Screen shot of Adam Shaw's FoxNews.com column

Screen shot of Adam Shaw’s FoxNews.com column By RNS

Adam Shaw, an editor for the Fox News website, has been taking a lot of heat, even from some conservatives, for a rip-roaring assessment of the pope’s recent apostolic exhortation. His column is titled: “Pope Francis is the Catholic Church’s Obama – God help us,” which gives you a sense of where Shaw was coming from.

But if Shaw’s Fox job is safe — hey, when Rush Limbaugh is blasting the pontiff anyone else looks tame — his other gig, as a film and video game reviewer for Catholic News Service, is over as of yesterday.

Tony Spence, editor in chief of the wire service, which operates under the aegis of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said he had been “very pleased” with Shaw’s work, which included an analysis of the comics book industry. Spence said he knew that Shaw worked for Fox but it never caused a conflict — until this week. Spence wrote in an email:

“(W)hen he penned the recent piece on Pope Francis, comparing him to President Obama, and presenting it as an op/ed, he seriously compromised his credibility as an objective Catholic journalist for CNS. Had Adam merely reported on the pope’s apostolic exhortation, even citing unflattering sources, there would have been no problem. However, Adam’s caustic condemnation of the exhortation and of Francis himself, one of the key figures we cover daily with objectivity, fairness and certainly charity, left me little choice but to end his service with us.”

Spence wished Shaw well “at FoxNews.com and in all his future endeavors.”

137 Comments

  1. Deacon Desmond Drummer

    Thank you, David Gibson, for reporting this story. Upon learning about and then reading Shaw’s article, I was deeply saddened. It was an unfortunate and irresponsible rant. I am pleased to know that leadership at CNS, namely Tony Spence, has responded to the matter. Among Catholic news outlets, Catholic News Service has carefully maintained a rare objectivity within a Catholic media world that is often ideologically polarized.

    • http://prolifecorner.com/pope-francis-and-the-child-killer/

      Pope Francis is playing it up to the liberal media while ignoring the poor and suffering.

      • You sure dont pay much attention to Pope Francis’ mission and his call of St Francis of Assis. The {Pope is shows and lives solidariy to the poor. His action to his fellow cardinals and Bishops proves he is upset with those who make Money their god. and orders them to reduce their finances. He is a great example for all us to detach from our materialistic attitudes and action.

          • His stuff is The Church’s stuff and The Church’s stuff is like a celebrity receiving an award for one who couldn’t be there–in this case, Christ.. Do you think a library should sell its stuff? What sbout your valuables? It’s believed Judas was taking from their needs, when he complained the expensive oil used on Jesus shpuld go to the poor. Archbishop Sheen called a similar bluff of
            one who complained about The Church’s stuff. Do you have a bluff to call?

          • His stuff is The Church’s stuff and The Church’s stuff is like a celebrity receiving an award for one who couldn’t be there–in this case, Christ.. Do you think a library should sell its stuff? What sbout your valuables? It’s believed Judas was taking from their needs, when he complained the expensive oil used on Jesus shpuld go to the poor. Archbishop Sheen called a similar bluff of
            one who complained about The Church’s stuff. Do you have a bluff to call? If you are a Catholic religious–so sad. The poor will always be with us, Christ said. Jesus may not in the most imminent sense–the Holy Eucharist (secondly in imminence, in a church, when 2 or 3 are gathered in his name), when the sexual freaks, anarchists and other tpols of the globalists take over.

        • laura_495@hotmail.co.uk

          While it seems laudable from a worldly point of view that the Pope is nice to the poor; it is fair to point out that no matter how ‘nice’, he will never solve the problem of the world’s poor! However, as Pope his first responsibility is to the souls of the millions of Catholics who have him as their leader. He must show that he is upholding the teachings of the Catholic Church on the main issues of contention in the world today – that is abortion, homosexual unions and sex outside of marriage. From what I see, and it behoves me to say this, he is undermining Church teaching if anything!

    • Bravo Adam Shaw for having the grace to tell the truth to a world that has embraced papalotry and is blind to the errors being committed by the one who is supposed to be PRESERVING the Faith. Perhaps if the papacy returned the Church to its mission of saving SOULS and not pocketbooks, the crisis of Faith today would be mitigated. I studied in a Jesuit school for 12 years. I know the dangers that modern Jesuits bring to the Church. They are no longer Catholic.

      • “Papolotry?” What are you talking about? The Church is under assault, apparently from both Left and Right. I kind of expect it from the Left, what with the abortion industry to defend, but from the Right? It seems to me that Shaw and his ilk are saying “Pope Francis isn’t doing what I want him to do, therefore he is wrong.” Thank God, Mr. Shaw, and Mr. Azanza, that neither you two, or me for that matter, is Pope. Let us be faithful to the Church and believe that the Holy Spirit put Francis into that position for a good reason. After all, we need both are John Paul IIs and our Francis’s.

