Sometimes, the "Translation!" defense is valid.

Namely, the Pope does get worked over by the occasional bad translation. 

How they ever got "divine being" out of demiurgo is beyond me.

Good dhimmi!

Shorter Maureen Fielder: Krystallnacht was not anti-Jewish, it was anti-Versailles Treaty.

He first characterized the bombing as a "horrific act" without a shred of justification. He praised the Christian community in Pakistan, now more fearful than ever, and noted that he himself was educated by Catholic priests and later by Presbyterians. He counts many Christians as friends.

So I asked him point-blank, "Was this bombing an act of religious discrimination?" Was it religiously motivated? Without hesitation, he said, "No." He pointed to a statement from the Taliban themselves saying it was a response to the United States' frequent and continuing drone attacks in the tribal areas of Pakistan. He said the Pakistani government's protests to the United States have been unable to stop the drones, so the frontier tribes have resorted to their ancient "eye for an eye" response to perceived injustice.

Nice to see Dr. Ahmed has "many" Christians as friends.

Much like the white bigot who's "friends with a black guy."

Yeah, despicable.

And of a piece with freshly-minted chickenhawk Michael Sean Winters' airy dismissal of concern about the fate of Syria's Christians, should Assad fall.

Say what you will about the Reporter, they always manage to find a new low. And if Catholics ever go into ghettos, you can guess from whose ranks the authorities will recruit the Order Police from.

OK, upon further reflection, it's not that worrisome.

But that's OK: they're now the home of "The Francis Chronicles, reporting on the ministry of the world's parish priest!"

The wind at their backs. The orthodox-as-Chip-Diller response is losing it's effectiveness. Just saying.

Hat tip to Pat Archbold for the link.

Last Man Standing?

Rick Santorum continues to amaze me with his resiliency. The primary hat trick was astonishing, given the relative paucity of resources and organization, and has shot him at least temporarily into the lead.


Jay, Paul, and Don have a lot of useful commentary worth reading.

One caveat, though--a commenter on a political blog pointed out that Santorum a couple of weeks ago that Sanrotum was something of a proxy for "generic Republican" in the polls. He hadn't had a crapstorm hurled at him by either the media or his opponents. But it's hitting him now, and I'm worried.

The President's Loyalist Media Auxiliary is already starting to soundbite him to death. The oily crapweasel Charlie Rose's interview was a case in point. Even though Santorum kept trying to shift it to economic issues, Rose was able to frame the narrative.

That can't keep happening. Even if it's just one question in an interview, five minutes out of an hour, that's what going to be highlighted in the reporting. He has to fight the culture war--the President certainly is--but he can't be painted into a corner on it. He can't abandon it, either--it is a winner, as Jay notes. But it's a winner as part of an overall package, one that frames the other guy as an out of touch extremist. The populist angle can work, if he can keep hammering it. Leave the culture war stuff to the proxies for now.

He has to frame the narrative and not let others do it for him. Otherwise, the rise is just another not-Romney  boomlet that will pass.

Get this straight.

It's only a theocracy when a politician to the right of center invokes Christ in support of his actions. The left's candidate? Okey-fine.

When Rick Santorum says it--activate the klaxons.

Fairness compels me to say that it just might be because nobody believes a word of it, coming from the President. Whereas they're afraid that the Senator actually means it...

Crocodile tears.

Or, "Progressives pretend to be upset about the iconoclasm they've tried to ram down everyone's throats since 1965."

The merry band of lassies and lads at the Reporter claim to be appalled--just appalled!--by a pastor's decision to cover a mural of Our Lady of Guadalupe. I agree--it's a horror. The Archbishop is screwing this one up.

But...color me skeptical that the folks at the Reporter are truly upset by the actual covering, though. The Reporter piece reeks of opportunism, getting the chance to rage at a despised bishop to their right (which, yes, is most of them). I mean, how can the same people who rip out baldaccinos, high altars, altar rails, statuary, crucifixes, etc. at the drop of a hat really be upset by the covering of a mural above the altar? Or am I to believe that the Reporter crowd suddenly got the bulletin from II Nicaea, rekindling that ol' time religion?

