Letter: Does The ‘Weekly Press’ Hate The Pope?

When they’re not fawning over women’s boobs, the Weekly Press is running anti-Catholic cartoons. Well, that’s according to one letter in this week’s Weekly Press:

The photo in the article, Who Would Jesus Bomb?(page 5), (7/05/06 -Weekly Press/UC Review) of the Pope being cast into hell by demons (Editor’s Note: That’s it over there.) — is an anti-Catholic propaganda piece which has been used throughout history in one form or another by American Protestant groups who have traditionally viewed the Roman Catholic church as the AntiChrist or the Scarlet Woman of Babylon from the book of Revelation. This would be quaint except for the fact that there still exists a lively strain of anti-Catholicism in the American character as is evident by the outrageous charges of millenia-long conspiracies by Dan Brown in the “The DaVinci Code.” … Some hold that if the Church doesn’t agree 100 percent with their positions then they deserve the vilification and venom of their constituency. In any case, the Church is the Big Guy and should be able to take it, right? (a Limbaugh-esque rationalization if I ever heard one.) [...]

While the left would find it abhorrent to be against immigrants, yet it is acceptable, even fashionable, to be anti-Catholic, which has traditionally been an immigrant church and, even today, advocates for the immigrant in the face of a xenophobic bourgeois culture. Since the writer appears to be a Muslim, I doubt whether she realizes the significance of the photo.

Though I would expect your editorial staff to be more critical in its use of obvious derogatory depictions.

Ohmigod! I just can’t wait for the new line of anti-Catholic propaganda to come out this year! It’s just so fashionable to wear. The new “Papist” handbags are just so cute!

After the jump, the Weekly Press‘ response, where they claim to be a bunch of know nothings! (Ho ho! Get it!)

More »

‘Inquirer’ Comment Section Way More Fun Than Our Own

Seriously, guys. There are still more posts than comments, which is apparently a big blog no-no — personally, I’d rather have like a 40,000:1 post-to-comment ratio, but that’s just me — and I spend 95 percent of my waking hours deleting spam.

Then I go over and check out the Inquirer’s comment section on their big Catholicism series and there are gems like this:

Do you liberal homosexuals of the Inquirer really think they have the right to judge normal, decent people. Although this is Philadelphia — which choose gays over God long ago.

This is like a text version of one of those “Can you spot the differences?” drawings in Highlights — only it’s “Can you spot the unintentional funny?”

When faithful flee [Inky]
May 31: NB To ‘Inquirer’: At Least Try And Make It A Little Easier, Please?

NB To ‘Inquirer’: At Least Try And Make It A Little Easier, Please?

Brian Tierney Makes A Pledge [PW]

Quickies: The one with the segues

• See, it’s not just priests who are pedophiles, it’s Catholic school janitors, too. Oh. Well, much better then, doncha think? [CBS 3]

• Speaking of Catholicism and scandal, a lawsuit filed by a priest-turned-activist alleges that Cardinal Edward Egan, the archbishop of the diocese of New York, practices in consensual homosexual sex with adults regularly. Also alleged to be gay? Albany bishop Howard Hubbard and Newark archbishop John Myers. Wow. [Village Voice]

• And speaking of alt-weeklies, the New York Press‘ editorial staff walked out after the paper’s publishers quashed the publication of the infamous Danish Muhammad cartoons. [The Politicker via Gawker]

• Annnnnnd, finally, speaking of quashing stories in newspapers, let’s just say if this anti-Tucker Max column in Penn’s newspaper wasn’t published, no one would have been all that upset. [Daily Pennsylvanian]