recurring symptoms," said Cantalamessa, a Franciscan priest.

Quoting from the letter, Cantalamessa said his Jewish friend was following "with indignation the violent and concentric attacks against the church, the pope and all the faithful of the whole world."

"The use of stereotypes, the passing from personal responsibility and guilt to a collective guilt remind me of the more shameful aspects of anti-Semitism," he said, quoting from the letter."
Fox News

I believe that the person that wrote the letter is right. We are witnessing a demonization of the Church with the intent of destroying her. In that regard this is a replay of not only the Holocaust but so many other times in history where the groundwork is laid before the war begins.

Somebody, somewhere, would love to see another Kristallnacht, but this time directed at the Church and her people. I know this sounds extreme but I believe it is coming. And after the Catholic Church they will go for the rest of Christianity before moving back on to the Jews once again. We are in the midst of an epic, final battle against the forces of evil. And we're all in this together. Satan knows this so he is fighting a campaign to divide and conquer.

Pointless spats such as the furor that has been generated over this comment by a priest serve the ends of the enemy. We must start focusing on the real enemy and avoid these useless distractions. If we play by the rules of our enemy we will lose the war.

CALLS TO BUILD THE THIRD TEMPLE

No comments; just found this really interesting.

"While tensions continue to simmer around the Temple Mount after riots in and around the capital’s Old City earlier this month, a new campaign calling for the construction of the Third Temple atop the holy site has made its way to the sides of 200 Egged buses in the city, which now sport posters featuring a picture of a rebuilt temple on the Mount, and nothing else.

The posters, which contain the phrase, “May the Bais Hamikdosh be rebuilt speedily and within our days,” were sponsored by the Our Land of Israel group, which is led by Rabbi Shalom Dov Volpo and activist Baruch Marzel, leave out the site’s current structures – namely the the Aksa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock.

The campaign’s organizers chose to plaster the posters on buses whose routes take them through predominately Arab neighborhoods of east Jerusalem."
Jerusalem Post

GOOD FRIDAY AND ALL IS QUIET

I'm thinking a holiday is in order. Just turn off the news, forget about the world and tune out for a day or two.

I was out working the garden today, just me and the bees. Nice and quiet it was. The radishes, lettuce and mustard greens are starting to come up and the chard and peas should be coming along in the next day or so. The brussel sprouts are doing nicely and I'll get the collards in tomorrow.

My old jon boat is sitting next to the garden which got me to thinking that the crappie should be starting to hit and the bluegill and bass will start in sometime next month. The rivers are high right now but there's a couple lakes I know that ought to be shaping up pretty nice.

The turkeys were down hanging out with my chickens this morning trying to get some of their scratch grains. They seemed to have worked something out between themselves because everybody got something to eat and no hard feelings were in evidence. We've got a couple big gobblers strutting their stuff for the ladies out in the yard. They don't know turkey season's right around the corner.

The grapes are budding and the blackberries are starting to get some leaves. The plum and peach trees are leafing out and the buckeyes have had their buds pop open with the coolest looking leaves sprouting from them. They have the most interesting buds of any tree in the woods. The buckeyes always get their leaves before anything else around here.

The buzzards are back and so are the bluejays. I saw a bald eagle fly over the church the other day. They should be heading back north pretty soon.

In other words, at least here in my little corner of it, all is right with the world. It's working pretty much the way it's meant to. And for that I'm thankful. I may not have much money and the whole damned globe is about to erupt in some sort of apocalyptic meltdown but right now, and for the next few days, I'm not going to pay attention. I'm going to focus on a blade of grass or the song of a bird. I'm going to look into the face of my wonderful granddaughter and the eyes of my beautiful wife. I'm going to thank God for my kids, my parents and all the blessings I've been given.

And tomorrow night I'll participate in the last night of the Triduum. I'll thank God for the sacrifice of His Son and I'll beg His forgiveness for all I've done wrong and ask His guidance and protection for the year ahead. I'll ask Him to strengthen my family and me for what is coming.

We're going to need it.

WELCOME TO MY WORLD

"There are two key types of match inefficiency. One is geographic mismatch. In 2008, the percentage of individuals living in a county or state different than the previous year was the lowest recorded in more than 50 years of data. People may be reluctant to relocate for a new job if the value of their house has declined. In addition, many who would like to move are under water in their mortgage or can't sell their homes.