Even better: there's evidence for the opportunism. From right here in Michigan, when some of the late bishop Untener's apparatchiks did the exact same thing to a Hispanic parish in Saginaw, removing the statue of the Guadalupana commissioned by the Mexican families in the parish back in 1961. Reporter coverage of that abuse of the religious sensibilities of Hispanic parishoners? Zilch. Try it yourself. I used "Guadalupe statue" and "rainbow parish."

Can't embarrass the administration of a late progressive hero, can we? But the Devil Chaput? Avengers assemble!

Nice bit of canned outrage by the folks in KC. Need to work on making it less transparent next time, though.

Who's the "Islamophobe" again?

"Think about it: if the average Joe expresses anxiety over Islamic fundamentalism, they’re called Islamophobes. But if an editor removes a comic in which Mohammed isn’t even present, that’s not honest to Allah Islamophobia?

Look, the media can’t have it both ways. They cannot criticize the public for concerns over Islam and then pull this stunt over a fear they may get stabbed in front of a Starbucks. If their governing principle in the newsroom is fear, then they should admit it and get the hell off our backs for feeling pretty much the same way."

--Greg Gutfeld, commenting on the Washington Post's decision to pull a cartoon that mentioned Muhammad.

Lazy narratives to push.

Did you hear the one about the Koran being burned as a protest of Islamic doctrine?

No no no no no--not by the Pentacostal microchurch led by Terry Jones.

Because, you know--they didn't actually burn any Korans.

No, I'm talking about Charles Merrill, the wealthy gay artist-of-some-sort. He actually destroyed an artistically-significant Koran gifted by King Hussein of Jordan (and valued by some at $60,000) back in July 2007. He did it to protest Islamic gay-bashing. Even sent out a press release and invited people to his website.

Media reaction? The sound of crickets. Crickets after a lungful of sarin. The closest thing to actual media coverage? A squib in the gay newspaper The Advocate.

That's odd.

But but but, you say--nobody's ever heard of Charles Merrill. He's a carnival-barking nobody busking for attention.

Fair enough. After all, the guy can't even get a mention in Wikipedia, of all places.

But. So is--was--Jones.

Why the discrepancy in coverage?

Might I humbly suggest that it's because Jones is the perfect demon-figure for lazy journalists marinating in Elmer Gantry and Inherit the Wind stereotypes about Christianity. Lord, the man's straight from Central Casting:

MSM: "It's a slow news month, and we're interested in Needlessly-Provocative Ignorant Backwoods Reverends to Caricature."

CC: "Wellll...let's see. Swaggart's pretty well clapped out, and Oral Roberts seems to be...er, dead. Hey--how would you like a guy who looks like the underfed love child of Paul Teutul and is threatening to burn the Koran?"

MSM: "EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! Perfect! Eleventy!!!!!"

Gay quasi-artist who points out Islamic violence against homosexuals--not so much. "Deer in the headlights" doesn't quite capture the flavor of a reporter being detailed to cover Merrill's stunt. He might even have to ask some difficult questions, and ruin the narrative by pointing out how Muslims are--you know, at least on occasion, once in a blue moon--victimizers and not just victims. There's no clear backlash angle, either. Best to just pretend it never happened.

But Jones, with his congregation of upwards of 20? The reporters rappelled down from News Copters 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10-13 inclusive for a Two-Minutes Tut-Tutting and Worried Frowning About The Rising Tide of Intolerance.

As the President would say: Let me be clear--I'm not a proponent of desecrating other people's holy objects or symbols as a general rule (argue about them--sure. Destroy--no). Not remotely. Which is why I can't cheer Artiste' Chagoya's gay Mohammed "tapestry." Do unto others...

But I am a major proponent of a vigorous free press that reports the facts, no matter how discomfiting it may be to groups it wants to coddle. And not a snooze bar media that pulls out comfortable templates to guide its air-cover reporting.

BREAKING NEWS--MUST CREDIT.

American Legion demands crackdown on "ideology of jihad":

Private William Long's slaying is the most recent in a string of murders in the service of the Islamic doctrine of jihad, and thousands of people have been injured or threatened since the World Trade Center bombing in 1993 because of the ideology of jihad. Bringing the killers to justice is not enough - the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security must root out and prosecute as domestic terrorists and violent racketeers those who support this criminal enterprise that has organized and funded these violent acts for decades. We call on the new attorney general Eric Holder and head of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano to treat these murders in the same way they would treat politically-motivated domestic terrorism of any other kind and put the full resources of their two departments behind that effort.

