From the article "Why are the media so utterly hostile to the pope?" posted by THE CATHOLIC HERALD:

The sneering vitriol heaped upon the Holy Father and on Catholics in general by the English metropolitan elites in advance of the papal visit to Britain in September has been little short of staggering. We are well acquainted with the apparent incompetence that has characterised the organisation of the trip, but that doesn’t explain why so many in the press seem to be baying for the Pope’s blood.

Back in March, the Independent's eccentric columnist, Johann Hari, succeeded in convincing those already eager to believe that Pope Benedict XVI was personally culpable for covering up child abuse that “there must be something in it”. His piece was laced with distortions and misrepresentations. He wrote: “It is now an indisputable fact that the Catholic Church systematically covered up the rape of children across the globe, and knowingly, consciously put paedophiles in charge of more kids. Joseph Ratzinger – who claims to be “infallible” – was at the heart of this policy for decades.”

What many have suspected as a pernicious anti-Catholic bias at the Times was apparently confirmed when columnist Caitlin Moran tweeted that the Catholic Church “hate[s] women and fucks kids” to her 29,000 followers.

The BBC is planning a drama called The Pope on Trial, “a 90-minute drama which will take as its premise what would happen if the Pope were to go on trial for covering up sex abuse perpetrated by priests”.

And there are hints, most notably in Damian Thompson's latest piece for The Spectator, that the British media are storing up something particularly juicy to deploy as Pope Benedict XVI’s plane lands.

All of which begs the question: why?

COMMENT: Answers on a postcard to "The Catholic Herald," please. There's no point in trying to contact them via their web page. Their account has been suspended for some reason.

My goodness! Even the Internet is out to get him.



  1. *sighs*

    A few things to point out here. In the first, Mr. Hari is employed by the Independent as a commentator, which appears to be Media-speak for ‘pot-stirrer’.

    Secondly, I would recommend that folk read Mr. Hari’s article for themselves and come to their own conclusions. Yes, that sort of ‘think-fer-yerself’ stuff has gotten me excommunicated, but fear not, as Englishmen (and, thus, kinsmen of God), you shouldn’t worry about such things.

    The fact that the left-leaning Independent is being excoriated (and not terribly well, I should add) by an arch-conservative catholic broadsheet (whose editor-in-chief is also employed by the Daily Telegraph) is probably not lightning-rod news, but the fact that the Catholic Herald obviously couldn’t handle the additional 100 visits to their website is amusing.

  2. Amusing or prophetic?

    Also, I would guess that Damian (perfect Christian name) Thompson’s smug and arrogant commentary in The Torygraph has done more damage to the pope’s standing among the English media types, and beyond, than any number of contraception and pregnancy related deaths in Africa and South America could ever achieve. Of course, the Ultramontane Thompson has as much to do with traditional English Catholicism as I have to do with body building.

  3. Oh, I’ll file it under amusing. I would put prophetic down to some blogger named Josh telling them to hush and go work in soup kitchens…or that Dr. Thompson is an expert in ‘counterknowledge’, the deliberate use of misinformation packaged to look like fact.

    RE: body building, I didn’t know your last name was Atlas. The things you learn….

  4. The Catholic Herald now says: “The site http://www.catholicherald.co.uk is temporarily unavailable due to necessary maintenance. We apologise for the temporary inconvenience, Catholic Herald Team.” They are a bit confused if they’ve taken to apologising to themselves.