        • Moreover, don’t go after the Jesuits, please. The Jesuits have taken more dung from conservatives, from Blaise Pascal to you, Mr. Azanza, and yet they have done more good for our world than you could possibly know. I am not a Jesuit, but from my long association with the Society of Jesus, I can tell you that they take all the teachings of Jesus into account, from his teachings on sexuality to his teachings on money, that the “last shall be first and the first last,” and that if you want to be perfect, you must “sell all you have and give to the poor, and come follow me.” Don’t go after the Jesuits, please–they are one of the truly great Orders of the Church, a defender of the Faith up to the final bell, and they are better than you, and better than me, too.

    • Not from a liberal perspective, of course. To be expected from the perspective that first redefines terms to suit itself and then judges. Mouthpieces from this perspective, not so incidentally, are the first to cry “judgmental” of everyone else.

      But I’m preaching to the choir on this score, Earold, am I not?

      • Earold Gunter

        Duane, But of course. However the right extreme does the exactly the same things you say the extreme left does. I see no difference between Fox and MSNBC. Both are at extreme ends, both are biased to those ends, and neither one is worth watching.

        • Earold, your skipping lightly over an important component of FNC: the inclusion, almost always, of the liberal viewpoint. I suggest that more people know of Allen Colmes through his appearances on FNC than they do through his own show. Bob Bechel? Juan Williams? Geraldo? Come on, Earold, show me such “diversity” on MSNBC or CNN.

          I hope you’re not suggesting that the broadcast news media is a better place. FNC regularly tells us how many minutes they devote to important subjects that liberals would rather not reach the airwaves at all. I suggest that the brunt of conservative criticism has been aimed precisely at the three broadcast news networks–and the NYT, AP, Reuters, and a few more, all of whom give us the same line.
          Were you amused when Tom Brokaw stated during Obama’s first inauguration that “we don’t know the man”? This after NBC had nothing but favorable reports on him during the campaign and nothing but negative about John McCain (who is not on any conservative’s list for anything but his quick retirement).

          Who are the “right extreme,’ by the way. I hope that you’re not referring to the “survivalists” or the last remnants of racial bigots out in the hinterlands. If you call Limbaugh, Hannity, et al. extremists, then I’ll only say that you are branding mainstream conservatives as extremists. That is what the liberal spokespeople and the White House guy who lives there do.

          Rush and others have it right: “Moderates” are liberals who don’t want to be called that. You don’t find conservatives shying away from their name.

          • Earold Gunter

            Duane, News agencies are businesses, and some approach their “reporting” like other businesses do, and try to give their customers what they want. MSNBC makes no pretense about what they are; hard left, and report from that perspective. In the case of Fox though, they are hard right, but also have a few left people on the shows who are overwhelmingly drown out by the right, just so they can disingenuously make the claim they are “Fair and balanced”, which they are not. If they were they would have a 50/50 mix, but they don not.
            However, I have seen many of your posts, so I have a pretty good feeling, if past history is any teacher, that you can’t see this. As the saying goes, there’s none as blind as those who will not see. I’m sure you feel the same about me though.
            Have a great day!

          • David Lloyd-Jones

            Duane,

            You have a simple dictionary problem. Conservatives conserve.

            In America’s current political situation there is a conservative party, the Democratic faction of Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton. They stand for the free enterprise system, for conserving what’s left of the middle class, and for subsidizing insurance companies to get people insurance, not health care.

            America has a few liberals, and the litmus would be, do they want a health care system for all? Not many pass that litmus.

            The Republican parties are not conservative, nor are most elected Republicans. Their political positions vary. Some are anarchists, some are feudalists, most are reactionaries, a few are like the ever-musing Senator Rand of Kentucky, enthusiasts for the whacko enthusiasm of the day.

            Finally ou have the right-wing entertainer claque, Limbaugh, Fox, Levin and so on. Limbaugh is as simple thug, the sort who plays the tough guy in professional wrestling. Fox is a parody of the evening news, a sort of mirror to The Daily Show, but without the wit.

            -dlj.

          • Dear Duane
            I consider myself to be a conservative, a Santorum conservative, a Catholic social teaching conservative, and I can tell who the extremists are. Extremists are anyone, Left and Right, who do not respect people who disagree, who treat them as something alien. We are all Children of God, and deserve the respect accorded to each of us on that basis alone. Every side, Liberal and Conservative, has something valuable to lend to the discussion. We should listen to each other, and not run litmus tests on who is conservative enough and who is not. A house divided against itself shall surely fall.

        • Catholicism and Satanism are also at extreme ends, are they not? Are we now totally incapable of recognizing error and classifying it as merely “another perspective”? This is the devil’s greatest victory so far.