Psych.

No, class, your assignment for the week to compare and contrast the media coverage of and governmental response to the apparently religiously-motivated murders in Kansas and Ar-Kansas on Sunday and Monday.

To the extent the latter gets covered at all, take care to note who gets the broadbrush, guilt-by-association treatment, demands for introspection and reform, sympathetic coverage and story-framing, and expensive governmental security measures and sympathetic press release from the Chief Executive of the Republic.

And, no, for the record, I don't want to see Muslims get smeared and I do think the pro-life movement has to be vigilant against the fringers. I'd just like the relevant parties to make a half-assed toss at impartiality for once, instead of the usual deck-stacking, special pleading and cynical partisanship.

Greetings, fellow polytheists.

U.S. Commission reiterates call to close Islamic school in Fairfax, Virginia.

Textbooks at a private Islamic school in northern Virginia teach students that it is permissible for Muslims to kill adulterers and converts from Islam, according to a federal investigation released Wednesday.

Other passages in the school's textbooks state that "the Jews conspired against Islam and its people" and that Muslims are permitted to take the lives and property of those deemed "polytheists."

* * *

The commission said it obtained 17 of the academy's textbooks through a variety of channels, including from members of Congress. The texts did appear to contain numerous revisions, including pages that were removed or passages that were whited out, but numerous troubling passages remained, according to the panel:
_ The authors of a 12th-grade text on Koranic interpretation state that apostates (those who convert from Islam), adulterers and people who murder Muslims can be permissibly killed.

_ The authors of a 12th-grade text on monotheism write that "(m)ajor polytheism makes blood and wealth permissible," meaning that a Muslim can take with impunity the life and property of someone believed guilty of polytheism. According to the panel, the strict Saudi interpretation of polytheism includes Shiite and Sufi Muslims as well as Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists.

_ A social studies text offers the view that Jews were responsible for the split between Sunni and Shiite Muslims: "The cause of the discord: The Jews conspired against Islam and its people. A sly, wicked person who sinfully and deceitfully professed Islam infiltrated (the Muslims)."

More generally, the panel found that the academy textbooks hold the view that the Muslim world was strong when united under a single caliph, the Arabic language and the Sunni creed, and that Muslims have grown weak because of foreign influence and internal divisions.

Note the highlighted section because it's true. Consider this telling passage from an ex-Methodist's conversion to Islam, which I read about a year ago:

He immediately cut me off with a simple statement: “You finally couldn’t stomach the polytheism anymore, could you?” He knew exactly why I was a Muslim, and he didn’t disagree with my decision!

More joy--he's a very prominent proselytizer (use the keyword "Dirks"), as far as these things go.

Yes, I know--Methodists will convert at the drop of a hat to anything (even Catholicism), but it's food for thought, especially when considering the happy-clappy one big Abrahamic family line that gets the most publicity.

Something tells me the CCD program she attended during her genuinely-Catholic days had ample supplies of glitter and markers.

Carl Olson finds a Newsweek interview of another person who asserts she's a Catholic priest(ess).

Jessica Rowley strikes me as a very pleasant person with a genuine thirst for aspects of holiness. She is a lot happier than the cohort of lemon-eating sisters striking a blow against patriarchy, kyriarchy and good sense. Moreover, she--unlike those determined to call themselves Catholic--admits that she is no longer a member of the Church.

So, a tall finger of fellowship to Newsweek for the title. Then again

A woman who left Catholicism is ordained to serve an offshoot church that claims it has a Catholic priesthood. Not surprisingly, the Catholic hierarchy does not have a lot to say about it because the episcopate can't comment on every Catholic who leaves the Church, but obviously cannot approve

doesn't fit the printing template very well. In fact, such a story doesn't get published.

However, like the unpleasantly-ordained who still call themselves communing Catholics, she privileges the zeitgeist and displays a feather-soft spirituality. For example: you will search in vain for references to discipleship in the interview.

Once again, it's the Church of the Perpetual Hello and Welcome. And they're bleeding to death everywhere you find them, regardless of the title they currently have on the sign out front.

I hope the ECC enjoys its instant of fame. I wouldn't care to bet on the odds of the communion making it to 2040.