Who knew?

First, who knew that the Boston Herald would run a story about the New York archbishop? And if they did, that the story would involve the archbishop defending the pope against the sex abuse furor:

New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan was greeted with applause after ⦠defending Pope Benedict XVI against suggestions he aided coverups of reports of child abuse. â¦

The leader of the nationâs second-largest diocese urged his congregation to pray for the pope, saying he was suffering some of the same unjust accusations once faced by Jesus.

Who knew that Jesus hid reports of his apostles raping young boys? Apparently the Archbishop of New York knew, and is finally telling the world.

More like this

Muslims have shown their displeasure with what Pope Ratzinger (professional name, Benedict XVI) said about Islam, but not many people have noticed what he said about atheists. I guess there are more Muslims than atheists. Too bad. The world would be a lot better off with more atheists and fewer…
The Catholic Church still doesn't get it By Adrian Liston No matter how many revelations of child sex abuse by Catholic Priests come out, the Catholic Church still doesn’t get it. Take, for example, this story told by the Archbishop of New York, in which he recounts a (probably apocryphal)…
Following up on my entry on Joanna Russ's book, How to Suppress Women's Writing, and its application to women in science and engineering... In discussing "prohibitions", Russ notes" First of all, it's important to realize that the absence of formal prohibitions against committing art [or science]…
Evidence for the influence of an effective media strategy, from a just released Pew survey: Following his first visit to the United States as spiritual leader of the world's Catholics, Pope Benedict XVI is viewed more favorably than he was a few weeks before his trip. Currently, 61% of Americans…

They post it without editorial comment. As if it stands on its own merits.

Who knew indeed. Now I do.

By Gray Gaffer (not verified) on 29 Mar 2010 #permalink

At least now we know that the Pope's response was a result of WWJD.

Um, it's been a while since I read the Gospels, but when Jesus was tried by Pontius Pilate, didn't he pretty much admit to all the charges against him? I don't remember any false charges against Jesus -- yes, people called him King of the Jews and he didn't deny it. Yes, he interrupted a stoning, claimed to perform miracles, preached the law contrary to the Pharisees, yada yada yada. Jesus denied nothing. That's why Pontius washed his hands of the whole thing -- there was nothing he could do to stop the sentence being carried out.

[a few minutes later] Ah, here's what the Skeptic's Annotated Bible has to say. Depending on what verse you read, He either denied nothing, or confessed to everything (in a really shitty, passive-aggressive way, according to John).

I told Rabbi bin Joseph not to recruit among the Greeks, but would anyone listen to me? Oh, nooooo.

By Marion Delgado (not verified) on 29 Mar 2010 #permalink

I'm just wondering how he is so readily able to determine which accusations against the Pope are just, and which unjust. On the other hand, it may be that all such accusations are unjust, in which case we can give Infallibility one more vote of thanks, for saving us a good bit of trouble in the judging.

On the other hand, it may be that all such accusations are unjust, in which case we can give Infallibility one more vote of thanks, for saving us a good bit of trouble in the judging.