Monday, 28 May 2012

Starting afresh from Christ: open post on Cath News for Monday!

We are in the Australian 'Year of Grace' now, and the tagline for the year is 'Starting Afresh in Christ'.

So let's call on Cath News to start afresh.

And keep calling!

Comments

This morning I said:
Last week's campaign to reform Cath News focused primarily on comments over at Cath News.  I have more to say on this topic shortly, but do keep your rejected comments coming in! 

And do keep trying, even if you think you are butting up against a brick wall!

This evening I have to conclude we really have to keep trying even harder!

The Gospel is literally true!

Consider, for example, the ugly modernism that has appeared in response to an news item presenting science to support an event reported in St Mathew's Gospel, viz an earthquake  on the day Our Lord was crucified. 

The scientists suggest there actually was one on Friday April 3, 33 AD. 

Now you'd think that would be potentially at least regarded as good news, a little independent corroboration that might aid the faithful.

But according to commenter Francis Maloney (and supported as might be expected by the usual suspects) the possibility of it being literally true gets in the way of understanding the 'real message' St Matthew was trying to convey!  And of course the last thing we would want to encourage is belief in the literal truth of the Gospel... Gah!

Now I know the Catechism is inconvenient to historico-critical devotees who received their theological education in the barren years of the 60s and 70s, but does contain some important principles, which one can also find in recent magisterial documents such as Verbum Domini.  In particular:

"The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: "All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal."

We are not supposed to start from our assumptions about what the writer is trying to say and interpret backwards!  We are meant to start from the literal.

I'm not saying that this really was the earthquake recorded by St Matthew.  But for the record, whether an event is mentioned in only one of all four of the Gospels is irrelevant in determining whether or not it really happened - one mention is enough!

The stories and links they are missing...

But this week I want to focus primarily on Cath News' story selection.

And particularly, the stories they aren't reporting on, the sources they never use (the Life Site immediately springs to mind!), the links to helpful contextual material they aren't including.

So throw in your suggestions folks!

Think about the commentators we never hear from; the political topics rarely touched on; and in particular, what is missing from today's selection.

And given that today is Michael Mullins' blogwatcher, tell us especially which blogs you think he should be mentioning instead of his regular selection of Irish and American liberal/Jesuit hangouts!

Cath News must be reformed!

1 comment:

Peter G said...

Count me as another who agrees with everything you have said about CathNews.

I have had numerous comments rejected apparently for no other reason than that they uphold Catholic doctrine and defend the Church, Popes, bishops and priests against unfounded and/or unfair attacks by pointing out the facts of the matter in question. A few months ago I gave up posting to CathNews for this reason.

In addition to outright rejection some of my posts were creatively edited, without my knowledge or consent, to make me appear to say something quite different. e.g. Ms Hogan changes the words "sodomy" and "sodomisers" to "homosexuality" and "homosexuals" to make me appear to condemn those unfortunate souls afflicted with this condition, rather than condemning the actions of some of them. In this case I vehemently and repeatedly objected via email but Ms Hogan ignored my requests to either restore my actual words or else delete the comments.

The few times Ms Hogan has bothered to contact me, the reason given was that my comments (concerning people making vicious attacks on the Church/pope/bishops/priests/Catholics) were "uncharitable and possibly actionable", a charge I reject. Meanwhile she continues to almost daily publish far more uncharitable and defamatory comments about the Church/pope/bishops/priests/Catholics.

One time she told me my comments were rejected because I used too many adverbs!

Ironically, generally anti-Catholic sites like the ABC, have no problem publishing the same comments which were rejected by CathNews.

CathNews must be reformed!