There is quite the tiff going on between William Donohue of the Catholic League and the denizens of dissent at the National Catholic Reporter.
It seems that other NCR does not like Bill very much. The published a piece by Joe Feuerherd entitled “Billy the bully is bad for the church.” If you think that title seems harsh, you should read Donohue’s response.
I am not here to wade into the he said/she said of this particular debate. Rather, I merely want to note a few facts and then make a humble suggestion.
First, whether you love or loathe Bill Donohue, you have to admit that this guy has fun doing his job. For a guy that does outrage for a living, he is having a blast. He is out there throwing punches and occasionally taking them too, but he always seems to be happy about it. Wouldn’t you want a job that made you smile like that…Continue reading at the National Catholic Register>>>
May 17, 2010 at 6:05 pm
Ol' Bill has always provided the ammunition I needed when butting heads with my adversaries in a local community blog, especially on Catholic matters. Whoever replaces him would do well to maintain his feisty attitude and keep smacking down the church's detractors with a dose of their own medicine.
May 17, 2010 at 6:32 pm
Here's an example embodying my reservations about Bill Donohue–and this is just the tip of the iceberg?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptVOpbEpn0k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhSIfuoz5aE
May 17, 2010 at 9:50 pm
William Donohue has often done the work of many bishops in defending the Church especially against the rampant prejudice in the mainstream media. We should be very grateful to this guy for carrying on a task that can also be pretty exhausting especially when the Church is riddled with so many weasels and quislings who function under the guise of being progressive.
May 17, 2010 at 10:55 pm
John Hetman: BINGO!
Brian: Your posted video is a classic example of two parties arguing with each other about different things at the same time and neither party listening to, or understanding the other. Both parties are correct and both are wrong about what the other party is saying. Too bad, really, because this should be a slam dunk subject.
The sex abuse evils that have gone on in the Church are heinous, inexcusable and horridly evil. Plain and simple there just is no other way to put it.
Mr. Donahue SEEMS like he is prevaricating on the topic. I don't think he means to, but saying ANYTHING other that that about this subject is a minefield. This should be just a zero tolerance thing. And he looks like he is tolerant of some abuse. But only if you really aren't listening to his point.
His point is to defend against attacks on the Church and to call out those who would use these evils to make the sex abuse seem even worse than it is/was. But it's basically like arguing about how many victims there were in the Holocaust. Some see that as a worthy topic. While being precise about the number of victims MAY have value, it doesn't LOOK good. It looks as though it is an argument to say, "It wasn't THAT bad." My take is that's a mistake. While he may be factually correct, it doesn't matter.
In general, I think most people's problem with Mr. Donahue stems from his Long Island approach to communication. If any of you disagree with what I mean by that then you can go jump in a lake 😉 Nevertheless, on the whole, he has done Catholics (other Christians) and the public in general, a service in bringing to light innumerable UNDESERVED attacks on Mother Church and Her members.
May 17, 2010 at 11:15 pm
Jimbo:
I live on Long Island. Born and raised here. Donohoe's STYLE is embarrassing to many of us, even. And there are times when he doesn't stop to think (his riff about the Chocolate Jesus sculpture is a good example of this), but then there are times when his bombastic style obscures the truth of his cause. I have only to think of the latest cause he's taken up: The Empire State Building Commissions refusal to light up the building in blue and white for Mother Teresa's upcoming 100th birthday. Here is a news item about it: http://newsessentials.blogspot.com/2010/05/catholic-league-petitioning-empire.html
I mean, seriously, the only person in the world who doesn't love and respect Mother Teresa is Christopher Hitchens.
May 18, 2010 at 12:48 am
"I mean, seriously, the only person in the world who doesn't love and respect Mother Teresa is Christopher Hitchens."
Kim, you have a very small and very insular world, indeed. Mother Terera p….s off millions of leftists of all shades.
May 18, 2010 at 4:47 am
John:
Thank you, but my world is hardly small and insular. I have read and heard many people of all political stripes have respect for her.
May 18, 2010 at 6:33 am
This comment has been removed by the author.
May 18, 2010 at 9:47 pm
YO Kim! I grew up on L.I. too – that's how I know what a "Long Island approach to communication is." Look, I knew someone would get all up in my business on that, but if you are from Long Island, than YOU KNOW what I mean. Not trying to paint with a broad brush here (last thing I want to do is P.O. a lot of Long Islanders ;)… BUT…
It took me YEARS living elsewhere around the country and the world to realize that my gentle form of discussion was like a punch in the face to most people – and more years to tone it down. But it wasn't wrong; just utterly devoid of…eh… "verbal emollients".
Hey – only on the Belt Parkway heading E. on a Friday afternoon can you get to experience the thrill of "cruising with traffic" at 70 MPH while going airborne over the hills, being honked at and "offered the finger" 10 times in 6 minutes by people who would probably also hug you if you met them elsewhere. (OK so maybe not JUST on the Belt.) But it's not personal, it's just "quick". Doesn't bother me. It's like no big wup. So OK. Not everyone from Long Island is like that, yes, TRUE. But…come OWNAH! Lots a you guys are like dat.
Cultural differences are interesting to me. Doesn't make 'em wrong. In other places, people are so worried about offending another person, they can't even make a point. So they kind of look at each other and smile a lot of fake smiles and say, "Mmmhmmmn. Oh my, yes." and all that jazz. Nothing gets done that way but lemonade sippin'.
So Bill rubs a lot of people the wrong way. Some of us get what he's saying despite that. He's done some very good work for the Church. Other times I think he crosses that line a bit more than I like. He sounds too harsh and comes across as uncompassionate, but maybe because to him that's not the point. The compassion is a given. It's like, "Yeah I love ya, but I'll slap that neck out from unda ya head if you get outta line." The love is real. The neck slapping thing isn't. But some people might not get that.
Ah whatevah.
May 18, 2010 at 10:00 pm
Okay, now I gotcha Jimbo. I would add one thing, though. The only ingredient you are missing in having to drive east on the Belt in traffic is having to listen to John Sterling and Susan Waldman calling the game.
May 19, 2010 at 1:03 am
I will concede has has done good work once in a while in exposing some serious anti-Catholic displays, such as a professor's public desecration of the Eucharist. Nonetheless, there are still question to ask about Donohue.
I will now bow out of this thread.
May 19, 2010 at 1:35 am
Hmmm but wouldn't that mean I was listening to a YANKEES game?! Pftoey! 🙂 Looking left from the Belt is good Ole Shea Stadium. More like it. LGM!
June 26, 2010 at 12:33 pm
The "National Catholic REPORTER" is a cover for heretics like Polosi, Biden, Kerry and others.
The Reporter will slander and defame those who do not agree with them if they are effective.
The REPROTER refuses to acknowledge the existance of the "Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition" first printed in the US in March 2000.
The CCC would expose their journalists and their political agenda as being heretical and schismatic.