So I noticed something. In the months following the election of Pope Francis, the news media lit up like a solar flare. This was especially true after his famous 'who am I to judge' remark about the LGTBQ movement. Every week, if not every day, there seemed to be stories about Pope Francis. All of which gushed with praise and adoration and optimism about how Pope Francis was beginning the good work of finally burning that old time religion to the ground. For example, this one always comes to mind, from the rag dedicated to proselytizing our youngest into a world of Sodom and Gomorrah debauchery and nihilism:
That was just part of the new age of post-modern propaganda that rotated around Pope Francis like a hurricane. Reminds you of the messianic visions of Obama in 2008, don't it.
Anyway, I notice in comparison to that, the press has been rather quiet about Pope Leo XIV. But so has everyone else. Certainly in comparison to the almost daily posts unpacking the latest Pope Francis interview or talking point. Oh, people mention Pope Leo here and there. For instance, those of more traditional sympathies noted that on June 1st, otherwise known as our last month long foray into post-Christian paganism and dreams of a post-Western world for the year, Pope Leo chose to talk about families and mom and dad and having those babies.
So naturally, this is what I saw after June 1st on most media outlets that bothered to mention him at all:
 |
| At least Vatican News added the family admonition to the important news |
Over at Where Peter Is, where every word that proceeded from the mouth of Francis seemed to warrant its own special column (except his trashing of transgender activism), I saw no mention of his June 1st musings. Just a column reflecting on how Pope Leo can effectively continue the reforms and activism of Pope Francis, and one reflecting on the real meaning of his emphasis on unity.
Whether it's the Church righting itself, or people wanting to refrain from rushing in, or what, I don't know. Clearly Pope Leo is not what the press initially hoped or imagined. By now we know that thing we used to call the news media is merely tabloid propaganda. They have no desire to cover news, merely promote. And so far, it seems whatever they want to promote and what they see in Pope Leo XIV are not one and the same. At least it looks that ways thus far. So we'll see. Just something I've noticed.
For a bonus giggle, here is a Youtube video (posted on WPI) in which we realize Pope Leo and Pope Francis will be, well, the same but with different name tags. And unity properly understood is when we realize it's the fault of those traditionalists and more conservative types misreading what Pope Leo no doubt intends to mean:
Heh. That sort of thing always makes me chuckle. The old leftwing trick of asking why can't conservatives stop being so damn divisive and just admit it's all their fault. I find the stunning lack of self-awareness among those, including Christians, who tack Left is usually the most amazing thing. And most annoying.
Yeah, you tend to think the bias in the news is what it reports.
ReplyDeleteEventually you come to realize the real bias is in what it does not report.
That is spot on. I've said the only thing I'm sure of is that the real world is the part I never see covered by the news. I'd kill to know what those on the Left in the Church - like Deacon Greydanus - have said about the clear and obvious cover up by the press of President Biden's cognitive decline. After all, just last year he posted on Facebook a long piece explaining why we should default to the experts, and that included actual MSM outlets as opposed to that stuff online. How much longer can that sort of perspective be sustained?
DeleteI remember back in the days when Shea would tolerate comments and disagreements, more than a few of us asked him something like, "what will you do when the democrats go off the rails? when they violate church teaching?"
DeleteOf course he protested that he would call them out and demand their repentance same as he does the republicans.
Now we see from him and his ilk that no, they won't. Because the news media will just not report on such things. So they just go along ignoring the evils of the left, but all the right people studiously ignore them. (And on off the chance they do, Shea will bury his head in the sand.)
Thus we see how the Christian Left are useless to act as any sort of conscience to the Left.
I remember that well. That's when he was starting to move from his post-conservative 'pox on both houses' to 'but Democrats have some good eggs' shift. This was accomplished by focusing on something good - like opposition to abortion maybe - that a Democrat would say, and then cheering the party on and insisting that proves the Dems aren't all bad, so Dems aren't bad at all. Meanwhile, we also noticed how increasingly even when Republicans did something that should have been seen as good, he would avoid giving credit. Like when the Ohio GOP moved to put heavy limits on abortion, late term abortion, and similar things he said he was against back then. When Ohio passed the restrictions, I remember him simply posting 'Well done Ohio!', notably avoiding pointing out that it was Ohio Republicans overcoming huge opposition from Democrats and the press. Me and a couple others chuckled at how those Ohio cornfields and rolling hills did a great thing, that's for sure. We knew then that Mark was quickly going where now so many have gone, and that's the Smeagol approach of being sneaky. Which, I suppose if you're going to align with the secular Left as a Christian, what else can you do?
DeleteAnother way of saying "lack of self-awareness" is "lack of humility". When someone is his own god, it's hard for him to be critical of self. --- G. Poulin
DeleteG. Poulin, I find that humility is in short supplies these days, as narcissism seems almost the golden rule of the day.
DeleteI, for one, am, still cautiously optimistic about Pope Leo. I recognize the precarious situation that he's been placed into, and if he just does his quiet thing and popes like a spiritual father and not like a politician, I'll be satisfied. Someone needs to turn the spigots of grace back on.
ReplyDeleteI am, too. Not that I will care for everything he says or does. But first off, I think he will have a more aggregable personality and manner than Pope Francis, which was often a problem. Of course the pope shouldn't sound like any one country or political party or demographic group, and I don't expect him to. And if he says things I disagree with, especially if he does so with charity and love and respect, I'll certainly try to work things out. Again, when I came into the Church Catholics at the time, including converts, bent over backwards to insist Catholics needn't bow down and grovel before everything the pope says - which in theory, even the staunchest Pope Francis defenders admitted by deed (see the transgender issue), if not by word. So I still take them up on that.
DeletePerhaps the quiet is from advice given to American priests when they are reassigned. Do nothing drastic the first year and give yourself a chance to figure out how that parish works. Chesterton's Fence is generally good advice.
ReplyDeleteI am just hoping and praying that when Leo does inevitably become more active, that he will be good for the Church.
I would like to think. It seemed like Pope Francis was anything but quiet in those early months. I do think Pope Leo is doing and saying things, it's just not making much of a splash. Perhaps he's being strategic in waiting, I don't know. But so far, my guess is that he isn't quite everything the most zealous fans of Pope Francis was hoping. The only thing now will be how they, after years of smacking down any criticism of Pope Francis, will handle it if Pope Leo goes against the grain.
Delete