The second inefficiency is skills mismatch. In simple terms, the skills people have don't match the jobs available. Coming out of this recession there may be a more or less permanent change in the composition of jobs.

Both of these mismatches are contributing to the long term unemployment problem - and the housing bubble was a direct cause of both. Usually people can move freely in the U.S. to pursue employment (geographic mobility), but many people are tied to an anchor (their home). And many workers went into the construction trades and acquired skills that are not easily transferable. Both of these issues make the long term unemployment problem a difficult challenge."
Business Insider

This is the absolute perfect description of the situation I find myself in today. The industry that I have worked in all my adult life, construction, will never return, at least in my lifetime, to the state of activity we've known over the last twenty or so years. Where I live the jobs have dried up and they're never coming back. I'd move if I thought I could get hired on somewhere else but doing that would require my wife to leave her job, too. Since she has a really good job with a really good company that wouldn't make any sense at all. Besides, I couldn't sell my house now even if I wanted to. Nothing is selling out where I live and I doubt I could get what it cost me to build it back out of it.

So we've decided that the best course of action is to find something outside construction. I'm not looking to make big money but it has to pay enough to at least be profitable. The deal is, the jobs that are out there are few and far between and most aren't full time. On top of it, the jobs that I do find are generally paying minimum wage and people are lined up around the block to apply for them. And most of the applicants are younger and thus more attractive to employers than I am.

I'm not writing this to whine or complain but just as a way of saying that there is a whole lot of people out here that are just like me. They are never going to be able to make the money they once did and consequently they won't be spending as they once did. All the happy talk and upbeat news of a recovery isn't fact. It can't be. Sure the guys on Wall Street are doing ok, playing around with the money the taxpayers gave them. And some of the white collar world has gotten through this relatively unscathed. But the reality of our current situation is that an awful lot of high paying blue collar jobs have disappeared. It is that part of the middle class that bought cars, boats, big screens and houses that aren't going to be spending money anymore.

For many of us the economic recovery will never happen. That's just a plain, cold fact. The rest of the economy will have to adjust to this, whether it wants to or not.

CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE NEW YORK TIMES

From Father Dwight Longenecker at Standing On My Head:

Campaign Against the NYT

Let's get a campaign going. Let's blitz the New York Times with emails complaining about Maureen Dowd's sleazy and false attack on the Holy Father. This means letters to the editor and a boycott of their advertisers. I'm not the only one. Bp Marzio of Brooklyn calls his people to 'besiege the New York Times' here and Thomas Peters the American Papist calls for a response here.

You can read what Maureen Dowd has written here. This first column made exagerated and false claims. That her attacks are false can be seen here and here and here.

A good and honest journalist would be corrected and apologize once she was proven wrong. Instead Dowd continues her smear campaign and repeats her lies here.

Clark Hoyt is the editor at New York Times. Here's his email: public@nytimes.com

Here are the rules: First, in the subject line write: "Fire Maureen Dowd". That will give the general impression. Letters should be brief, firm and indignant, but also intelligent and charitable. No rage. No anger. No rude words. No self righteous condemnations. Here's a copy of my letter:

Dear Mr Hoyt,

As a faithful Catholic I am grateful for any effort which will help rid our church of the few pedophile priests. Honest and fair investigative journalism is part of this righteous crusade.

However, your journalist Maureen Dowd is telling lies. Pope Benedict is not guilty of any crime in the case of Fr Lawrence Murphy. You and your staff had the facts. Rather than implicate Pope Benedict the facts actually exonerate him. There are only two options: that you and your staff did not bother to understand the facts, or that you willfully distorted them. As you are intelligent people I have to assume the latter.

Shame on your paper for publishing lies and continuing this intentional smear campaign against the Catholic Church during the holiest time of our year. Would you launch a similar campaign on Muslims during Ramadan about the prophet's marriage of a young girl, the institutionalized pedophilia amongst the Taliban or the Muslims shameful treatment of women? I think not.

I have decided to never purchase your paper and to boycott all your advertisers and I will be encouraging all I know to do the same.

Yrs sincerely,

Dwight Longenecker

If you have a blog, do a post on this. You can copy and paste my whole post if you wish. Compose a brief email with Hoyt's email address and encourage people to write. Send it to all the faithful Catholics on your list and ask them to forward to their lists.

