If any of you have a subscription to the ultra-liberal dissenting – dying – National Catholic Reporter I suggest that you cancel it now.
Urge your parish’s pastor to cancel as well. Get it out of our churches.
Take a look at the beginning of this piece:
Church reformers have second thoughts on pope
Mar. 30, 2010
By Jeff Diamant, Religion News Service [Jeff Diamant writes for The Star-Ledger in Newark, N.J.]To many advocates of reform in the Catholic church, the election of conservative Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as pope in April 2005 was a blow to hopes the Vatican would change positions on gender, sexuality, divorce, and the church hierarchy.
Yet the result encouraged three prominent reformers who were appointed to a U.S. bishops’ National Review Board. The three American Catholics — a judge, an attorney and a newspaper publisher — were concerned mainly with the clergy sex scandal.
They had met with Ratzinger in his Vatican office in 2004 for an extensive discussion on the cover-ups of clergy sex abuse of children, and came to view Ratzinger as the best churchman anywhere on the issue. A year later, when he became Pope Benedict XVI, they were often quoted praising him in American news articles.
But that was then.
[…]
The rest of the piece trashes Pope Benedict.
They embrace the New York Times position and agenda.
And they trash him in their editorial while staging a spittle-flecked nutty.
Read what the hysterics wrote:
We now face the largest institutional crisis in centuries, possibly in church history. How this crisis is handled by Benedict, what he says and does, how he responds and what remedies he seeks, will likely determine the future health of our church for decades, if not centuries, to come.
The sad thing is that they want this. This is their big chance.
It is hard to justify even wrapping fish in this.
Cancel now.
I want clarity and answers too. I think that if there are more cases of sexual abuse of children by priests that are lurking in the mud, they need to be brought out and dealt with in justice and in truth.
The Church has to be cleansed of this. It will be painful. We will be beaten up by the Enemy while it goes on.
But the NCR is using the present crisis to attack the Holy Father. They are trying to damage this pontificate.
Cancel it.
Just cancel it.
Loading ...
“It is hard to justify even wrapping fish in this.”Fr. John Zuhlsdorf ROFL So true. I think it would be unkind to the fish and it is dead.
I would be so happy to see them go out of business. I always assumed they took in millions of dollars each year from private donors who benefit from having such a junky “Catholic” publication, because their circulation is so low but they manage to stay afloat and relatively influential.
I don’t even think this garbage is worse than most of their other garbage. Seems like once a month or more there’s something published by NCR that is toilet-paper worthy.
In World War II we would have referred to these folks as “collaborators.” Tom
Centuries? Well, you can at least argue that, maybe. But ever? That’s beyond absurd. With no research whatsoever, let’s name some bigger threats: Arianism, Iconoclasm, the Great Schism, the Eastern Schism, the Protestant heresy . . . that’s enough to start.
Follow up: you can only really argue “centuries” if you only mean one and a half. The upheavals of the Napoleonic Wars and the revolutionary tremors that shook Europe through the 1840s were really far worse in their consequences and dangers than anything happening now.
UUUUGHHHH! Man, we have to seize back the name “Catholic”! How can you hate the Church, spread lies, print filth and still get to keep “Catholic” in your name??
Tom – you hit the nail on the head. Folks such as these are, knowing or unknowing, collaborators with the enternal enemy!
Makes my blood boil!!
For folks who are “into” going back to the first centuries of the Church (The NCR crowd; writers and many of their commentors, who “tell it as it is” according to historical revisionism and just plain stupid theology), they have a pretty strange idea of Church history.
I guess you see what you wanna see.
And Judge Burke and R. Bennett should know better…shame on THEM!
I can’t cancel… as I don’t subscribe! :-)
“…we have to seize back the name “Catholic”! How can you hate the Church, spread lies, print filth and still get to keep “Catholic” in your name??”
Can a Canon Lawyer comment on canon 216? Would this canon apply?