        • Absolutely correct, Mr. Gunter. You have hit the bullseye. We live in a world where civil discourse has died, where bellyaching is the fashion, where playing the victim card is a position of power, where individuals have a regiment of “rights” and a graveyard of responsibilities. Extremism is just a way for us to let loose the dogs of war upon anyone who would have the effrontery to disagree. We have come to the point in our history where we should abandon the pretense of civilization and have at each other with AK-47s in the parking lot of Wal-Mart.

          • Pardon me. The Left won’t show up at Wal-Mart. We should go to the upscale malls for that.

  2. Well might the hierarchs deal decisively with Mr Shaw. Another degree of separation from Murdoch is a move in the right direction.
    Then, when the Bishops have examined their collective conscience after reading and meditating on Pope Francis’ Evangelii Gaudium and its challenges, they might turn their critical focus on white-anting, carping, whining clergy like John Zuhlsdorf who makes a very comfortable living out of providing ideological dreck, bits of second hand Latin and loads of self-absorbed clericalism in return for generous gifts to his crassly materialistic wish-list. Single issue harpies like him do nothing for Jesus Christ, his Gospel or his Church.

    • Wow. Fr. Z provides a lot of solid information and has many admirers. Those who donate to him do so voluntarily as they see value to his website as he provides a lot of solid information. Note that the bishops organization as a whole has no status to censure an individual priest. In the case of Fr. Z, only the bishop of his home diocese and the bishop in whose diocese he’s active have any say in his activities. He helps with Mass in the Extraordinary form at the request of the bishop in whose local he resides with the permission of his home bishop, some guy named Francis.

  3. @cmt… please describe “clericalism”… its a made up word by apostate ncronline and other liberal rags, pretending to be Catholic. You all decry clerical matters because your angry feminists, with a needto be priests… you are sad…

  4. @john….’clericalism’ is the spiritual psycho-pathology of that subculture within the Church who actually believe with the eccentric John Vianney that, ‘after God, the priest is everything.’
    Zuhlsdorf and his minions heavily subscribe to and actually encourage this perception as it distracts from the poverty of their own human maturity levels and their monumental intellectual dwarfism.
    Surprise yourself John and read Pope Francis’ criticisms of clericalism and its subculture. Benedict XVI said similar things. Zuhlsdorf and his ilk maintain a deep tactical silence behind their gated, moderated blog-festungs on those things while all along promote his/their status of entitlement and privilege. Take a close look at his wish-list then count up the number of times he ever mentions Jesus Christ, the Gospels, grace, mercy, compassion, the great Social Teaching of the Catholic Church just for starters. He’s more interested in rubrics, guns and donations.

    • Only a sick individual could come up with these kind of distortions. No doubt Fr. Zuhlsdorf is interested in guns to protect himself from crazies like you.

      If only all priests were as “eccentric” as St. John Vianney.

    • You appear to me to propose a rabidly distorted view of the priesthood. Bear in mind that, if you don’t have a priest, you don’t have Mass or Confession. Most of your “compassion” is rendered useless if a sinner cannot repent by means of the sacrament.
      As for the number of times that Fr Z references grace, the Gospel, and so forth, I think you need to re-read his blog. He used to call it WDTPRS for a reason: he provided commentary about what the prayers really say. He BEGAN with the Gospels and worthy derivatives therefrom.

      For that matter, if all you ever worry about is “mercy”, “compassion”, and the “Great Social Teaching of the Catholic Church’, I think you’ve missed about 90% of the Church’s actual cause to exist.

      • Wow! You’ve had way too much RC kool-aid!
        “Most of your “compassion” is rendered useless if a sinner cannot repent by means of the sacrament.” Really? LOL! What color is the sky in your world?
        Your type of arrogance is exactly what has driven people away from the church in droves.

        • Have you ever read John 20:19-23? “Whosever sins you forgive are forgiven. Whosever sins you retain are retained.” (Christ to his Apostles after the Resurrection.) The Church (the only true Church) has ensured this authority has been observed for nearly 2000 years.This is not “Kool Aid.” Our Lord established the Sacrament of Reconciliation to effect the ordinary means of remission of sins on this planet. Do you propose another means? I am sure you do. Good luck.

          • Yes, but the Church also acknowledges that one can be forgiven even Mortal Sins by a perfect Act of Contrition, one based on loving God rather than fear of the fire, or at least on loving God more than fear of the fire. No doubt the priesthood is a heroic form of life, and is vital to the life of the Church. Every young man who is bound for the seminary should be given a pair of crampons and an ice axe for climbing Everest, because in our world, that is what they are doing. God bless them all! However, clericalism is a long recognized problem among priests, where some priests come to believe that membership in that holy body makes them better than the workaday shmoes who inhabit the laity. It is the great trap for all who climb Everest, to get dizzy from the height, and fall into spiritual pride, like the Pharisees.

    • It never dawned on you that he would, because of his personal biases, give unfavorable evaluations to works that might agree with the Pope’s words instead of his own.

