"Breeding like rabbits", eh?

Pope Francis is an incredibly personable man, and he loves to talk. I'd even say that he loves to gab, as if meeting great friends over coffee. His colloquialisms and off-the-cuff style are part of his charm, of course, and it's how he has enchanted most of the world, and certainly the press corps. But the press can also exploit the pope's friendly nature by picking headlines and editing stories in ways that don't quite capture the truth of things. 

I have learned to go to the full transcript of those plane interviews (which are still just a translation of the original) to get some context when I see headlines like these:

 

First of all, he didn't even use the the word "breed", but you'd think that he did, wouldn't you? Here's what he said about rabbits:

"Some think that -- excuse the language -- that in order to be good Catholics, we have to be like rabbits. No. Responsible parenthood." 

In other words: Pope Francis in 2015 is repeating the teaching of Pope St. John Paul the Great in 1984 (see "Responsible Parenthood") who is repeating the teaching of Pope Paul VI in 1968 (see Humanae Vitae). 

And just like his predecessors, Pope Francis spoke these words of responsible parenthood within the overall context of condemning artificial contraception as a moral evil and promoting Natural Family Planning. I'm glad that most of the media reports did put that relevant fact in the body of their pieces, but gosh, if you don't get past the headlines, what would you think was the message?

And if you look above at the headline from Time, you get an even more distorted message: Pope Francis tells Catholics they SHOULDN'T be breeding like rabbits! To any normal human being, that would translate to something like: "Catholics, stop having big families! You should not be having lots and lots of kids!" Isn't that what you take away from the headline?

And yet, on the Feast of the Holy Family less than a month ago, Pope Francis spoke to an Italian association of large families about the importance of large families:

“In a world often marked by egoism, a large family is a school of solidarity and of mission that’s of benefit to the entire society."

Talk about controversy, the pope even went so far as to say:

“Every family is a cell of society, but large families are richer and more vital cells.”

So what could he have meant when he said that being a good Catholic does not require being "like rabbits"? He means the same thing that I and so many others have said a thousand times, but using slightly different words, namely: 

No, the Catholic Church does not teach (as many believe!) that a woman must have as many babies as physically possible. No one is forcing women to become "breeders" like an animal (hey, like a rabbit!). We Catholics believe in responsible parenthood, which means prudence in deciding what is best for the spouses, their children already born, and the society in which they live. And that prudence can mean either having many children (generously welcoming a houseful!), or having fewer  (and using only moral means to postpone pregnancy). Each couple is different, each family has different needs, and prayerful discernment is required.

And guess what else Pope Francis said immediately after he made the now-infamous "rabbit" comment? He said this:

"...for most poor people, a child is a treasure. It is true that you have to be prudent here too, but for them a child is a treasure.... Responsible paternity, but let us also look at the generosity of that father and mother who see a treasure in every child."

Oh, and did you hear what else he said on the same in-flight interview? Did you see all the headlines about the pope condemning "ideological colonization" (the West pushing its sex agenda on other vulnerable cultures as my dear friend Uju addressed so eloquently on this blog)?  I didn't think so, so here you go:

Kids in poor countries suffer 

when West pushes sex agenda, Pope says

Thank God for Catholic news sources!

+++++++

**Update: The Pope is making headlines again today, this time praising large families. No doubt in response to the massive misunderstanding!


**Update #2: The Pope has apologized for his words causing "disorientation", and reiterating his love for large families. I hope we all already understand this!

Yawn. The press gets it wrong again.

Catholics can always count on the press to get it wrong.

The next time the press says that some !!New Teaching!! is bursting forth from Pope Francis that will change the Church and bring her into the modern day (man, they do get giddy when they report such things), just remember that it's a bunch of bunk.

If a family member, friend, or co-worker asks you about the headlines, you are on safe ground by responding, reflexively, that none of those teachings are new. And then yawn just a little yawn for emphasis. Because this is boring, honestly.

For example when the 4,623rd headline screams, "OMYWORD THE POPE SAID THAT ATHEISTS HAVE A SHOT AT HEAVEN AHHHHHHHHH!!!!" …that is boring. That is old news. About 2,000 years old to be precise.

I summarized the teaching way back in 2011, before there was a Pope Francis:

Can Non-Catholics Be Saved?

Am I a fortune teller? A soothsayer? Or, is this perhaps the same-ole, same-ole teaching of the Church throughout the ages? Yawn. You see what I mean? Boring.

When the press screams a headline like "HOLY CANNOLI POPE FRANCIS MIGHT CHANGE CHURCH TEACHING ABOUT PRIESTLY CELIBACY (EVEN THOUGH IT WASN'T HE WHO MENTIONED IT, WHOOPS) AHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! …that is also boring. The discipline (not doctrine) of priestly celibacy has always been changeable and debatable. And there have always been married Catholic priests (I know two personally). That is old news.

