Saturday, 26 May 2012

Cath News on Friday and this week...

I promised I'd get back to Friday's edition of Cath News.  But first a few other issues that readers pointed to this week.

Melindagate

First, an update on the Cath News shouldn't-have-been a story of the week, the Melinda Gates saga.

Cath News got lots of comments on it. 

And rejected a whole lot more, read back through the week's posts!

Fortunately not all the Catholic media are acatholic, or at least not all the time, because this week's Catholic Weekly has a really excellent piece on the subject, from Jovina Graham under the heading 'Youth Voice'.  It talks about the 'Catholicbut' mentality.

It's the kind of article one would love to see featured on Cath Blog or in the opinion column (but I'm not holding my breath!), so do go take a look.

Anti-pope Joan

Sister Joan piece also seems to have attracted its share of rejections, presumably on the basis that they were part of a 'campaign'.  Here's a rejected comment passed to me by a reader:

"Poor Pope Pius XII cops it again with another broadside of allegations that have already been disproven in a number of books, including one written by a Jewish scholar. He was also awarded a medal from a Jewish organisation after WW2 for His and the Church`s efforts in saving Jews from Hitler’s final solution.One could suppose that any excuse to attack any Pope is easier for Sr Joan to do than answering the genuine and real problems among some religious organisations in America with relation to their loyalty and fidelity to the Church`s teaching. Why do Sr Joan`s writings always get a run at Cath-news when they seem to be always against the Church? As an organisation funded by the Catholic Church in Australia and funded by many individual [myself included] Catholics through the Bishop`s conference is it too much to ask Cath news to publish stories that are actually positive, loyal and true to the Church?"

Yup, I'm guessing it was rejected because it was interpreted as being part of my campaign for reform.  

Rejected for asked for stories that are positive, loyal and true to the Church!

Or perhaps it was rejected for attacking Sr Joan - for her attack on someone else!

Websites promoting abortion...

You might also look at the comment on Friday's open post from commenter Sharon, who pointed to one of Cath News' 'featured websites' that features links to sites promoting abortion.  Yes, it was  few years back. 

But the link is still there, live in their archives.

Despite the fact that more than a few commenters pointed out that it was not in fact a Catholic Agency (as the Cath News feature claims).

And despite the fact that it promotes contraception and abortion...

Oh dear, can the bishops really continue to protect this organization!


Friday's stories

Friday's stories included a few of particular note:
  • some comments from the Pope on absentee Dads, which attracted a series of shall we say, 'interesting' comments that could really do with some responses!;
  • the merger of the (few remaining) Tassie St Joseph's sisters and a gathering to honour the 125th anniversary of the order in Tasmania.  Cath News reports: "Archbishop Adrian Doyle was the main celebrant at yesterday's Mass which followed a procession of the Sisters into the church wearing their symbolic teal pashminas."[What is a 'pashminas' you ask?  According to wiki, it is something such as a scarf made out of a type of cashmere wool, that comes from the Nepalse pahmina goat!  Come on Cooees, that one is just begging for the treatment...]
  • Bishop Heenan of Rockhampton criticises the introduction of income management (which ensures that 50%  - not 70% as the story incorrectly claims (70% income management only applies when the child is in the child protection system because of substantiated neglect) - of unemployment and other benefits must be spent on essentials such as food, rent and other essentials, rather than pissed away on the grog.

3 comments:

A Canberra Observer said...

my experience is that any comment to CathNews that includes some exhortation to either not publish or publish something else is rejected.

They used to edit comments, and to be fair I guess this stopped some excesses but it also took out any questioning of CathNews approach. Now I suppose if there is anything in a comment that doesn't pass muster for whatever reason it is just binned.

Sharon (L) said...

Hi
Just pointing out that the Sharon who commented on Friday's open post is a different person from me (though I agree wholeheartedly with her comments there).

I'm the one who gave you my CathNews-rejected post about Melinda Gates.

I have had quite a few others about various topics rejected for no apparent reason. (I'll post them here if you are ibnterested). It really does seem that there is an agenda to promote an anti-Catholic line on CathNews.

Saddest of all perhaps is that when a non-Catholic or a poorly catechised Catholic hears a story on the secular news presenting the Catholic Church as some monstrous organisation dedicated to promoting evil, and he thinks "that can't be right, I'll just click on "Catholic Church in Australia" and see what the Catholics have to say, instead of Catholic doctrines and links to actual statements from the Holy See all he gets is exactly wheat he sees in the secular media. And OUR collection plate money is paying the salaries of the people who do this!

Kate Edwards said...

Thanks Sharon (L). Yes, by all means send in your other rejected comments.

Let everyone judge for themselves the validty of Cath News' policies!