Finally--does anyone have the time to go through the NYT and make a list of their advertisers? I think a Catholic boycott of all companies who advertise in the NYT and on their website is in order don't you?

MODERNISM ON PARADE

"The simple truth is that there is no litmus test for being Catholic. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that “All men are called to this catholic unity of the People of God . . . And to it, in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God’s grace to salvation.” (CCC 836) There is room for everyone under that umbrella. There are many ways of living out the Catholic faith. When we disagree with how someone is living out their faith, our best recourse is to pray for them and for ourselves. We are called to love one another. That is the mark of a true Christian. We are all sinners in need of God’s mercy. None of us fully live up to the Christian ideal. Our place is not to judge our Catholic brethren."
Catholic Exchange

It appears that our modernist friend above neglected those paragraphs in the Catechism that put the lie to her assertion; you know, the ones that directly follow the paragraph she quoted:

837 "Fully incorporated into the society of the Church are those who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, accept all the means of salvation given to the Church together with her entire organization, and who - by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion - are joined in the visible structure of the Church of Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. Even though incorporated into the Church, one who does not however persevere in charity is not saved. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but 'in body' not 'in heart.'"

838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter." Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church." With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."

So how many exclusions to the modernist's washed out, gray and meaningless version of catholicism can we find in these two paragraphs?

1. To be a Catholic you must be baptized in the proper form and matter.
2. You must accept all means of salvation given to the Church. No doubts about the real presence on the altar or the efficacy of confession will be allowed.
3. You must accept the authority of the Pope and the Bishops, acting through the Magisterium.
4. Catholics are bound by the profession of faith; the Nicene Creed. You must believe that every word spoken in the Creed is true. No wiggle room is allowed.
5. Even if you have been baptized in the proper form and matter by another church you are not considered Catholic. Your Christian faith is imperfect and will need to be reconciled to the Catholic faith before you can receive the benefits of Christ's salvific action.

While number 5 may seem, I don't know, so unnecessarily divisive to the modernist mind it is after all taught in the Catechism. Unfortunately, our author above overlooked that, too.

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.

So what is modernism? According to the Catholic Encyclopedia:

"The general idea of modernism may be best expressed in the words of Abbate Cavallanti, though even here there is a little vagueness: "Modernism is modern in a false sense of the word; it is a morbid state of conscience among Catholics, and especially young Catholics, that professes manifold ideals, opinions, and tendencies. From time to time these tendencies work out into systems, that are to renew the basis and superstructure of society, politics, philosophy, theology, of the Church herself and of the Christian religion".

In other words, to the modernist there are no absolutes. One idea is as good as the next and to judge a belief system against the wisdom of the past is archaic and irrelevant. God is not what he is, the eternal "I am who am", but instead is held hostage to the personal beliefs and values of the individual. Modernism is the root of modern liberalism, a system of beliefs that holds the individual has primacy over everything, that he is a free agent with no restraint against his actions or understandings of the world around him.

To the modernist there is only emotion and personal desire. Right and wrong can only be defined in how they work to either restrain or advance the needs of the individual, regardless of the cost to society. Modernism and narcissism share the same basic flaws in their self centered destructive blindness to the truth.

Modernism is a lie and as a lie it is evil. It has infected the Church to such an extent that we now have the homosexual abuse crisis and the USCCB supporting Marxist government initiatives against the clear and consistent teachings of Holy Mother Church. The pews have become empty and why shouldn't they be. So many of the priests of the Church are Modernists at heart and don't believe that what they are teaching is any more true that what the Baptist preacher or Buddhist monk down the street believe. And if the priests don't believe it, them why should the parishioner?

America and the world need to divorce themselves from this fallacy. Truth exists and it IS knowable. We must honestly search to find it and accept it, following it wherever it leads us. Until mankind realizes that there is one greater than themselves and accepts the fact He has created rules that we must follow we will continue to wallow in a cesspool of moral ambiguity and vain-glorious self destruction. Modernism plays to the goals of Satan and those that follow him in designing our "New World Order". Because we no longer believe in objective truth we cannot recognize destructive evil.

We are beginning to reap the crops sown by Modernism. Pray for all of us.

PIRATE SKIFF ATTACKS NAVAL FRIGATE-REALLY?

"U.S. naval forces said Thursday they've captured five pirates after exchanging fire with them, sinking their skiff and confiscating a mother ship.