Let’s not confuse the NCReporter with the NCRegister, which is actually writing good journalistic articles in support of the Pope! The Reporter should just give it up. I just wanted to clarify that because when I read an article on the Register, I was confused. Didn’t want anyone else to be confused, too!
I can think of a better use of the National Catholic Distorter, but I would not even give them my money if I was short of bath room tissue.
They seem very similar to the Tablet in Britain- which, I’m pleased to say, is to be found at the back of less and less churches as time goes by. The simple truth is these trash rags ceased being Catholic a long time ago, and are still entrenched in the ‘spirit of Vatican II’ nonsense. They see in Benedict a threat, not to the Church, but to the survival of their own rag mags- the more the Church moves away from sloppy celebrations of the liturgy towards beautiful worship, the less relevant these mags, with their outdated views on how the Church should be, become.
Hello Fr. Z,
Unfortunately, my guess is that your readership is unlikely to have any overlap at all with the NCR subscriber base. [You would be surprised. They read. They don’t comment.]
But I confess that if I had the money to spare, I’d love to buy the NCR just for the satisfaction of being able to fire everyone.
How this crisis is handled by Benedict, what he says and does, how he responds and what remedies he seeks, will likely determine the future health of our church for decades, if not centuries, to come.
Of course, I couldn’t disagree more with the NCR’s premise (nor with its transparent objective).
But I do agree with its conclusion in the sentence above. If our Holy Father declined to let this crisis go to waste, and instead took it as an opportunity to lop off those heads that deserve to roll — and I’m thinking liturgical and doctrinal and disciplinary as well as clerical abuse crisis — then, indeed, the Church could reap the benefit for years and decades, perhaps even centuries. [Centuries? I doubt it.]
Why a credible journalist like John Allen Jr. persists in writing for this no good rag is beyond me. [Sad but true. He is good enough NCR won’t take him with it when it goes down.]
TJerome-‘collaberators’, yes.
I have another word for them-TRAITORS!
The Distorter has sold their identity and their soul for their thirty pieces of silver-and the sooner it goes, the better.
I have an idea, I’m not sure I’ll do it myself… but I was thinking that LOTS of people should subscribe, and THEN demand their money back after an issue or two. If nothing else, it will give them an accounting headache.
What subscription? :)
I refuse to even grace their website with a hit, these days. Probably gives them advertising money every time you log on to their site. The answer to the question is, “Yes, it is time to simply cancel your NCR subscriptions.” There is nothing Catholic about the rag. It makes me wish I lived in a culture where it was normal and accepted to spit on things/persons in disgust. Jesus knew how to get the thieves and salesmen out of his Father’s house. It’s time to throw this TRASH out on the street. And toss out your copies of NCR, as well… :-)
Not only that, 1) If it is showing up on your parish literature rack or in your parish library, please ask the pastor- in writing- to cancel, citing specific scandalous examples; 2) The same goes mutatis mutandi for Newman Clubs, college libraries, convents, motherhouses, seminaries, rectories and monasteries; 3) Ask publishers, vocation directors, retreat directors etc. no longer to advertise in it; 4) Write to your bishop asking that he order it removed from all the parishes and institutions of the diocese and that he command that no advertising be placed in it by any diocesan entity.
To be honest, on Good Friday I am tempted to not silently kneel when the clergy calls for us to pray for Pope Benedict XVI, but to stand and applaud. (Of course, that would be wrong!)
Does NCR know that dogma and teachings cannot be ‘changed?’ Do the editors understand why this is (i.e., the faith isn’t a stage play we can rewrite and edit per contemporary tastes)?
Lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi. This is such a basic concept. Clearly, the Novus Ordo’s production and implementation have caused many Catholics to believe that doctrine can similarly be a work of committees.
