News


Is The New York Times anti-catholic?

Yes, there is a long history at the paper


New York Times headquarters, Manhattan
New York Times headquarters, Manhattan

Guinness PubFinder Ad

Columnist Frank Rich raises the issue of whether The New York Times is anti-Catholic by his excoriating column attacking  Bill Donohue's Catholic League complaints about a Smithsonian exhibition last Sunday.
 
On the one hand several of The Times columnists are Catholics.  Nicholas Kristof's father wrote editorials for the Diocese of Portland's newspaper.  On the other we have the sports department columnists Carl Rhoden and Harvey Araton who aggressively attacked Notre Dame University, Rhoden over the firing of black coach Tyrone Willingham.

When Willingham was fired by Washington, The Times didn't carry the story. Araton and others in the sports department savaged two Duke lacrosse players and their Catholic high schools over an an alleged rape.   Turned out the rape never happened. 
 
Nicholas Kristof, who often chides others for ignoring scientific evidence, habitually blames the Catholic Church for AIDS in Africa because it condemned the use of condoms.   There is no scientific evidence of a correlation between Catholicism and AIDS and it's dubious that anyone who ignores the Catholic Church's proscription on sex outside marriage is concerned about the church's position on condoms.
 
The Times perennially features the McMansion ethnic slur,  the Irish as perpetrators of the New York City draft riots, and Simon Winchester the anti-Catholic who eventually admitted writing stories for the Guardian that covered up British army killings of civilians in Northern Ireland.
 
Connecting the draft riots to New York's Irish is especially problematic.   Although the Weinstein brothers' Gangs of New York movie about the riots features the Irish in the Five Points neighborhood, near where my great-grandfather lived,  most of the violence occurred along the 20th-30th street axis uptown, as Pete Hamill pointed out in a Daily News column.  Indeed the lynching of Abraham Franklin recounted in Bob Herbert's egregious column about the riots occurred virtually on the doorstep of Mount Sinai Hospital's original location.   Although Herbert identifies a teenager who mutilated Franklin's body as Irish, the person charged with the lynching was not mentioned: he was neither Irish nor Catholic.  Neither were the commercial interests who incited the rioting, notably the leader of the Democratic party at the time, August Belmont.
 
Mr. Herbert egregiously accused poor immigrants of refusing to fight to free poor blacks.   MIA, as far as The Times is concerned, is the fact that most of New York City, including the Irish, didn't riot in July 1863.   MIA the Great Militia Mobilization of June 1863 that sent 15,000 men to the aid of Pennsylvania when the Confederates invaded, but stripped New York City of its self-defense force leaving it to the mercy of malcontents.  MIA New York City's 200 Civil War Medals of Honor.  MIA the 200,000 soldiers from New York City including Brooklyn who fought for the Union.  MIA their 20,000 dead.  MIA New York City's Irish Brigade and its suicidal assault on the stonewall at Fredericksburg on December 13, 1862, on the eve of Emancipation.  MIA the Excelsior brigade at Gettysburg.  MIA New York City's 69th Fighting Irish regiment, which fought in almost all the major battles in the East from Bull Run to Appomattox, losing more KIA than any other Union army infantry regiment, some of its members even accompanying Sherman on his march to the sea.
 
Finally, to illustrate universality of this problem, The Times science department refuses to note that the Large Binocular Telescope (LBT) is by far the largest single mount optical telescope in the world and has produced observations clearer than the Hubble Space Telescope.  Given The Times position that religion, and particularly the Catholic Church, is an antagonist of science, the Gregorian calendar notwithstanding, the science department is loathe to acknowledge that LBT sits next door to the Vatican Observatory in Arizona and the Vatican Advanced Technology Telescope, which was the prototype for manufacturing LBT's gigantic mirrors.
 
What we have here is what the British call Whig history, a world saved by stouthearted Cromwells and Marlboroughs from the Irish, Spain, benighted Kings, and the Catholic Church.  Wonderful fairy tales for those who like cultivated prejudice and to read that someone else is the problem.