      • Terik Ororke

        Traditionalists long for the good old days, whenever they were, perhaps 16th century. They all forget one truth: We Are Tradition….if this Pope is upsetting some maybe there is a good reason and you better pay attention.

  5. And it’s precisely the kind of mentality of the unthinking sycophancy you represent which is the target for ideological cynics like Murdoch and his servant Adam Shaw. Take a look at the editorial policy of Fox News and the Murdoch tabloid press. They love the unthinking masses and despise those who question. So does Zuhlsdorf. He and the whole cohort of celebrity clerics make a comfortable living out of the ignorance and idolatry of their disciples.
    If you read the history of Zuhlsdorf’s blog since Francis became pope you’ll see that just to cope, he has had to invent a new hermeneutic of understanding Francis through Benedict. He has lost the authority behind his laziness and his licence to dump contempt on those who oppose him.
    Now he’s on the run big time. Check out his endless contortion acts and torture routines of rationalisation and note how the mindless disciple lap it all up.

  6. @cmt. You seem to have an unhealthy obsession with father z. Father Z is a good man. Not like the load of homosexual priests that came in the wake of Vatican two, and its ensuing feminization and watering down of the faith. Ever since the sixties, the Church has been in decline… that is the “church of nice” with its false eccumism, and religious liberty scam. We are in a downfall in the Church. Father Z is a strong voice of the flourishing remnant thats left. We love the traditional Latin mass, we actually reproduce, we go to confession regularly, while your ilk just stays angry. You try hard to change faith and morals, which cannot change. You wreck the liturgy, and the faithful Catholics flee. You are quite sad… you read Francis to suit your needs, and ignore his smackdownns on abortion and fake “wwmen preists”. Father Z threatens your church of nice nonsense… so you must set the narrative against him… this is what progressives must always do… the biological solution is weeding you all out.. as our Lord called you, the weeds among the wheat… go back and read ncronline and other fake Catholic organizations. The remnant will read father z’s blog

    • John, a wonderful description of a sect following blindly a delusional leader. It is common knowledge and a given in sociology, especially the sociology of religion, that these sects themselves dissipate quickly when the leader is demystified.
      Might be a cosy existence for a time but it has nothing in common with Jesus Christ, his truth or his Church.

      • “…these sects themselves dissipate quickly when the leader is demystified.”

        I didn’t know Fr Z was such a mystery or that any of his readers had formed some kind of cult around him. If you think he has nothing in common with Christ Jesus, I think you understand Christ Jesus exceedingly poorly.

  7. @cmt. You also seem to love grace, mercy, and social justice for the poor. The Church of nice doesn’t ever teach about the four last things… death, judgement, heaven, and hell. No surprise that wasnt on your “list”.

  8. Well, if Catholic News Service doesn’t care for how Mr. Shaw commented regarding Pope Francis, I think I shall be VERY cautious about even considering a subscription to Catholic News Service.
    I think Mr. Shaw provided a great outlet for what many people have been thinking.

    • What we all must keep in mind is that many liberals do not recognize themselves to be such. Point out to them that their behavior or words give evidence to their liberal perspective and they’ll either deny it or give you a blank stare and change the subject. When John Stewart (?) humorously stated that “Reality has a liberal bias,” he hit the nail on the head regarding liberals’ own evaluation of their viewpoint.

      The editor-in-chief of this website asked me for examples of my judgment that RNS has its own liberal bias. I provided a couple. There’s been no rejoinder. I do not criticize RNS for its perspective, I want only that they either acknowledge it or make editorial efforts to remove it, especially from headers to articles placed here. None of us is objective. Media people who don’t want to appear to be biased must make better efforts to remove the appearances of bias or to incorporate the biases of both perspectives generously through their writers and their editors. Let’s make it perfectly plain and clear that “we pet both cats.” Or neither.

  9. You’d think that CNS would promote the guy, since he equated Pope Francis to Obama.

    Didn’t Cardinal Dolan say just last Sunday that the bishops were longing to be Obama’s strongest “cheerleaders,” if he would just remove the HHS contraceptive mandate?

    Looking more deeply, though, reveals the real reason: Shaw was criticizing Obama as a socialist (true), and then tagging Pope Francis as another socialist (false).

    He should have sent the Fox piece to rewrite to make his analysis parse, instead of swallowing Rush Limbaugh’s superficial line (but what can you expect of the “cheerleaders” at Fox?).

    All this is lost on Mr. Spence, of course, whose reporters are clueless Social Justice junkies who turn every phrase of every pope into a socialist tirade.

    While the pope is busy downsizing the Vatican, I hope he will do the same with the bloated Bishops’ conference bureaucracy.

