Pardon me, your bias is showing

The following appears in an opening paragraph of a CNS article covering the Pope's 2009 activities:

"The Year of St. Paul. The Year for Priests. A major social encyclical. A Holy Land pilgrimage. A first meeting with President Obama. Ten new saints. An African trip and an African synod. A Facebook debut. A controversial concession to Catholic traditionalists. An unexpected overture to disaffected Anglicans."

It doesn't take a hound dog to sniff out the bias there, does it? The "eyebrow raising" encyclical calling for "large-scale redistribution of wealth on a world-wide scale" which speaks "urgent need of a true world political authority" which is "universally recognized" and "vested with... effective power...[and] the authority to ensure compliance with its decisions from all parties" is referred to simply as a "major social encyclical." The other events are also simply listed. But, the lifting of some excommunications...that is referred to as a "controversial concession to Catholic traditionalists."

Although one might (unfortunately) expect such bias in the secular media, it seems especially out of place in a news service of the U.S. bishops - a news service that they claim "has set the standard in Catholic journalism". But then again, it's hardly surprising in light of some of their recent coverage, coverage which prompted one author to state that "It is bizarre theater indeed when an American Cardinal must directly refute the errors in a piece that was syndicated, published and propagated by the news service owned by the very Bishops' Conference to which he belongs, and this just months after the leadership of said news service was put on notice by a powerful Vatican prelate".

Even if the Pope's lifting of the excommunications was "controversial" (particularly to the Jews), was it really any more controversial than some of the novel passages in the encyclical or the Vatican's recent playlist including a rap song with explicit lyrics, or any other events occurring in 2009? So, why single this one out for the label "controversial"? One who didn't know any better might think the bishops were biased in a liberal direction - or that were more concerned about Jews' feelings than Church unity. But, no, that can't be the case. Certainly not.

[12/17]