Nster.com


41 Comments

15 - 41 | See all comments

Sez spasticpaddy: **(The NYT)... is a centrist paper at best, to call it left wing is to be entirely ignorant of the political spectrum** --- No kidding! When the 'political spectrum' one lives in has one placed to the left of Trotsky, Mao and Pol Pot, any 'rag' will seem 'centrist' as a matter of distorted perspective. --- As for reading my own bible and/or listening to the priest at Mass... precisely because I do so I've become immune to the red disease.-- Commies like to fantasize that because the bible says in Acts 'early Christians shared their wealth and held all things in common' that means they were 'communists' in the Marxist-Leninist sense. That's nothing less than distortion and classic out of context proof texting, much in the manner proddies justify their theorizing. -- If Christians in fact shared their goods it was out of 'love for neighbor' and because they expected the imminent return of Christ, not because they were FORCED to do so. -- Further, I'd like to see the biblical reference, Old or New Testament, that demands that government TAKE from those who produce, to give to those who don't, in order to equalize the misery. -- Also, in which socialist/commnist country has there been any 'equality' and true social justice? -- History shows instead nothing but failed societies where dearth is the norm and a political bureaucratic elite lives as a parasitic royalty.
Reference for the quotation from 1844, below, is Tom Hayden's "Chronology" in "Irish Hunger." Pope Gregory XVI's letters & encyclicals are available at several Internet sites--just use Google to find them.
Just a little more on the enigma of Irish loyalties. . . In an 1839 apostolic letter, the Famine-Era Pope Gregory XVI opposed slavery. He condemned those who "separate [slaves] from their wives and children, despoil them of their goods and properties, conduct or transport them into other regions, or deprive them of liberty in any way whatsoever." Then in 1844, on the eve of an Gorta Mor, the same pope reprimanded Irish priests "on behalf of British." The Vatican instructed priests, "by work and example to inculcate subjection to the temporal power in civil matters and to dissipate popular excitements," in other words, to tell their parishioners, who considered themselves virtual slaves to British owners, to obey the Brits and quit rebelling. Go figure how to remain loyal when the institution's moral stance seems to change with the direction of the wind!
Probably, Confederates sought out the papal approval that CitizenWhy refers to. Bernstein writes, "As the war progressed, [NYC Archbishop] Hughes' attacks on emancipation and the Vatican's willingness to entertain Confederate diplomats at the papal court made the issue of Catholic loyalty to the Union even more worrisome" (197). The complicated but fierce loyalties of Irish and Irish-Americans, both the rioters and the police in 1863 for example, remains, to me, the great puzzle of the Draft Riots. NYC Metropolitan Police officers, like the rioters, were mostly Democrat Party members, but the Police worked for the Republicans and became almost an arm of Washington Republicans. Maybe Jimmy Breslin understood it: the Police, he writes in "Leaves of Pain," were "Irish with their trait of loyalty. And loyalty was stronger than stone. There was no question what the police would do: protect the black families and then attack the mob, this mob of Irish. Attack them and beat them and club them and force them to break and run and then chase them down the street and beat them so they would have no stomach to return for more" (in Tom Hayden's 1997 book "Irish Hunger").
No not joking, it is a centrist paper at best, to call it left wing is to be entirely ignorant of the political spectrum. To call a rag such as the New York Times leftist is also to ignore the fact that it is a newspaper full of opinion pieces written by individual writers. Read some of the economic articles which are clearly capitalist in their ideological opining. People who call it left-wing do not read it and are entirely mislead in their criticism. I too dislike it but for legitimate and informed reasons. As for 2Bornot2B do you need to resort to name calling or is your argument so weak you need to distract from it with the opposite of witticisms. Also, read your own bible and listen to your priest at mass were you really Catholic you too would be leftist and not an apologist for greed and idiocy.
The poor Irish cannon fodder in the war of aggression. Totally hoodwinked by the clever sound bytes to inflame passion that the war was about slavery, they bravely marched into certain death in many cases. In some cases it was march or get the firing squad. But the war wasn't about slavery, Lincolns emancipation proclamation only freed slaves in the south. The war was about states rights vs. an intrusive central government.
From reading the New York Times, it's the only conclusion that I can come to. Time and space does'nt allow me to give any examples but believe me. The New York Times is anti-Irish and also anti-Catholic, ergo anti-Italian and anti-Polish.
eiramach neglects to mention the letter sent by the Pope to Jefferson Davis in full support of the Confederate cause (the original in the Museum of the Confederacy in New Orleans). It is full of sentimental drivel about the South being the stronghold of true medieval knighthood against the forces of evil as represented by President Lincoln. Total crap, if you will pardon the expression. ... I can count an ancestor who came form Ireland precisely to fight against slavery, linking the abolitionist cause to the cause of freeing Ireland (he returned to Ireland). ... As for the Times being anti-Catholic, who says the Catholic Church is exempt from public scrutiny, reporting, and criticism? The Times coverage of the Catholic Church is balanced, often positive. If you consider coverage of the church's disgraceful record in the priest abuse scandal o be biased, then you're hopelessly in the uber-Catholic camp and probably approve only of Fox News.