  10. Articles on Religion News Service rarely attract any more than a few comments. This must have hit a nerve. And it’s interesting that Adam Shaw’s editorial came out not too long after Pope Francis’ teaching on the effects of capitalism on the poor, a teaching I’ve been told that adds little to the Church’s long standing teaching on the subject. Could this be the source of all the angry energy? Don’t like the teaching so you attack the teacher. Just saying…

  11. What a blast this must be for anyone reading this thread from outside the USA! Most of the posters have no idea of the difference between Socialism and Communism, liberal or conservative in the classic sense. How many of the readership know or realise that most of the developed world has ‘social’ medical and welfare systems which are based on a social contract of citizens who agree to higher taxation which provides for a safety net for all its citizens and visiting foreigners alike.
    How many of those who are doing the knee-jerk reaction to Pope Francis and his teaching on the Gospel of Social Justice have ever read Francis alongside the Gospel message of Jesus and the Magisterium on his teaching in, for example, the Papal Encyclicals such as Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum, John XXIII’s Pacem in Terris, Populorum Progessio, Centesimus Annus, Deus Caritats Est.
    I wage a bet that next to none of the readership here has ever read any of these. If you (they) have/had, you would not be bending the knee at the shrine of Shaw nor facing ‘ad orientem’ towards the shrine of self-interested and self-worshipping, grasping materialistic clerics like the Zuhlsdorf and his fellow celebrity clerics.

    • Give me a break, CMT!
      While some nations may still have strong Catholic factions within them, no nation state in existence today requires high tax rates or offers a “welfare system” because of the demands of charity as described by Catholic encyclicals.
      I’m not aware of any nation of citizens who have willingly established a social contract to provide a safety net. I AM, however, aware of many nations within whom a large cadre of adamant liberals have browbeat the citizenry into allowing government to redistribute wealth as those liberals have seen fit. Strong insinuations of sinful attitudes–justified or not–have gone a long way toward persuading people to surrender their freedom as individuals and allow the State to make too man choices.

      Odd how you howl about the lives of Fr Z and others too. It’s very difficult to have a debate when you insist that they’re wrong because they don’t live in the manner you think they ought.

    • I would like to know just one system of economics/government interaction that has expanded the middle class like the former system in the United States. Add to that the aid that has been extended to other countries. How dare these socialists complain. The world would be a much bleaker place without US help.

  12. Agree whole heartedly with CMT. I emailed Rush Limbaugh after I heard him call our Pope a Marxist. Rush Limbaugh needs to study up on Ignation Spirituality. without that background he really doesn’t know who Pope Francis is. Also I know very few Catholics who have studied any encyclicals, unless they did so in a Catholic school (probably high school) . Shaw must be a ‘fraud’. So many people of any persuasion should shut up until they read up!

  13. JMJ I thought Adam Shaw’s article was so truthful I sent to each of my 11 children. Like a voice in the wilderness someone with the fortitude to speak the plain truth in season and out of season! The novelties of VII have gone onto long the fruit has failed.

  14. Looks like this is real face of “forgiveness” “in the spirit of Vatican 2″. Agree with our revolutionary agenda or you’re fired! Now, about those pedophile priests…

  15. May be Pope Francis should receive a copy of Shaw’s article. He is Pope for all of us those who agree with what he is doing/saying and those who dont. One of Obama’s downfall is sorrounding himself with people who only say “Yes sir”. He walks in traps without knowing. Pope Francis shouldnt do this. He should know what his flock thinks even those with divergent views. Obama will go down as the worst, We dont want Francis to do the same. We love the whole poor, their souls and their bodies. It is better to go to heaven poor, shievering and hungry than to go to hell with a full stomach. His love for the poor is commendable but he should equally fight abortion and gay behaviour which destroy men’s souls. Firing Shaw will not change the way conservative Catholics feel about the Pope. He should add emphasis on the poor without disregarding the soul killers. Catholics should also know that helping the poor is not an institutionalized call, it is a call for all of us individually. On judgement day, it is going to be each of us, not our governments.

  16. I saw the article, on par with Rush Limbaugh, totally ignorant of Catholicism and very telling how BOTH sides wish to use the church for their OWN AGENDA, not God’s. Glad he got canned.

  17. I heard Rush Limbaugh’s comments on what the pope said in his apostolic exhortation & he did not “blast” the pope. He was commenting on the wording in paragraphs 55 – 58 which does communicate a liberal view of economic policy.
    Everyone needs to take a chill pill & keep in mind; words shape ideas, ideas shape behavior.

  18. I never had a problem with Shaw before and apparently neither did CNS, but the hyperbole he used and pedestrian level comparison to Barack Obama was really unfortunate. Pope Francis leads a global church and is accountable to no government or non governmental agency. He’s free to speak as he wishes. The complexities of media management and translation to the world’s languages sometimes confound him. But Shaw should know better than to package such a man for American media consumption and partisan argument, as should Rush Limbaugh. Shaw came across as juvenile and disrespectful and CNS has standards after all. FoxNews? Perhaps, perhaps not.

