www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Sainthood for the Pope?

Dear djs,

Forgive my two cents, but, I read Alice's "God-hating media" comment to be a general statement, not a statement in reference to their treatment of the repose of Pope John Paul II, may his memory be eternal! What I have seen and read has been largely complimentary to the Pope, which as Alice says, is its own miracle!

Also, I agree with you that this was not a eulogy for the Pope, but a news article, which must attempt balance, not bias, either for or against its subject.

Gaudior, who holds the Pope in great respect

From Gaudior:
The alternative explanation, is that cherished phony perspectives on the media were blown away, which is also miraculous.

I have discovered, however, that some find that kind of reporting to be full of disrespect.

From the Administrator
I have already stipulated to the exxistence of anti-Catholic bias. But, for the third time, what I questioned was not bias, but a much more over the top claim, as characteristic. That claim no longer being supported.

Well, the sad fact is, neither are we.
In fact, I think it far less likely to hear demonization from main-stream news media than it is to hear it here. Punditry, is terrible, but with our support and even adulation.

Dear Alice,
"The Greeks had a word for it." In this instance, therefore, I suggest speaking and writing about "the theomachian media". Means the same thing, but less likely to cause a brou-ha-ha.

as ever,

Incognitus

Nothing that Alice said was unreasonable.

As JP2 explained in Vertatis Splendor (1993), hatred of God does not consist solely in direct acts of blasphemy, but also in turning toward a creature ("conversio ad creaturam") and setting it up in God's place. Television networks have done this for years, idolizing sex, pleasure, and freedom at the expense of truth and right reason, and ultimately at God's expense.

The media hate God. No one with proper Christian sensibilities would deny this.

Djs, I'm not sure where you're coming from, on this subject or on the subject of Terri Schiavo (God rest her soul).

LatinTrad

Dear Incognitus,

LOL! Yes, that is what I will do from now on, use Greek!

...and I know that atleast you will understand!

Fondly,
Alice

Theoclast ... the word used (translated from Slavonic) to describe the Bolshevics by the Russian Church during the early Soviet era ... "God Smashers", analogous to Iconoclast. This seems to be the hyperbolic term, much as "cacodox" rather than "heterodox".

Photius

--- Commence Original Message ---
Incognitus posted:
Dear Alice,
"The Greeks had a word for it." In this instance, therefore, I suggest speaking and writing about "the theomachian media". Means the same thing, but less likely to cause a brou-ha-ha.

as ever,

Incognitus
--- Commence Original Message ---

What breath-taking arrogance, Latin Trad to put yourself up as qualified arbiter of proper Christian sensibilities.

I deny the stereotype. The media are not monolithic. It is comprised of human individuals who deserve the dignity of being treated as human individuals. And that treatment is exactly what the passages from Weigel and Disputations are about. If you want to transform the world then engage it like JPII "within the bond of a profound respect for the humanity of the other".

That is where I am coming from.

ps

I searched Veritatis Splendor for "hate". This is the only hit:

The other human individuals that comprise the group collectively referred to as "the God-hating media". "theoclasts" and other expressions indicative of condemning their lack of respect for Christians have a well known track record of not even ATTEMPTING to portray true Christian ideals and theology in their broadcasts. Even on such times as they want speakers to speak for Christianity, they locate, not responsible hierarchs, but media-happy deposed priests to comment.

In case you have not noticed, to be a Christian a few decades back used to be a good thing...now, thanks to the levels of out-there portrayals of Christians as bigotted, intolerant, mentally deficient, and hypocritical, about the only thing left to safely sneer at are Christians.

The individual humans that comprise "the God-hating media" have contributed to this. That cannot be denied.

ARE some who call themselves Christians bigotted, intolerant, mentally deficient, and hypocritical? Absolutely. But there is no mention of those others, by far the majority, who are not.

And, I might further add that if to be opposed to promiscuous sex, immodesty, abortion, and birth control as offenses against humanity is to be bigotted, intolerant, mentally deficient, and hypocritical, then I, for one, prefer to be called an intolerant bigot.

Gaudior, getting a wee bit tired of people defending those human individuals who comprise the "God-hating" media in the face of all the evidence to the contrary.

Gaudior,

I won't dispute for a moment that that there are individuals within the media whose ideas are suspect on any number of grounds. Some indeed promote ideas that are in opposition to Christian ideas. SOme may be anti-Christian. Stipulation of this, however, in no way justifies stereotyping, false witness, rash judgement, or detraction. Any lapsing into that behavior undercuts productive engagement.

I have not and never would defend "'God-hating' media". If that is what you are inferring, then you are completely misreading my posts.

It seems to me that djs is being argumentative just for the fun of upsetting people. His arrogance in pontificating as if he were infallible and then calling other people�s opinions �arrogant� is beyond acceptable.

I recommend that participants simply ignore his posts when he gets like this. Don�t let him have his fun by taunting you and he will most likely behave better in the future.

I�m going to close this thread with the suggestion that those seeking sainthood for Pope John Paul II will pray that the new pope will act quickly to begin the process.

Dear djs,

I am merely stating that, as you correctly observed, 100% of "the media" are not "God-hating" nor are they "God-fearing", as they are individuals, and their beliefs are individual beliefs, not collegiate beliefs.

However, I do not think it is at all improper to complain of consistent derogatory remarks about Christians by those few of the media who 100% of the time dislike Christianity, or openly oppose it, with no balanced views.

Is it judgment on the part of those so opposing this commentary? No, it is not, as throughout the history of the Church, certain anti-church movements have been denounced by the Fathers, and properly rebutted. In order to do this denouncing, a discernment process was needful. One it was evaluated that the majority ofthe content of the words of these groups was in opposition to Christ and the Church, the groups themselves were held under suspicion. For instance, ALL Arians were condemned as heretics, not only those individual members of the followers of Arius that subscribe to greater than 85% of his views, for example. Thus, it is easier to say, for purposes of the quick post, "the God-hating media" and assume, say, that since Alice is a very charitable person, she meant "Those individuals of the media who have shown themselves in the past to be opposed to Christianity, and not ALL the media". And, also, to make the assumption that while this phrase is used, each of us can call to mind how vehemently St. Paul opposed the Church, until he was granted a revelation....So, we know that even the most oppositional can change, and keep that in mind.

But as we caution children against playing with snakes, because some may be dangerous, although most are harmless, so we must caution the children of God against those who are opposed to Christianity, because, although most are only causing harm to themselves, others can cause a great deal of harm to others.

Gaudior, who assumes you know all this, but is posting so that there can be no confusion, and who does you the credit of assuming that of course, you would not defend that which is opposed to your faith, but yet that you will not condemn ALL members of a set without evaluating them as individuals.

Sorry, Admin, was typing my reply when you posted.

Gaudior, in apology