My immigrant great-grandfather was a member of the Metropolitan police forces that put down the Draft Riots of 1863. Swinging hickory clubs, they attacked the rioters, many of whom used firearms. His sister and brother had arrived from Ireland that week. The sister died days later in the Immigrant Refuge and Hospital on Ward's Island, of Typhoid contracted on board ship. Her death was a continuing effect of the Famine that drove the family to emigrate. That week broke the heart of this Irish police officer who could not have imagined his countrymen lynching blacks from lampposts! It alienated him from the Church that, locally, had encouraged violence against Protestant merchants and supported the continuation of slavery. But it left him with a commitment to civic virtue, most important, to tolerance of diversity in the American republic. Let's remember that the Metropolitan police forces during the Riots were 90% Irish, the fighting 69th of NY was all Irish, and many Irish workers supported Abolition in defiance of the preaching of their priests, "who attacked Protestant abolitionists as revolutionary sowers of chaos, 'the American manifestation of the lawless liberalism' of Europe, and as infidels" (Bernstein 113). Can anyone name a religious sect that does not have similar shameful moments in its history?
It always amazes me, the Not-Dirtier-Than-Thou logic that 2B and others push here. The RC Church tortured and burned many during the Inquisitions, but the Prots did too with their witch hunts, so the RCs are OK and the Prots are the devil incarnate? I think the logicians call this fallacy the "tu quoque." If the best reason you can give for defending your sect is that other sects are as bad or worse, you really need to rethink! And while you're rethinking, how about a little respect for those who disagree with you? Personal insults are over the top, and glorybe is not the only visitor to this forum who thinks that it's well nigh time for everyone to drop the assumption that if you're Irish, you're Catholic. RC's rejection of many (gays, feminists, non-conservatives, etc.) and alienation of many more with the sex abuse scandals has sent many millions of Roman Catholics fleeing the Church. RC pronouncements on matters of "race, gender, and sexual orientation" have been continuing sources of anguish which is not likely to disappear in this generation, so let's tread lightly, please.
The term "McMansion" was coined in the US in the 1980's to describe the "supersized" houses that were springing up among much smaller houses in a community. It is hardly an Irish slur. That said, the NY Times's reporting has always reflected an ideological bias such as Walter Duranty's favorable reporting on Stalin's Russia, to the point of denying the famine in the Ukraine. Of course, the NY Times displays an anti-catholic bias because the Church is seen as antagonistic to the gay agenda. All news at the Times is seen through a template of how does it relate of race, gender and sexual orientation. If you search the NY TIMES website, you will find nary a story on the torturous murder of Jesse Dirkhising by two gay men, yet there are countless Matthew Shepard stories. According to the NY Times' journalistic standards, gay victim murdered and tortured is news, but when gay perps torture and murder a victim it is NOT.
Write this down as PROTESTANT CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY on the 95 theses you'll chance to hang one day at the doors of the apostate sect you now follow, old hag!: During the so called protestant reformation, your hero Luther threw 'his base' the peasants who actually validated his anti-Catholic 'revolution,' under the horse hooves of the German princes. So much for the integrity of the proddy founder! ---- Further, existing German records show there were more people burned at the stake, torutured, drawn and quartered for 'witchery' under prots, than the 3 or 4 thousand who died under all the Inquisitions from the 12th to the 16C's. The reason was that protestants who wanted to acquire the wealth and property of others, all they had to do was accuse them of engaging in the 'black arts.' Catholics did not because confession kept a check on their morals. -- Further, how about demanding that the many prot pedophiles and sex abusers be sent as well to the WORLD COURT for their crimes? Why don't you tell us the story of Tony Alamo a rabid preacher (almost as rabid as you) who was sent to the slammer not long ago for abusing some 175 kids.... and those were only the ones who came forward! So lady, go do something useful, like cleaning your dentures, instead of engaging in periodic drive-byes you do on this forum with your anti-Catholic inanities.
Everybody in the world should deny the RCC it's non profit status. And it should be taken to the WORLD COURT for CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.IF THAT SOUNDS LIKE ANTI CATHOLIC, THEN SO BE IT. WE'RE NOT SAYING WE'RE ANTI CHRISTIAN, JUST ANTI EVIL.
I've researched NY Times articles about the Irish in NYC, and I've seen 19th century bias against--more properly fear of--the Irish interest in local politics, as well as NY Times opposition to the Archdiocese of NY's intrusions into local politics. Nonetheless, the NY Times chronicles the facts, and it is an important source of NYC history. We do not learn from history if we deny the facts of history.
Iver Bernstein's "The NYC Draft Riots" is probably the best source of information on the 1863 Draft Riots (called at the time the "Irish Riots"). Its "Merchants Divided" chapter analyzes Belmont, who was vacationing in Newport when the riots broke out, not inciting rioters as McManus claims. There is simply no denying that the immigrant Irish of the City were the backbone of the riots, with Bishop Hughes of the NY Archdiocese inciting them with his 1862 conspiracy theory about Protestant nativist employers (112). Accordingly, the rioters' early targets were factories, which they emptied and burned. Belmont was a "leader" of Democrat merchants, not a party leader and certainly not a leader to Irish. He preached white supremacy against Republican paternalism toward free black working families in NYC. When the Republican government imposed a discriminatory draft on immigrant white poor of NYC, after a decade of Irish dockworkers and iron workers trying to drive black strikebreakers out of their neighborhoods and fearing the success of the abolition movement (since Emancipation would further weaken their prospects for fair wages), the outbreak of rioting in July 1863 was "both mob action and strike" (5). Bernstein does not oversimplify, but does attribute the Riots to explosive Irish-black conflict, Irish and other worker conflict with exploitative employers, and intrusive Republican government, both federal and local. Just like today, Republicans found ways of transferring the financial and human burden of war onto the backs of the poor, and the Irish of NYC, along with some Germans and others, rebelled.




Log into IrishCentral with your Facebook account


or sign-in directly

E-Mail:
Password:
 Remember me Forgot my password
Not a member? Register Now!
print this article Print
email this articleE-mail