The USS Nicholas was just west of the Seychelles in international waters Thursday when crew began taking fire from a suspected pirate skiff, NBC News reported. The Nicholas returned fire and disabled the pirate boat, then pursued the skiff until it finally broke down.

...Experts say piracy will continue to be a problem until an effective government is established on Somalia's lawless shores. The country has not had a functioning government for 19 years."
MSNBC

It's that last paragraph that bothers me.

Let's go back to the beginning of this story. Now, I'm not a pirate and I'm certainly not some poor kid from Somalia, impressed into piracy by a warlord. I don't know how they think or what their world view is.

But I do know this; a U.S. Naval ship, bristling with arms and the latest war technology, looks nothing like a freighter, tanker or yacht. There is no way in the world pirates would fire on one. Pirates are the ultimate capitalists, engaging in their occupation purely for profit. Where is the profit in losing ships and men?

Maybe the skiff was loaded with inexperienced pirates that couldn't tell the difference. While this may be true, my guess is that, since profit is the motive, no skiff would shove off without an experienced commander on board. Again, why risk their profit by sending out a raiding party that couldn't get the job done?

Profit, or at least the promise of it, has been the only thing protecting those taken prisoner by the pirates. The warlords that control the pirates have threatened retaliation if governments begin to go after their ships; retaliation in the form of the deaths of hostages. I suspect they're being honest in this regard because it's the only real leverage they have. If we've taken their guys prisoner you can expect to hear demands for their safe return or hostages will be executed.

And that's why that last paragraph in the story caught my eye. War has always been used as a means of bringing countries out of depressions. We've gotten ourselves involved in plenty of them of late but maybe another would be just the thing. Also, I suspect that our President may have a warm spot in his heart for Africa and Indonesia in general which may prompt him to believe we need to help the people of Somalia; help them to establish a "functioning government". Contrary to what groups such as Code Pink would have you believe, nation building is not a conceit purely of the right.

So I say that we need to watch this story carefully. I think that there is more here than has been reported. Something just doesn't seem right about a skiff attacking a frigate.

NEW YORK TIMES LIES- SHOULD WE BE SURPRISED?

"In a statement issued late on Wednesday, the (New York) Times said its reports were "based on meticulous reporting and documents."

"Some of the particulars were confirmed by the Church, and so far no one has cast doubt on the facts we reported," said the Times in the statement issued by spokeswoman Diane McNulty.

"The allegations of abuse within the Catholic Church are a serious subject, as the Vatican has acknowledged on many occasions. Any role the current pope may have played in responding to those allegations over the years is a significant aspect of this story," the newspaper said."
New York Times

The New York Times has now resorted to lying about their lies. Why does anyone even bother with this trash any more?

I have posted below four examples of very serious doubt being cast upon the reporting and the facts at the Times. There are quite a few more. Maybe the Times should have said in their statement that "no one that agrees with us has cast doubt on the facts we reported". At least that would have been one "fact" we could ALL agree on.

I think that I'll stick with Pravda.

"My intent in writing this column is to accomplish the following:

To tell the back-story of what actually happened in the Father Murphy case on the local level;

To outline the sloppy and inaccurate reporting on the Father Murphy case by the New York Times and other media outlets;

...With regard to the inaccurate reporting on behalf of the New York Times, the Associated Press, and those that utilized these resources, first of all, I was never contacted by any of these news agencies but they felt free to quote me. Almost all of my quotes are from a document that can be found online with the correspondence between the Holy See and the Archdiocese of Milwaukee. In an October 31, 1997 handwritten document, I am quoted as saying ‘odds are that this situation may very well be the most horrendous, number wise, and especially because these are physically challenged , vulnerable people. “ Also quoted is this: “Children were approached within the confessional where the question of circumcision began the solicitation.”

The problem with these statements attributed to me is that they were handwritten. The documents were not written by me and do not resemble my handwriting. The syntax is similar to what I might have said but I have no idea who wrote these statements, yet I am credited as stating them. As a college freshman at the Marquette University School of Journalism, we were told to check, recheck, and triple check our quotes if necessary. I was never contacted by anyone on this document, written by an unknown source to me. Discerning truth takes time and it is apparent that the New York Times, the Associated Press and others did not take the time to get the facts correct."
Father Thomas Brundage

"...today’s Times presents both a lengthy article by Laurie Goodstein, a senior columnist, headlined “Warned About Abuse, Vatican Failed to Defrock Priest,” and an accompanying editorial entitled “The Pope and the Pedophilia Scandal,” in which the editors call the Goodstein article a disturbing report (emphasis in original) as a basis for their own charges against the Pope. Both the article and the editorial are deficient by any reasonable standards of fairness that Americans have every right and expectation to find in their major media reporting.

