Shock! Pope Benedict Misrepresented By Media

Proving what Chesterton said when he stated that "it is generally the man who is not ready to argue, who is ready to sneer," here are my top ten favorite sneery headlines from press outlets who cherry picked a single sentence from BXIV, divorced it from its context, and proceeded to generally mislead the general public:

1. "Pope Benedict at Christmas: Preaching bigotry disguised as compassion"- The San Francisco Chronicle

2. "Pope Benedict's Vatican Address Angers Gay Community"- ABC News (still waiting on the headline "Gay Community's Distortion Of Vatican Address Angers Pope Benedict")

3. "Protect The Planet From Gays, Pope Says"- Canberra Times

4. "The Pope's Christmas Condemnation Of Transsexuals"- Time

5. "Saving The World From Homosexuality Like Saving Rainforests: Pope"- Indian Express.

6. "Fury As The Pope Says: Save The World From Gays"- Aberdeen Press And Journal

7. "Pope Accused Of Spreading Fear About Homosexuals"- Daily Mail

8. "Pope Says Gays Could End Human Race"- First Post

9. "Pope's Latest Outburst 'Justifies' Homophobic Bullying"- Pink News.

10. "Pope Rebuked For Stoking Homophobic Sentiments"- The Scotsman.

Let's do a little experiment here. I'm going to take a HUGE journalistic risk, and print here the text of Pope Benedict XVI's address that has caused the sensational pseudojournalistic firestorm detailed above. See if you can find the following words or phrases in it: "Save the Planet," "End Human Race," "Homophobic Bullying," "Homosexual," "Gay," "Transsexual," or "Rainforest Equals Heterosexuality":

Since faith in the Creator is an essential part of the Christian Creed, the Church cannot and should not limit itself to transmitting to its faithful only the message of salvation. She has a responsibility for Creation, and it should validate this responsibility in public.

In so doing, it should defend not just the earth, water and air as gifts of Creation that belong to everyone. She should also protect man from destroying himself.

It is necessary to have something like an ecology of man, understood in the right sense. It is not outdated metaphysics when the Church speaks of the nature of the human being as man and woman, and asks that this natural order be respected.

This has to do with faith in the Creator and listening to the language of creation, which, if disregarded, would be man's self-destruction and therefore a destruction of God's work itself.

That which has come to be expressed and understood with the term 'gender' effectively results in man's self-emancipation from Creation (nature) and from the Creator. Man wants to do everything by himself and to decide always and exclusively about anything that concerns him personally. But this is to live against truth, to live against the Spirit Creator.

The tropical rain forests deserve our protection, yes, but man does not deserve it less as a Creature of the Spirit himself, in whom is inscribed a message that does not mean a contradiction of human freedom but its condition.

The great theologians of Scholasticism described matrimony - which is the lifelong bond between a man and a woman - as a sacrament of Creation, that the Creator himself instituted, and that Christ, without changing the message of Creation, welcomed in the story of his alliance with men.

Part of the announcement that the Church should bring to men is a testimonial for the Spirit Creator present in all of nature, but specially in the nature of man, who was created in the image of God.

One must reread the encyclical Humanae vitae with this perspective: the intention of Pope Paul VI was to defend love against consumer sex, the future against the exclusive claim of the moment, and human nature against manipulation.

From reading the articles linked above, you'd think that the Holy Father had just off the top of his head said, "Merry Christmas! And by the way, all you gay people are going to Hell." In none of the articles linked above will you find a single reasoned response to the metaphysical and ontological arguments presented in the Pope's address. All you will find is foamy-mouthed crotch-liberation theology. Is there such a thing as the ideal setting for sexuality as created by God? It's awful hard to deny. And it's not homophobic to say so.