I find the NCR can be helpful so long as I filter out the obvious bias. The same is true of all such publications. Once the bias of the source is determined, the reader can correct for it and discern what – if any – valuable information or insight is contained therein. For example, at the other end of the spectrum one would find “First Things” which contains many pieces of good information and well reasoned insight, yet clearly as does the NCR has a clear (extreme right wing) bias. Somewhere there is a happy middle between NCR and First Things, neither is perfect, and the discriminating reader can filter out what is unhelpful. Sort of like finding the middle between Fox News Network and MSNBC . . . a steady diet of either in isolation would leave a person with a warped view of reality. Case in point, Mr. Allen does a wonderful job writing for NCR – now if he were ever to leave them, the paper would lose quite a bit of circulation. And if an NCR subscriber dropped the NCR, he/she would no longer have access to Mr. Allen’s excellent work. Fr. Jim
I concur with Fr. Z’s comment on many of us here who read the NCReporter but do not comment (and I must commend those whose “names” I recognize for taking up the sword of truth there!); tried it for a while; a complete waste of my time. Many of them have no interest in actually discussing any issue; they just “pontificate” (I say this with a grin on my face!) or “vent their spleen”.
The absolute garbage and error that gets posted there defies any kind of understanding. It’s not liberal/conservative…it’s Catholic/dissenters. And they don’t want to hear it.
Father Z: “…then, indeed, the Church could reap the benefit for years and decades, perhaps even centuries. [Centuries? I doubt it.]”
Of course, I was simply critiquing the NCR in its own syntax. But …
Seriously? You doubt that forthright action to restore the liturgy now — remember, I said “liturgical” as well as … — could perhaps yield benefits for centuries to come?
Really? Seriously?
Of course, I was simply critiquing the NCR in its own syntax. But … Do “we” really believe Save the Liturgy, Save the World (eternally, yes, centuries and centuries), or not?
I already cancelled my subscription 12 yrs ago when it dawned on me that NCR is not Catholic!
Just more catholic-haters. They’re no more Catholic than Martin Luther was. Maybe now the powers-that-be in the hierarchial church will start to act like they understand this fact.
I glance at National Catholic Reporter online for the same reason I glance at CTA now and then. It’s a good thing to scout out your enemies to see what they’re up to.
“Just cancel it.” Amen! Amen!
I’m so glad I gave up TV this lent. I might just leave it off after Easter.
Congrats John 6:54 on dumping the TV. I did that a while back. See DVD movies on the computer once in a while. One of my better life moves.
I can honestly say I never read anything from NCR. My only experience with it has been from Father Z’s hi-tech blog. From what I’ve read about it here, I wouldn’t use it to wrap one of those Asian Bighead Carp that so many people are concerned about.
As has been said before, have to watch we’re our money’s going so it doesn’t end up in forums like NCR. If we get them to the point to where they need a bailout from President Obama, we’ve done what we can do. ( No sarcasm here :) )
Just out of curiosity, how many boycotts do you guys average a week?
The lines are being drawn up. My reaction is that the struggle for what the bishops of the US think is over….they will be orthodox. Since that is the case, they must be deprived of any possible authority. That explains both this and the Times, and why they are digging so hard right now, and why they did not in, say, 1985. The question has been asked as to why the Catholic Church has been singled out. I also think that the question must be asked as to why the Church of 2010 is being singled out, but the Church of 1985 was not.
Very funny, PostCatholic.
Anti-Catholic prejudice is coming out of the woodwork this spring. It’s always bad, but we’re cover for Obama’s health care fiasco right now, so it’s really bad.
However, most people don’t have religion on their minds as much as they used to, so hopefully, it’ll pass in a while. Most people now are more interested in money, jobs and stealing each others’ live-ins to worry about us for too long ==> about the only upside of living in a heathen country. [You knew there had to be one.]
Besides, most people hate the health care bill anyway, and know they were forced to accept it by a monumental abuse of power and fraud.
Non-Catholics out there may notice the brouhaha that we’re struggling with, and it may arouse their anti-catholic prejudice a bit but they know that’s a different topic than the health care fiasco.
The theory is, you know, that people can only get riled up about one thing at a time…but I don’t think the administration realizes how angry many people are about the health care bill. And they’re be even more ticked when they get the bill and then get told they can’t see the doctor for the next six months.