    • The Pope can speak as he wishes, but apparently, CNS does not extend that same courtesy to Adam Shaw. Truthfully one learns more from one’s enemies than from ones friends.

  19. Limbaugh called Pope Francis a Marxist. Anyone who would do so is either a fool (and thus not worth listening to) or a liar (and thus not worth listening to).

    What Francis said is that unfettered capitalism is not a good thing. Pope John Paul II, in Centesimus Annus 42, (italics added):

    Returning now to the initial question: can it perhaps be said that, after the failure of Communism, capitalism is the victorious social system, and that capitalism should be the goal of the countries now making efforts to rebuild their economy and society? Is this the model which ought to be proposed to the countries of the Third World which are searching for the path to true economic and civil progress?

    The answer is obviously complex. If by “capitalism” is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”. But if by “capitalism” is meant a system in which freedom in the economic sector is not circumscribed within a strong juridical framework which places it at the service of human freedom in its totality, and which sees it as a particular aspect of that freedom, the core of which is ethical and religious, then the reply is certainly negative.

    The Marxist solution has failed, but the realities of marginalization and exploitation remain in the world, especially the Third World, as does the reality of human alienation, especially in the more advanced countries. Against these phenomena the Church strongly raises her voice. Vast multitudes are still living in conditions of great material and moral poverty. The collapse of the Communist system in so many countries certainly removes an obstacle to facing these problems in an appropriate and realistic way, but it is not enough to bring about their solution. Indeed, there is a risk that a radical capitalistic ideology could spread which refuses even to consider these problems, in the a priori belief that any attempt to solve them is doomed to failure, and which blindly entrusts their solution to the free development of market forces.

    • So then, John, apart from our disagreement on the grasping, auto-idolatrous and materialistically obsessed and clerical free-loader, John Zuhlsdorf, we share common ground on the social justice teaching of the Catholic Church. You have correctly shown that, in the words of JPII’s ‘Centesimus Annus’ no economic ‘ism’ enjoys the support of the Catholic Church, especially any system which leaves the poor and dispossessed behind. The reasoning is founded in the teaching of Jesus himself, particularly in the Parables of Loss found in Luke’s Gospel, where the human subjects of scorn and contempt are shoved aside as refuse, economic/spiritual losers, and thrown into the collective trash can.
      Pope Francis take up the great Tradition of Catholic Social teaching and roundly says that it is not a matter of throwing a dime into the plastic cup of a beggar. It is a matter of looking at the underlying social structures of poverty and social dispossession. Francis is a Latin American and he is well aware of the teaching of one of the great Catholic pastors of the Latin American Church, the late Brazilian Archbishop of Recife, Helder Camara, who said, “When I give bread to the hungry, they call me a saint. But when I ask why the poor have no bread, they call me a Communist.”
      I suggest readers take a close look at the article published in The Tablet which provides a brief commentary on Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation, ‘Evangelii Gaudium,’ not ‘Evangelii gaudier’ as the dissembling, semantic contortionists call it. See: http://www.thetablet.co.uk/blogs/1/170/on-the-economy-francis-says-what-no-politician-will

    • You better read it again. Saying that the Pope is saying Marxist things and calling him a Marxist are two different things. That is the problem with the whole world. Everyone exaggerates what another has said. Pope Francis spoke of ‘unfettered capitalism’ as being bad. I contend that unfettered anything is bad. And like Rush pointed out, there is no place in the world where ‘unfettered capitalism’ exists. Now for unfettered socialism that exists in many places simply because some socialists execute anyone who disagrees with them ala Cuba

  20. One of the hallmarks of Communism is the suppression of dissent. CNS and the USCCB have inadvertently tipped their hands in censoring Adam Shaw and have clearly demonstrated how they are aligned with Marxist ideology. “The floor of Hell is paved with the skulls of rotten bishops.”

  21. Garson Abuita

    Fox News exercised their First Amendment rights. The Catholic News Service exercised them right back. The extreme right in this country have been crowing for many years that freedom of religion and speech are under attack. It’s really nice to see them hoisted on their own petard.

  22. I love Francis, and I have great contempt for “Fox Noise,” but I also defend the right to free speech. And when it comes to outfits like Fox who are only in their entertainment game to make millions for Rupert Murdoch, they aren’t dumping anyone because that person offends decency or anyone who is decent, like Pope Francis. They are only pretending morals in order to save their advertisers so they can save their viewers and numbers–including their numbers of dollars.

  23. Americanizing a world religious figure to fit with our view of “left” and “right” wing politics won’t get anyone anywhere. I choose to take Pope Francis’ advice and “not judge”.

