The Houston Chronicle — Anti-Catholicism Redux

The Houston Chronicle -- Anti-Catholicism Redux
Zola accuses the French Republic of anti-Semitism

The Houston Chronicle published a chirpy little piece on the Kennedy speech by a professor Brian Kaylor, Kennedy speech eloquently balanced religion, politics.” Kennedy achieved a “pitch perfect” balance, he opines. He proceeds with a hackneyed account of a few parts of the speech. Now why would the Chronicle choose to publish a trite piece by an academic at a college in the orbit of the beltway, and completely ignore a significant, creative speech in their own backyard? The Chronicle knew about the Santorum speech. But why not one word, why not even a peep from the Houston Chronicle about a major event at Houston’s only Catholic University? It is painfully clear — the Chronicle is vehemently anti-Catholic. They lead the charge in support of Planned Parenthood, gay rights, and Church bashing. So why would they possibly give a pro-life, national figure with a persuasive speech, “who happens to be a Catholic,” the time of day? They can do what they please and no one calls them out.

J’accuse. I say it is anti-Catholicism redux. Kennedy expelled the demon of bigotry and it came back seven-fold. The Kennedy myth assures the American liberals that Catholics can really be alright and reasonable after all (i.e., pro-abortion). Any threat to that myth must be squashed. And they do it just the way Tocqueville and Solzhenitsyn have noted — turn them into nobodies, deprive them of voice. Thank God for the internet; the monopolies of the liberal Chronicle type news outlets are quickly being out flanked by the new journalism. Readers of blogs all over the country now know more than the avergae reader of the Chronicle.

But I must turn one more time to Pope John Paul II to get to the root of the problem. The liberal dealers of death and their conspiracy of silence hide behind the cloak of majority rule and legalism. Here is  John Paul II’s incisive analysis identifying the contradiction at the heart of liberal society:

We have what appear to be two diametrically opposed tendencies. On the one hand, individuals claim for themselves in the moral sphere the most complete freedom of choice and demand that the State should not adopt or impose any ethical position but limit itself to guaranteeing maximum space for the freedom of each individual, with the sole limitation of not infringing on the freedom and rights of any other citizen. On the other hand, it is held that, in the exercise of public and professional duties, respect for other people’s freedom of choice requires that each one should set aside his or her own convictions in order to satisfy every demand of the citizens which is recognized and guaranteed by law; in carrying out one’s duties the only moral criterion should be what is laid down by the law itself. Individual responsibility is thus turned over to the civil law, with a renouncing of personal conscience, at least in the public sphere. (Gospel of Life §69)

Here is Kennedy’s hidden legacy — a forgetfulness of what makes for conscience — and to forget is to have renounced already. As the Psalmist said: “If I forget you, O Jerusalem, let my right hand wither!” (137:5) Need I remind the reader that for a Catholic, the Church is the new Jerusalem. Hence, if I forget thee . . . I have renounced thee.

A culture which renounces true conscience has become totalitarian. True conscience requires a struggle with God. At the heart of every culture is the question about man’s relation to God. §24  Some try to eliminate the very question. Best of all just ignore those who speak about faith in the public square; if one must acknowledge them, just call them “theocrats” and “move on” quickly.

Man is above all “a being who seeks for truth and to live in that truth” (§50). The open search for truth is precisely what defines a culture. Faith and reason are two wings by which man ascends to the truth about God. Sen Santorum quips “the movement in our country to fly on “one wing,” reason alone will ultimately undermine the very foundation of our country – freedom.”

The Church will serve as the sign and safeguard of the transcendence of the human person through its commitment to truth. The “source and synthesis” of all rights is the right to religious freedom, which entails the “right to live in the truth of one’s faith and in conformity with the transcendent dignity of the human person.” (§47) That means politicians, doctors, nurses, teachers, — a right to live in the truth of one’s faith, and to speak it.

By the suppression of conscience, the approval of the killing of the innocent (it is legal), the endorsement of gay marriage (it is a constitutional right), the liberal state shows that it is not a neutral body, but a secularist state. Kennedy opened the way for Catholics to build the secularist state; the Houston Chronicle sings its praises every day. It is not a neutral source of news, but an organ of the secularist state.  

Pravda brooks no rivals. Sorry, Senator Santorum..

1 Comment
  1. "Kennedy opened the way for Catholics to build the secularist state."

    Your point about Catholics who work to build a secularist state, dovetails nicely with an observation made by Eric Hoffer, "Those who bite the hand that feeds them will lick the boot that kicks them."

Join us!

* indicates required