What�s anti-Catholic?

by Editor · May 19, 2010

At a time when our Church is making all the wrong headlines and is solidly criticised, it is easy to feel that there is an anti-Catholic agenda. Indeed, some of the coverage of the abuse scandal reflects a veneer of just too much glee.

Catholics must be mindful, however, that the scandal emanated from actions and omissions within the Church. Pope Benedict was quite clear about this when he spoke to reporters on his flight to Portugal: �The biggest weight on the Church doesn�t come from the enemies outside, but is born from sin inside the Church.�

There is no intrinsic anti-Catholic agenda in forthrightly questioning the Church, in challenging it, or in criticising it. As a body that asserts its influence in the public discourse, the Church must be prepared to accept scrutiny, reproach and opposition.

When we speak of anti-Catholic sentiments (outside the realms of sectarian persecution), we must further make distinctions. The writings of, say, �new atheist� Richard Dawkins are certainly anti-Catholic. They are polemical and designed to persuade audiences of a preference for the gradual extinction of the Christian church. It is anti-Catholic in much the same way as Christians are anti-atheist. It is philosophical and its battleground is relatively respectful disputation.

The more pernicious form of anti-Catholicism does not reside in criticism, reproach or philosophy, or even in tasteless comedy, but in ostensibly detached comment that trivialises the Church by dismissiveness and subtle distortion.

An editorial leader published by the English daily The Independent (and reprinted in the Cape Times) earlier this month provides an example of this. Deliberating on Pope Benedict�s comments after viewing the Shroud of Turin, The Independent observed: �Pope Benedict XVI has for many weeks been groping for something innocuous to do or say and on Sunday he found it in Turin, where he gazed reverentially upon an ancient piece of cloth.�

The rest of the editorial discusses the Shroud�s authenticity in uncontroversial (if not entirely informed) ways, but that opening paragraph created a distorted impression of a hapless pope who is unable to publicly articulate a thought without the help of a prop in the midst of a grave crisis.

Readers of The Southern Cross will know that this view does not correspond with reality. In the same week that the pope embarked on his long-planned visit to Turin, he found something to say on such important matters as state intervention in the capitalist economy and micro-financing as a developmental tool in Africa � and he did so in ways which The Independent might well approve of.

It is difficult to determine whether The Independent�s leader-writer was acting on a consciously anti-Catholic impulse, or whether the slur originated in a state of ignorance.

Either way, the anti-Catholicism we need to respond to � with courtesy and respect � is that which proceeds from false preconceived notions, caricature, generalisation, ignorance, prejudice and dismissiveness, all of which are present in The Independent�s editorial.

Australian Bishop Peter Ingham told the Federation of Catholic Bishops� Conferences of Oceania this month that �this dismissiveness could be quite aptly described as the new modern method of martyrdom� which he described as taking the form of �ridicule, derision and character assassination�.

Bishop Ingham may be overstating matters. There is no evidence of a concerted media persecution of the Church, and unlike the martyrs who died for their faith, the Church is in a position to defend itself.

That defence must be rational: even when provoked, we must not lose our temper. We must acknowledge instances were criticism of the Church is fair and where perspectives may legitimately differ.

And when we do encounter hostility and inaccuracies, we must be prepared to answer these dispassionately and factually from a position of insight.