  24. Pope Francis has made few Policy Changes not much for providing direction and a lot of verbal comments. He has issues at his door steps . St Stanislous Church Parishioners Excommunication, Banishment issue. Pedophile Priest Issue. Use of Parishioners weekly contributions to support legal defence for abusing clergy bishops,cardinals and other church officials. Respond to a UN mandate child abuse. He wants to appoint commisions, meetings, groups to investigate these problems. All will take years and volumes of written reports to conclude what he knows now. His Priests and Clergy violated children over the last 50″ years. What he needs to do is to provide immediate directions followed up by written policies and applied punishments to all that do not follow his policies, He is so well protected and insulated to everday news I doubt anything will be done to resolve the issue. I think all at the Vatican are in a hunker down mode waiting for him to retire also and they can resume as was 5 yrs ago…business as usuall. Just dont think anything will change at the vatican
    unless Pope Francis today walk into the remaining offices at the curia and fire the rest of the staff including Cardinal Burke, O’Malley, Dolan.

    • Buffy, you do not know what you are speaking of. Read Donohue’s (Catholic League) responses to the howling media over the abuse scandal. The Catholic Church has done more to correct that than any other organization in the world. Yet, the American and European media carp on it day and night for their own amusement. You can never lose money attacking the Catholic Church. Hate is always good business, if you hate the right people. If we really want to do something about child sexual abuse, we should be looking at the coaches, the group where most of the abuse occurs.

  25. I just like the helpful information you provide for your articles.

    I will bookmark your weblog and test again right here frequently.
    I am rather sure I will be told plenty of new stuff
    proper here! Best of luck for the next!

  26. If a product sells through their marketplace, then you receive 10% of the
    standard retail price paid by a customer. Nowadays, the people have developed a lot of concern about all kinds of latest state news.
    Yes, with no more monthly bills to take care of because Amazon already did that for you.

  27. Have you ever thought about writing an e-book or guest authoring
    on other websites? I have a blog based on the same ideas you
    discuss and would love to have you share some stories/information. I
    know my viewers would appreciate your work. If you’re even remotely interested, feel free to
    send me an email.

  28. gilhcan, I challenge you to produce one iota of evidence of conservative news and talk radio presenting “illiterate, hateful, outrageous speech.” You won’t be able to without first redefining those terms according to the liberal perspective, which you, apparently, hold dear to your heart.

    I suspect you have never found anything offensive coming from the mouths of Rachel Maddow and Crissy Matthews, let alone that firebrand over at CNN, Bashir, who got canned for his crap.

    We await your defense of the indefensible.

  29. Stoney, I absolutely agree. Shaw has First Amendment rights exercised outside the job at the propanda arm that is CNS. CNS betrays their true mission by firing him. Thank God for a teaching Magisterium against which to balance Papal Exortations.CNS should welcome Shaw’s comments and any criticisms therof.

  30. “This president I think has exposed himself over and over again as a guy who has a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture….I’m not saying he doesn’t like white people, I’m saying he has a problem. This guy is, I believe, a racist.” –Glenn Beck on President Obama, sparking an advertiser exodus from his FOX News show, July 28, 2009

  31. “I could give a flying crap about the political process … We’re an entertainment company.” –FOX News Channel’s Glen Beck, Forbes interview; April, 2010

  32. “America was certainly safe between 2000 and 2008. I don’t remember any attacks on American soil during that period of time.” —Fox News Channel host Eric Bolling, forgetting 9/11 (July 2011)

  33. The following exchange between Fox News hosts Bill O’Reilly and Megyn Kelly took place during a November 2011 discussion in which they tried to downplay the impact of pepper spray on student Occupy protesters at UC Davis:
    O’Reilly: “First of all, pepper spray—that just burns your eyes, right?”
    Kelly: “It’s like a derivative of actual pepper. It’s a food product, essentially.”

  34. “The only problem with talking about Sarah Palin is that she works here, and it’s like a coworker. And if I say something bad and I see her in the hallway I feel really awkward and wrong. So I just kind of say, ‘that was a good job!’” –Greg Gutfeld, co-host of Fox News’s Channel’s “The Five,” to his co-host Bob Beckel, who agreed, saying, “It has everything to do with your paycheck. That’s why you feel awkward. I know exactly what you mean. I’ll be honest, I’ve pulled my punches.” (August 3, 2011)

  35. Deacon John M. Bresnahan

    If there were an emmy or oscar for garbage-mouthing, it would clearly go to liberals in Congress and the media. The liberal media covers up for their liberal foul-mouthed cohorts in Congress by lumping all Congressmen together instead of reporting on the behavior of the members of each party separately.
    During the debates on the budget one need only have watched c-span to have seen who the smear merchants were. But it was reported in the mainstream news media as though Congressmen of both parties were behaving the same.
    If Republicans had behaved as rottenly as the Democrats in Congress (who constantly, demeaned and insulted Republicans as “extremists,” rightists,” etc. ) they would have constantly labeled Democrats as Communists, etc.

  36. Duane, Are you serious? What freakin planet do you live on? How can anyone with a straight face say what you just said? I have no words to describe my total shock and awe at the absurdity of such a statement and I shake my head in wonderment of what kind of human being could seriously say such a thing and really mean it. What a joke.