I summarized the difference between discipline and doctrine way back in 2010, long before there was a Pope Francis:

Catholics, You Must Understand This

Am I special? Do I have super-secret decoder-ring information that no one in the press has the ability to access? Or, could this always have been understood and accessed with minimal effort? Yawn. Again, boring.

And yet it's not only boring, it's inexcusable. How on earth does the world media get away with reporting on a subject without any knowledge of the subject? And since the teachings of the Church are so readily available, why aren't these reporters and pundits profoundly embarrassed and ashamed of themselves for their shoddy work?

As others have noted, the one good thing about all this journalistic malpractice is that Catholics have an opportunity to learn more about their Faith when this nonsense about our Church comes to the fore. I'm hoping that Catholics who wonder about these headlines and are faced with questions from others will being a study of Catholicism in earnest.

And maybe if they are corrected enough, some of the reporters will start to study the basic truths of Catholicism, too? That may be too much to ask, but hope springs eternal!

"I've often said that if a sports reporter was as clueless about his subject as the typical religion reporter is about his, he couldn't keep his job for a week."  -- Paul Thigpen

*Go here for a translation of the Pope's letter that has resulted in such a media frenzy.

Quick Takes: Things that entertain (and boggle the mind)

1) Stop everything you are doing. You have to read the following article. No, seriously, you do. You don't have to read it right now, but click it open and then keep it at the bottom of your screen, or minimize it, or whatever, until you have a quiet few moments later to read it all. Jen Fulwiler (yes, the hostess of Quick Takes and the most insightful atheist-turned-Catholic that I know) has really nailed the problem. What problem? The problem! The reason why we Catholics and the purveyors of human abortion cannot even speak the same language. It's as if we live in two different realities, and this is why:

A Sexual Revolution

Oh, all right, here's a sneak peek, from somewhere in the middle:

All my life, the message I had heard loud and clear was that sex was for pleasure and bonding, that its potential for creating life was purely tangential…. This mind-set became the foundation of my views on abortion…. I thought of unplanned pregnancies as akin to being struck by lightning while walking down the street—something totally unpredictable and undeserved that happened to people living normal lives. 

My pro-choice views (and I imagine those of many others) were motivated by loving concern: I just did not want women to have to suffer, to have to devalue themselves by dealing with unwanted pregnancies. Since it was an inherent part of my worldview that everyone except people with “hang-ups” eventually has sex, and that sex is, under normal circumstances, only about the relationship between the two people involved, I was lured into one of the oldest, biggest, most tempting lies in human history….

And… you'll just have to read the article to find out what that lie is. :)



2) I do love a great quote from a brilliant mind, to be read slowly:

‎We live in a culture where our marketers and entertainment media compulsively mislead us about the sustainability of youth; the indignity of old age; the avoidance of suffering; the denial of death; the nature of real beauty; the impermanence of every human love; the oppressiveness of children and family; the silliness of virtue; and the cynicism of religious faith. It’s a culture of fantasy, selfishness, sexual confusion and illness that we’ve brought upon ourselves. And we’ve done it by misusing the freedom that other — and greater — generations than our own worked for, bled for and bequeathed to our safe-keeping. 

-- Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia from “A Thread for Weaving Joy” 

(Archbishop Chaput makes me swoon!)


3) And now, how 'bout a quote from a not-so-great mind? I have to reprint for you all one of the dumbest things ever said to me. It came during one of my myriad time-sucking facebook debates, from a young male atheist who thinks I'm stupid:

"I don't care if god is real... I care about whether there is evidence of his existence. If there is not, then it makes absolutely no difference if he's real or not." [emphasis mine]

Now, how can I argue with something like that?


4) The annual March for Life and the annual media blackout that accompanies it was actually pretty fun this year! If you read Bad Catholic's smackdown, you can't help but smile:

Media Stupidity at the March for Life

Also, I was originally going to link to the positively reedonkulous "coverage" of the March from CBS news, but they had so many negative comments about their bogus slide show (with ZERO shots of the hundreds of thousands of pro-life marchers, but numerous shots of the same eleven pro-"choice" folks) that they had to go in and add actual photos of the March itself!

Under hail of criticism, CBS relents, adds some photos of pro-lifers to March for Life album

When you look at the CBS slide show, note that the first six photos there now were not there a few hours earlier, nor was the last photo. And even though CBS was shamed into adding those seven photos of the pro-life marchers, the bias still jumps right out: The pro-life side and the pro-"choice" side each gets seven photos? A sea of young, vibrant marchers as far as the eye can see, from all over the nation, hundreds of thousands strong…. versus a handful of protesters that no one even noticed (save the liberal press)? Methinks they missed the story even on their second try!

It is so laughable, and very entertaining, but the big question still remains: Why would anyone trust the MSM these days?


