Christianity to believe in (UPDATED)

I like this from Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio.  I like it very much:

In his homily to the priests and people of the Diocese of Brooklyn, Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio, called upon the priests and people of the Diocese of Brooklyn to stand up with him and "besiege The New York Times. Send a message loud and clear that the Pope, our Church, and bishops and our priests will no longer be the personal punching bag of The New York Times."

Bishop DiMarzio's spirited defense of the Holy Father was based on the decision of The New York Times editors to, "Omit significant facts," and ignore the reality that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which Cardinal Ratzinger headed up, did not have competency over Canonical Trials in 1996. Moreover, Bishop DiMarzio continued "...the priest in question, Father Murphy was in the midst of a Canonical Trial. He died before a verdict was rendered."

Reflecting on the timing of the stories, DiMarzio stated "Two weeks of articles about a story from many decades ago, in the midst of the Most Holy Season of the Church year is both callous and smacks of calumny!" He continued "This evening, I am asking you to join me making your displeasure known to the editors by letters or emails."

Deacon Greg promises to post the entire homily later tonight.

I'd check back if I were you.

I will.

Crossposted at Wizbang.

UPDATE: Deacon Greg has his promised follow-on post up:

In recent weeks, we have all been reminded of the evil that some of our brothers inflicted upon children. These men are our brothers and we all, priests and bishops, share some of the responsibility for the harm they have done, for we could not believe it was possible. For this reason, we must resolve to be vigilant in the protection of those young people in our care. We must humbly seek forgiveness of those that have been robbed of innocence and the faithful whose trust was abused.

I do want to take a moment to speak about The New York Times mischaracterization of the role of the Holy Father when he was Archbishop of Munich and then Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The fact is that the paper omitted significant facts with respect to the case of a certain priest in Wisconsin. The reality is that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith did not have competency over Canonical Trials in 1996 when the case is believed to have first been referred to Cardinal Ratzinger. Moreover, the priest in question, a Father Murphy, was in the midst of a Canonical Trial. He died before a verdict was rendered. The case of the priest in the Munich Archdiocese also is presented as a definite error of judgment when all the facts are not known.

This evening, I am asking you to join me in making your displeasure known to the editors. I might even suggest cancelling our subscriptions to the New York Times, but we need to know what the enemy is saying.

You'll want to read it all.

And thanks Mr. Reynolds for the Instalanche... here's hoping many of your readers decide to return and often.

Comments

[Speedwell]

Great, how about we stick up for the victims... by which I mean not the poor beleagured clergymen, and not the poor "persecuted" Christian majority, but the actual victims, the molested children and others taken advantage of by evil people under color of Church authority.

[TubbyHubby]

Um. Ok. I stick up for the victims. Like I did in the 80s. Then again in the 90s. Then again in naughts. Same victims. Same crimes. Same story. Can you say "Dead horse?"

[SenatorMark4]

Act.Up.Now. It's really very simple to enter a store and pick up your copy of the New York Times and walk it to the back and forget it in the toilet paper aisle.

[Gunga]

As if you can't support both victims AND the truth...

And exactly HOW are you "supporting" those victims, Sunshine? ...snarky blog comments? ...happy rainbow unicorn wishes caste on the winds of hope for a better tomorrow? As they used to say in the sixties, if you aren't part of the solution, you're probably a bed-wetting lefty living in his mommy's basement waiting for the governement to tell you what to think.

[Paul A'Barge]

Your problems began when you took your spiritual health out of the hands of our savior and yourself and put that health in the hands of a papist infrastructure that pretends to intercede on your behalf with our G-d.

The Reformation was years ago. If you hurry you can catch up.

[Warren Bonesteel]

Just great...

...religious, militant pedophile priests.

And the public is ok with that.

And some people think this isn't the EOTWAWKI?

Do Christians actually read their own religious texts????

Or do you just go along with all of those doctrines and teachings...which seem to change every few years. Jesus. Every wind of doctrine. That sort of thing.

'Cause the curent doctrine seems to be that corruption abuse and the seven deadly sins are ok, even justified...if you're a priest, a preacher or a 'prophet.' However, if you're not a priest, a preacher or a prophet, you're going straight to jail...before you go straight to hell.

[Mommynator]

Rick, the problem is that these molestations did happen, and the RC church did try to cover it up by moving priests around and not allowing the long arm of the law to take care of these men.

Whether Benedict knew or not, it looks like the church really has NOT dealt with the problem at a fundamental level - like in the seminaries. Instead of a calling, potential priests are psychoanalyzed. I think that's ridiculous myself.

[Rick]

Mommynator,

We agree that egregious behavior took place and the Church was slow in stopping it.

But when you say that the church really has NOT dealt with the problem at a fundamental level - like in the seminaries, I have to ask on what basis are you concluding this... and please, provide links.

I may later link in its own post to this piece The Anchoress has turned me on to via email. It's a must read, and it sheds light on how far some are taking this with little to no substantiation.

This Pope is being targeted unfairly and what the man has accomplished in fighting this scourge is being completely ignored.

Why do you think that might be?

[Mommynator]

Oh, this is the usual Catholic bashing, I agree. Benedict must be doing something right to be facing such vitriol, just like Bush. Don't get me wrong - I know the vast majority of priests are at least decent, and there are many exceptional men serving their congregations.

I have to look for links - may take me awhile since I'm at work - about how the church has allowed conflicted homosexuals to be ordained whilst conflicted (I'm of the mind that if they have the tendency and keep chaste, it's not a problem).

I'm not trying to bash, but it seems that there have been expediencies taken which should not have been, and the church is now paying for them, unfortunately.

Again, no bashing. I have major differences between RC doctrine and protestant doctrine, but not to the point where I think the church is the antichrist or the whore of Babylon or any of that other nonsense.