In her lead paragraph, Goodstein relies on what she describes as “newly unearthed files” to point out what the Vatican (i.e. then Cardinal Ratzinger and his Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) did not do – “defrock Fr. Murphy.” Breaking news, apparently. Only after eight paragraphs of purple prose does Goodstein reveal that Fr. Murphy, who criminally abused as many as 200 deaf children while working at a school in the Milwaukee Archdiocese from 1950 to 1974, “not only was never tried or disciplined by the church’s own justice system, but also got a pass from the police and prosecutors who ignored reports from his victims, according to the documents and interviews with victims.”

But in paragraph 13, commenting on a statement of Fr. Lombardi (the Vatican spokesman) that Church law does not prohibit anyone from reporting cases of abuse to civil authorities, Goodstein writes, “He did not address why that had never happened in this case.” Did she forget, or did her editors not read, what she wrote in paragraph nine about Murphy getting “a pass from the police and prosecutors”? By her own account it seems clear that criminal authorities had been notified, most probably by the victims and their families."
Cardinal William J. Levada

"Before addressing the false substance of the story, the following circumstances are worthy of note:

• The New York Times story had two sources. First, lawyers who currently have a civil suit pending against the Archdiocese of Milwaukee. One of the lawyers, Jeffrey Anderson, also has cases in the United States Supreme Court pending against the Holy See. He has a direct financial interest in the matter being reported.

• The second source was Archbishop Rembert Weakland, retired archbishop of Milwaukee. He is the most discredited and disgraced bishop in the United States, widely known for mishandling sexual-abuse cases during his tenure, and guilty of using $450,000 of archdiocesan funds to pay hush money to a former homosexual lover who was blackmailing him. Archbishop Weakland had responsibility for the Father Murphy case between 1977 and 1998, when Father Murphy died. He has long been embittered that his maladministration of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee earned him the disfavor of Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, long before it was revealed that he had used parishioners’ money to pay off his clandestine lover. He is prima facie not a reliable source.

• Laurie Goodstein, the author of the New York Times story, has a recent history with Archbishop Weakland. Last year, upon the release of the disgraced archbishop’s autobiography, she wrote an unusually sympathetic story that buried all the most serious allegations against him (New York Times, May 14, 2009).

• A demonstration took place in Rome on Friday, coinciding with the publication of the New York Times story. One might ask how American activists would happen to be in Rome distributing the very documents referred to that day in the New York Times. The appearance here is one of a coordinated campaign, rather than disinterested reporting."
Father Raymond J. DeSouza

"Rembert Weakland is the emeritus archbishop of Milwaukee, notorious for having paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to satisfy the demands of his former male lover. Jeff Anderson is a Minnesota-based attorney who has made a substantial amount of money out of sex abuse “settlements,” and who is party to ongoing litigation intended to bring the resources of the Vatican within the reach of contingency-fee lawyers in the United States. Yet these two utterly implausible—and, in any serious journalistic sense, disqualified—sources were those the Times cited in a story claiming that, as cardinal prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith [CDF], Joseph Ratzinger, later Benedict XVI, had prevented sanctions against Father Lawrence Murphy, a diabolical Milwaukee priest who, decades before, had abused some 200 deaf children in his pastoral care. This was simply not true, as the legal papers from the Murphy case the Times provided on its Web site demonstrated (see here for a demolition of the Times’ case based on the documentary evidence it made available). The facts, alas, seem to be of little interest to those whose primary concern is to nail down the narrative of global Catholic criminality, centered in the Vatican.

...So, of course, would elementary fairness from the global media. That seems unlikely to come from those reporters and editors at the New York Times who have abandoned any pretence of maintaining journalistic standards. But it ought not be beyond the capacity of other media outlets to understand that much of the Times’ recent reporting on the Church has been gravely distorted, and to treat it accordingly."
George Weigel