Archbishop: MSM can’t be trusted on matters of faith
posted at 4:45 pm on August 25, 2011 by Tina Korbe
Christians (and presumably non-Christians, too!) “make a very serious mistake” if they turn to news outlets like The New York Times, Newsweek, CNN and MSNBC for “reliable news about religion,” the incoming bishop of Philadelphia told a crowd of young people in Spain last week. LifeSiteNews reports:
“Being uninformed about the world and its problems and issues is a sin against our vocation as disciple[s],” Archbishop Charles Chaput told his audience during a special World Youth Day session in Madrid. And yet, he went on to note, the Christian believer is faced with a unique challenge in finding accurate sources of information on key issues.
“In the United States, our battles over abortion, family life, same-sex marriage and other sensitive issues have led to ferocious public smears and legal threats not only of Catholics, but also against Mormons, evangelicals and other religious believers,” he said.
“And with relatively few exceptions, the mass media tend to cover these disputed issues with a combination of ignorance, laziness, and bias against traditional Christian belief.” …
“These news media simply don’t provide trustworthy information about religious faith,” he said. “These are secular operations focused on making a profit. … They have very little sympathy for the Catholic faith, and quite a lot of aggressive skepticism toward any religious community that claims to preach and teach God’s truth.”
In case you have any doubts as to the accuracy of Chaput’s criticisms, the latest example of the double standard at play in the columns of at least one NYT writer (who just happens to be the executive editor!) might help to resolve them.
Of course, no one asks that the NYT or MSNBC demonstrate “sympathy” for the Catholic or any other faith — but a fair shake would be welcome. All the news media needs to do is state accurately and openly what the Catholic Church or any other religion teaches on an issue and allow readers to decide for themselves. In the case of Catholicism, it should be especially easy to do, as the Church publishes an official catechism that serves as the final word on Church doctrine. Reporters could store that volume in their desks right along with the AP style guide and refer to it anytime they want to provide the Church’s position on an issue. I imagine other religious faiths publish similar materials.
Or, the MSM could abandon all pretense to objectivity. That, at least, would alert readers to the reality that they need to diversify their sources to ensure a well-rounded perspective. But until news sources like Newsweek and CNN speak the truth about themselves, Chaput and others will continue to call them out.
On a related note, the MSM is not the only segment of society that has “a lot of aggressive skepticism toward any religious community that claims to preach and teach God’s truth.” Academia, too — in my limited experience, at least — seems to operate from assumptions of religious falsehood rather than religious truth. Studies show higher education liberalizes believers’ faith, leaving few completely sure of their convictions. But I’d be curious to know if additional education about what various religions actually teach (and not just “higher education,” in general) leads students to reject religion or soften their stances on objective truth (embracing relativism) at similarly high rates. In other words, among the highly educated set, how many are also highly educated about a wide variety of religious doctrines and yet reject religion? Just a question.
Related Posts:









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3
Doomberg Says We’re Just Gonna ‘Have to Change’ How We Interpret That Old, Antiquated Constitution In Wake Of Boston Bombings
M2RB: Styx
Resist We Much on April 23, 2013 at 11:24 AM
That link from the Jester site is verrrry interesting. I suppose the powers that be could be playing dumb and saying we think they acted alone so other conspirators aren’t put on notice.
mikeyboss on April 23, 2013 at 11:29 AM
Are they sure it wasn’t a Ben Affleck movie?
RadClown on April 23, 2013 at 11:36 AM
The one guy — a boxer, no advanced education. The other guy, a pothead college student, no technical education.
The difficult part is (a) detonator and (b) radio control of detonation. Would appear difficult, yes? Apparently not. The info is readily available on the interwebs. Like here. If you can use Google, then read and look at pictures, yes you can create a remote detonator out of toy parts.
Welcome to the 21st century.
SunSword on April 23, 2013 at 11:42 AM
Yep. And even that example is overly complicated.
stvnscott on April 23, 2013 at 12:00 PM
Here’s the real problem believing these two did this alone.
Where?
Tamerlan had his wife and mother living with him. So the wife has to be an accomplice. I wouldn’t doubt the mother is.
Jahar had several roommates. Some of these winners are being arrested and released, rinse repeat.
Neither had a job that provided the workspace.
So to believe no one else was involved, means they bought the supplies just a few days before and built it that morning, during the race. With no training or testing.
Along with the other IED’s.
And several guns.
And hundreds of rounds.
Just got it all over the weekend.
The Feds are lying that no one else was involved. Whatever statement Jahar gave them fit their needs.
Hell, he could have said yes to a question that asked “was anyone else involved with the Marathon bombing”?
That’s totally different than “Are you working with any groups”?
budfox on April 23, 2013 at 12:08 PM
Looks like Tamerlin may have murdered a few friends on September 11th 2011…
Click Me
Smoothies on April 23, 2013 at 12:13 PM
All I can say is “no shiite sherlock”.
dentarthurdent on April 23, 2013 at 12:33 PM
Yup, so obviously the laws that make it illegal to make a bomb, and the laws that make it illegal to kill and maim lots of people are just not effective – so all we need is some more laws to make those things more illegal and we can solve the problem.
dentarthurdent on April 23, 2013 at 12:37 PM
I’m sure a guy who’s blown people up, shot a cop in cold blood and tried to kill some more in a getaway, would never tell a lie.
IndieDogg on April 23, 2013 at 12:39 PM
Exactly how would the RUSSIANS have pegged one of the two “lone wolves” operating in America as a terrorist if this is true. Are they doing a better job of monitoring American internet traffic than our own intelligence agencies. Either that or our govt is lying to us – again. We are screwed either way.
LarryinLA on April 23, 2013 at 1:18 PM
It was a joke.
farsighted on April 23, 2013 at 1:46 PM
Acted alone?? Really??
Where did the MONEY come from?? For the clothes, the cars, the apartments, the GYM and boxing. I guess they just came in from the internet as well.
Michael73501 on April 23, 2013 at 2:13 PM
I hear the term ‘self radicalized’ all over the news. They can’t understand how the bombers don’t have a direct connection to terrorists, but can do this.
It is imperative to understand it is not ‘radical’ Islam.
It is Islam – the antithesis of western civilization.
TfromV on April 23, 2013 at 8:18 PM
They’ll conveniently come out with information that attacks the internet, and freedom but they won’t tell us who funded these guys. Probably because it was the Sauds or the FBI.
fatlibertarianinokc on April 23, 2013 at 8:46 PM
It’s still too early to say what his motivations were, but I have a hunch he’s a tea partier.
/msm
jhffmn on April 25, 2013 at 12:59 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3