5a) Planned Parenthood, keeping it classy, as usual! Check this out:

Planned Parenthood's cheeky new ad campaign

Ah, those crazy kids! What crude and degenerate thing will they think of next to corrupt our culture? 

(Be sure to read the comments! Some creative pro-lifers thought of their own ad slogans for PP's new campaign.)

5b) It's all over the news that "abortion is safer than giving birth", but of course that's another pro-"choice" obfuscation. Let's look at the facts and see through the spin:

Rehash of Abortion Safety Claim Ignores All Inconvenient Evidence to the Contrary

Word to the wise: Those who make their living killing human beings do not always live by an honor code of truth-telling.

6) Okay, this is serious! I need you all to tell me if you know of any good, eligible Catholic young men who are looking for a bride. There just don't seem to be as many good men out there as there are young women who are looking for them! Please, email me (look under my picture) if you know of any decent, faithful, emotionally stable men between the ages of about 24 and 34. I've got women who want to meet them!


7) Still don't have much to update on my sister's condition, other than one amazing turn of events which has lifted a 10-ton weight off our shoulders: Her first diagnosis of advanced pancreatic cancer was wrong. I cannot begin to describe the emotions that come from believing your only sibling has four months to live, then having the imminent death sentence rescinded. She still has a long road to diagnosis and treatment, so please keep those prayers coming. She has been most grateful for them, as have I!



Thanks, Jen, for hosting!




.

How do the media know so little about Catholicism?

It's not like Catholicism is a new religion. It's not like the teachings of the Church cannot easily be found. It's not like a reporter couldn't pick up a Catechism as a reference, or search the Internet for official Church statements, or even pick up the phone and call the local Catholic diocese, whose staff is always ready to help.

And yet the other day, I'm happily reading an AP news story* about the upcoming beatification of Pope John Paul II, and I trip over this:

Once he is beatified, John Paul will be given the title “blessed” and can be publicly venerated, or worshipped. Many people, especially in Poland, already venerate him privately, but the ceremony will allow Catholics to publicly worship him.  [Emphasis mine.]

This level of cultural illiteracy reminds me of the other times I've witnessed the media completely blow it when it comes to Catholicism.

For example, I'll never forget the night I was watching my local TV news a few years back (the NBC affiliate), when a story came on about the possibility of the Pope officially defining Our Lady as the "Mediatrix of All Graces" (a legitimate title for her). I about fell over when the anchor said that the Catholic Church was considering making Mary a "fourth person of the Holy Trinity"!!!!!**

Catholics (or anyone who knows a lick about Christianity), can you imagine?!

I was flabbergasted. This was a respected news station! How did this get by all of them? How could they not stop and think for one moment that the Church cannot simply decide one day to elevate a creature to the Godhead? How does such a thing even enter the radar screen of possibilities? I ran to my husband and screamed! (Yes, I was worked up, ha ha ha!) I thought of the Protestants out there, the evangelicals who already erroneously think we "worship" Mary, and I imagined all of them saying, "Aha! We knew those Catholics think that Mary is God!" Ugh!

Fast forward a few months, and the same news channel has another report about the Catholic Church. A married man was to be ordained a Catholic priest, and the anchor stated that for the very first time, the Catholic Church would allow the ordination of a married man to the priesthood! I ran to Dean again, flabbergasted.... Where were the fact-checkers? There have been married priests since the beginning of Christianity: In the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches, ordination of married men is still the norm, and although celibacy is required of priests in the Latin Rite, dispensations are given occasionally (i.e., when married Anglican clergy convert to Catholicism). In fact, we had at least one married Roman Catholic priest in my diocese at the time of that local news story!

After the "first married priest ever!" story, I did contact the news station and asked about the blunder. The anchor wrote back and apologized, saying that his producer -- who was a Catholic -- cleared the story. (Yet another example of why I want this to be a teaching blog, primarily for Catholics!)

I know that this sort of misrepresentation of the Catholic Faith goes on all the time. Sometimes it's deliberate, but I would like to think that most of the time it's not. However, the fact remains that the regular media do not generally take the time to research and report accurately when discussing Catholicism, and yet accurate reporting and fact-checking is the crux of a journalist's job! I don't expect the general public to know what the Church teaches, but the failure of the media to accomplish what is essentially their only task reinforces my growing belief that mainstream journalism is useless.

As Paul Thigpen said after the rush of "Pope Approves Condoms!" headlines:

"I've often said that if a sports reporter was as clueless about his subject as the typical religion reporter is about his, he couldn't keep his job for a week."

Nicely said.

* The linked article has since been modified or replaced, so the above statement no longer exists in this form. This could be a result of the emails some of us sent to AP.

** I seriously try not to overuse exclamation points, but this was warranted!!!!!!!!