New York Times Targets the Pope Again

by Catholic League on March 17, 2010 · 5 comments

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the latest attack on the pope by the New York Times:

Once upon a time there was a homosexual priest who was accused of molesting boys in Germany. That was 30 years ago. At the approval of Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger (now the pope), he was sent away for therapy and was later reinstated; years later, under a new archbishop, there was another incident and more therapy.

We know this because the New York Times (which does not like to report on molesting rabbis in 2010), told us about this on Saturday in a front-page article. Today, it ran a front-page article on the same story. Was there any difference? Yes. On Saturday, the Times was only able to identify the priest as bearing the initial “H.” Today, it has real news: his name is Hullermann. And now “H” has been suspended.

Was it wrong to send abusers to therapy? Is it wrong today? The Times does not say. While it is painfully obvious that psychologists and psychiatrists have oversold their competency in treating abusers, it has long been considered to be both scientifically and ethically sound. It still is. Perhaps that view is unwarranted, but it is flatly unfair to cherry pick Catholic decision-makers for indictment when therapy fails.

The Times also wrote today that when the pope was Cardinal Ratzinger under Pope John Paul II, he was “in charge of reviewing sexual abuse cases for the Vatican.” In doing so, the Times leaves the impression that Ratzinger was in charge of overseeing these cases when the scandal developed. Nonsense. The Times reported on January 9, 2002 that he had just been appointed to this role. Thus, he had nothing to do with this issue at the time when most of the abuse took place (mid-60s to mid-80s).

The Times has a vested ideological interest in keeping this story alive. To say it dislikes Pope Benedict XVI intensely is an understatement.

By

  • http://arkanabar.blogspot.com Arkanabar Ilarsadin

    It is not an “it” that hates the Pope, but a group of people: the _Times_ editorial board.

  • caoimhin

    Who was it that said, “The character of those who oppose us is the best thing that can be said for us”? It never ceases to amaze me how hostile some elements in the media are to the Church and how far-fetched and deceitful the criticisms they shout from the rooftops.

  • lkeebler

    No priest or any person, lay or not, who is guilty of abuse should be allowed in any way to serve the people (or any child) of the Church. That is not to say, if they repent, that they should be booted out of the Church or should not receive communion. But Wisdom is called for… no matter how much “therapy” a person has (and really isn’t a true devotion to Christ and true repentance for the rest of one’s life the only real “therapy” that will change a heart of stone to a heart of flesh?). The devil attacks from without (the New York Times) and from within… I believe the problem is we have allowed homosexuals into the priesthood believing celibacy was a good enough criteria, obviously this thinking has allowed evil in. Where is our Wisdom? Why are we not following our own directions (maybe most of the problem has been from decades earlier but I have seen for myself the “devil” standing at the alter of God shamelessly flaunting homosexuality in the faces of Christ’s children… this must stop!):

    CONGREGATION FOR CATHOLIC EDUCATION

    Instruction
    Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations
    with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies
    in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders

    Deep-seated homosexual tendencies, which are found in a number of men and women, are also objectively disordered and, for those same people, often constitute a trial. Such persons must be accepted with respect and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. They are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter.

    In the light of such teaching, this Dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called “gay culture”.

  • DWC

    I for one defend little here. The universal church must deal with this travesty hard and straight on. Not a drip should escape. The Vatican must learn, as the US chuch did, to swallow the difficult medicine. In these cases, I can only surmise that once the molestation issues broke … every bishop around the globe had better roll up his sleaves and look into every corner of his diocese, past and present to root out and deal with these sins.

  • lkeebler

    DWC: Your insinuations are not cute… go wash your brain out with soap.