l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 bama and his willing accomplices in the media are now targeting Cardinal
Dolan
June 2, 2012 by Rick Rice
No one should deny that The New York Times serves at the behest of Barack
Hussein Obama and the leftist ideology they both embrace.
And no one should deny that Cardinal Dolan is the face of the opposition to
the HHS Mandate being foisted upon Catholics by this administration.
So this hit piece from the New York Times can’t really be surprising.
Cardinal Dolan must be taught to bow to Obama and digging up alleged dirt on
him is the Chicago way. The Old Gray Hag is of course willing to do her
level best to teach Dolan a lesson, to punish him, to smear and discredit
his name.
Will it work?
To the unthinking and those prone to pile on to that which feeds their
hatred of the Church, of course.
But to those who care to go deeper, those who see this for what it truly is,
the hope is that it won’t.
For the latter, I give you first Jimmy Akin who fisks The New York Times
piece effectively and who offers up what I consider to be effective counters
to the smears.
And then I give you Mark Shea who I think sums things up rather smartly:
There is much dudgeon in the article. There is no dudgeon–none
whatsoever–about the fact that exactly the same tactic is used to get rid
of pervy public school teachers. This, and the lionization of the Right Sort
of Roman makes me rather inclined to think this a specimen of the Times
indulging in fake dudgeon because of Dolan’s leadership against the HHS
mandate. In short, it’s a hit piece in the service of another agenda.
In the end, the story seems to be that Dolan tried to get rid of bad
priests as fast as possible, which used to be a good thing according to the
Times. Since the state did not see fit to get rid of them by putting them in
jail and the canonical process might for all I know, have cost *more* than
this route (has anybody done the calculations?) I don’t think it’s
particularly a slam dunk that this was a bad way to go. In the end, the
tradeoff is between asking, “Do you want a long expensive process in which
the perv remains a priest on the payroll while he games the system endlessly
or do you want a short process in which he gets some money and we are rid
of him?” I, for one, am not ready to have hysterics about Plan B–at least
till I know the cost of the full canonical rigamarole for laicizing a perv.
You pays your money and you makes your choice: is it more important to
get rid of the perv swiftly even if it costs you something (that used to be
the very sensible demand of the Times, if you recall)? Or do you keep the
perv around for months or even years (while it still costs you something and
perhaps costs even more than it would cost you to just get rid of him)? I
care more about getting rid of the perv fast than I do about money. So even
if the long canonical process were cheaper than $20,000 (and I strongly
suspect it is not) I think I’d be inclined to favor the fast route. The
only drawback is that the perv gets the money. So is it more important to me
that the perv not get the dough or that innocents are protected from a perv
? I opt for innocents protected over my desire for vengeance.
I suspect this is the first of more attacks to come against Archbishop Dolan
, after all, it is the Chicago Way and we know with certainty that Obama is
quite the thug-in-chief.
The question is how far will the attacks go?
Time will tell.
In the mean-time, allow me to plug a movie I’m hearing has relevant
undertones.
For Greater Glory is playing at theatres near you. I plan on seeing it this
weekend. I think you should as well. |
|