  37. Yes indeed, sounds like an Obama-like response to criticism. No cheek-turning here.

    “Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.”

  38. Deacon John M. Bresnahan

    The problem is that some Christians have come to equate socialist government coercion with the voluntary charity that is extolled in the Bible. There is a huge difference. One (socialism) leads to eventual destruction of freedom for both the well-to-do and the poor. The other (charity) builds up community and personal responsibility.
    And much of this talk of the poor in the U.S. is a scam.
    I have worked my whole life. Other members of my family are “poor.” But they are “poor” only if you don’t include the “in-kind” government services (including food, housing, medical care,etc.) they receive. Include those and many of the so-called “poor” have higher “income” than many” working” families. But most surveys of the “poor” don’t count “in-kind” income– the wealth most poor receive–only “cash” income.

  39. Gilhcan, I agree with you completely… some of the statements on hear sound like they come from an alternate universe. What woodwork do the people crawl out of anyway. ? Never mind the answer to that I really don’t want to know. I will pray for them.

  40. The Obama’s sat in Rev. Wrights pews listening to him spew Anti American, Anti white and Anti Semitic sermons for 20 years.

    Barack Obama first met Wright in the late 1980s.
    Wright officiated at the wedding ceremony of Barack and Michelle Obama, as well as their children’s baptisms.

    The title of Obama’s 2006 memoir, The Audacity of Hope, was inspired by one of Wright’s sermons. This sermon also was the source for themes of Obama’s 2004 keynote address to the Democratic National Convention.

    Obama stated that he was aware of Pastor Wright’s controversial comments, and had personally heard “remarks that could be considered controversial” in Wright’s church, but denied having heard the particular inflammatory statements that were widely televised during the campaign. Obama was specifically asked by Bill O’Reilly if Reverend Wright had said white people were bad, to which Obama replied “no.” [29][30][31] In his book Dreams from my Father, Obama had quoted Reverend Wright as saying in a sermon “It’s this world, where cruise ships throw away more food in a day than most residents of Port-au-Prince see in a year, where White folks’ greed runs a world in need.”

    I think Glenn was correct.

    btw…Oprah Winfrey also sat in Wrights pews.

  41. Gary Lockhart

    “Shaw has First Amendment rights exercised outside the job at the propanda(sic) arm that is CNS.” ann

    Incorrect. The First Amendment doesn’t apply to private entities. The Bill of Rights only applies to what the government can and cannot do to your unalienable rights.

    However, your assessment CNS is correct.

  42. You can’t fire the truth, but you have to find it first. Frankly there is not much to see here. Tasteless opinion maybe, but not much else.

    But when you are covering an absolute monarchy, you probably should not insult the monarch openly. =)

  43. Couldn’t agree more. Pope Francis appears to be a naive country bumpkin. The liberal media are having a field day quoting him and CNS condemns a journalist who dares to point this out? Give me a break.
    Viva Christo Rey!

  44. If they never get out of the alive womb, they can’t be on their own, eh? I guess that means “Prolife”. If they’re dead, then no “Infancy”,eh?

  45. Pretty much. Her womb, her rules. But we only want the mother to be the one who acts in the situation. None of this abortion assault by others nonsense.

  46. Really?

    Every statement coming from you and cohorts is all “liberal media bias..blah blah blah”. Its a lame excuse every time a conservative gets caught doing something they should not be doing.

    Give me a break. Republicans seem to rely on smear. Republicans just call their opponents “socialists”, “godless atheist heathens”, “immoral antichristians”…

  47. Gato, the citizens of the USA are not the most important people on the face of the earth nor is the USA necessarily the greatest county on the face of the earth or ever in history. Check with the ancient and noble peoples of Chad, Mali, Burkina Faso among others. They think they’re wonderful, great, are living in unbelievable poverty and desperation. They also say what they like and have nothing or little so unlike the citizens of our over indulged, self-absorbed and incredibly obese and ignorant citizens of the USA. These people say ‘thank you’ when someone serves them at a little place to eat. Do you? Bet you don’t!

  48. Kris & Kindred,
    Read the Gospels. The read the prophet Amos. It’ll probably be a whole new experience.
    Treat yourselves. They’ll scare the willies out of you.

  49. It was available for all those who had the power to pass the bill or reject it. Conservatives are just big crybabies.

    Socialism has nothing to do with ACA. If it did, the law would work better. Single payer out of an employer’s control, none of this “religious exemption” nonsense or bishops making healthcare decisions for people.

  1. […] Shaw, who penned that mindless screed, is just not the brightest bulb in the firmament, after all: Fox News columnist rips Pope Francis, loses Catholic News Service gig | Sacred and Profane Quote: Tony Spence, editor in chief of the wire service, which operates under the aegis of the […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments with many links may be automatically held for moderation.