With Friends Like FOX, Who Needs Enemies?

FOX declares Benedict a failure.

The Holy Father should take the nastiness of a frenemy like FOX as a badge of honor.  What a disgusting piece of  bunk.  I much prefer the naked hostility of NPR or the NY Times to this “more in sorrow than in anger” bit of passive aggression.

"FYI Mark -- update as of May 18 -- respectfully for your (re)consideration:this well-reasoned refutation ..."

The Uses of Alfie Evans
"Will do. Re: media learning, though, the media has blown far past that kind of ..."

Gun Cult Renews Commitment to Lies ..."
"Listen to the podcast when you can. Derek Black speaks specifically into your parenthetical in ..."

Gun Cult Renews Commitment to Lies ..."
"Thanks; that was easier for me to carve out a few minutes to read. There ..."

Gun Cult Renews Commitment to Lies ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • SpasticHedgehog

    I don’t get it — what exactly did he “fail” at? He didn’t single handedly reunite the churches, convert the entire planet, or become friends with Bono? Leaving aside the progress made on all those fronts which Mr. Moody woefully neglects, I have a feeling if that’s the criteria Mr. Moody is using, he’d be disappointed in Saint Peter himself.

  • B16 never stood a chance!…says the guy selling his own biography of John Paul II.

    “Nobody wants a hare-brained pope like this! Ya see, Buzz, it lacks the creative spark, the unalloyed genius that made, say, the pontificate of John Paul the Second such a success.”

    • Rosemarie


      Bl. JPII was a great theologian/philosopher, yeah, but sometimes his writing was way above most people’s heads. So there’s a potential downside to that, too.

      Yeah, that article stunk. It’s probably just a matter of taste: which do you prefer, JPII or B16? Mr. Moody prefers the former, apparently. I say they’re each good in their own way and there’s no need to compare them against each other like that.

      • Yeah, I agree on the personal preferences bit. Do you prefer New Pope or Pope Classic? Pope Zero or Diet Pope?

        • Rosemarie


          If the next pope brings back the papal tiara, would that be Pope Classic?

          • It would indeed!

          • stephen didovich

            who cares rosemary

            • Rosemarie


              Maybe no one does. I was kidding around anyway, so maybe no one should care. Yet you apparently “cared” enough to comment, so perhaps that’s your answer right there.

  • hmelton

    “None of which lessens Benedict’s place in the line of Vicars of Christ. His decision to resign was a brave one, based on personal humility, in keeping with his message to the faithful that the things of Earth are transient, but the promise of heaven lasting and infinite. For that he should be remembered”

    Doesn’ty sound like “naked hostility” to me.

    • Mark Shea

      Correct. It is, as I said, passive aggressive hostility.

  • YachovBenYachov

    Do we really have to bring in politics at a time like this?

    • Um, it’s out there. I look at the Fox News web page several times a day to check on the general flow of the news, and so do many others. I know better than to click on links like the subject of this post. They are in every way the journalistic equivalent of fried pork rinds: skin only, not kosher, bad for the blood pressure.

      But since it’s in such a public forum, it’s completely fair to comment on it.

  • MarylandBill

    We need to remember that with the exception of places like EWTN and parts of the Catholic blogosphere, the media, liberal, conservative or other is no friend of the Church. Sure some members of the conservative media might be somewhat friendly, but by and large media, especially TV is about selling ads. They will do anything to get another reader, viewer or clicker. A balanced review of Pope Benedict’s tenure wouldn’t sell ads. So while nicer than most, lets pretend everything Pope Benedict did was a failure so we can sell a few more ads. We will be just a bit nicer how we crucify him so we can continue to be conservative (or fair and balanced).

  • Just sad. Damning with faint praise is petty much the size of it.

  • Abraxas

    “…you will look ridiculous to everyone else.”

    And who is that “everyone else?” The billion Muslims who think one man infallibly spoke a book in Arabic 1400 years ago that God wrote, in Arabic? Or the billions of Hindus and Buddhists who think that they will come back after death in another form, not excluding a dog or a turtle?

    Sounds like “everyone else” is just you and your friends, writ large.

    • It’s okay, Abraxas, he’s right that we LOOK ridiculous. But so did Jesus! Everything we believe is true, so popularity is irrelevant.

  • Mike

    The byline says it all: Former Vatican correspondent for Time magazine…no agenda there…

  • Funny, I didn’t consider FOX a friend.

  • Believe nothing you read in the idiot media over the next weeks/months. Believe only the promise of Christ. The Church is guided by the Holy Spirit; it is not in the province of Fox News or any other media outlet to second-guess the Holy Spirit.

  • I don’t know the man’s ecclesial leanings, but Moody sounds a lot like a disenchanted triumphalist with his talk of “expansion”, “footholds”, and the Church’s prestige in Europe. I suggest that he read Ratzinger’s Jesus of Nazareth for a better insight into the pope’s real conception of the Church’s mission.

  • hugh cunningham

    Maybe before his departure, he would be kind enough to return all the artwork, chalices, churches, etc designed and executed by homosexual men (whom he despised) to the gay communities around the world. Now that would be news worthy

    • Bernard

      What a stupid remark Hugh. Homosexuals are not despised by Pope Benedict or the Church. The official teaching of the Church is to love them and to help them to save their souls. I know this, because I am one of them.

      • God bless you, Bernard. I have tremendous admiration and respect for those who carry the cross you carry. Thank you for being willing to speak up with such grace on behalf of the Church.

      • Alypius

        Ditto what Erin said above. God bless you Bernard!

  • Stu

    This article is like a social reporter trying to write an article about a baseball game. There is no eye for either the long game or nuance of the sport in general.

    Dismiss it accordingly and move on.

    • Bingo!

      Plus some other words so that my comment is long enough.

  • Elmwood

    This reminds me of what Clinton said of the late John Paul II: “He’s like all of us. He may have had a mixed legacy.”

    Give me a break.

  • Arnold

    Why does Mark blame all of Fox when it was one single commentator on the Fox blog site? I really doubt that Fox’s management or the sum of its employees have declared they share that opinion. That approach is not untypical of Mark and really gets tiresome.

    • Rosemarie


      The link to the article on the front page clearly says “OPINION:” before the title. News outlets generally give a forum to differing opinions without necessarily endorsing those views. I would think that any column labeled “OPINION:” would naturally fall under that category.

    • ivan_the_mad

      Fox’s choice to publish is itself an endorsement. By publishing it, they place it within their bounds of permissible discourse. They published it, so, to borrow from Harry Truman, the buck stops there. Because Fox published it, the statement “Fox says …” is not inaccurate.

      If it were just a piece on the author’s private blog, then it would just be his opinion.

      • Rosemarie


        So a news organization’s choice to publish a piece that it clearly labels as “OPINION” is always an endorsement of the contents? Really?

        Okay then: FoxNews.com also publishes pieces by Juan Williams, one of their liberal commentators, in the Opinion section. So Fox News clearly endorses liberal viewpoints. Like this column against drone attacks, for instance:


        • ivan_the_mad

          Endorsement is commonly used in a political context to mean whole-hearted agreement and support, but it really just means to give sanction to something. So yes, by publishing his stuff, Fox does endorse Juan Williams, among others.

          • Rosemarie


            In other words, Fox News is sanctioning Mr. Moody’s exercise of his First Amendment rights by speaking his mind on a topic, without necessarily agreeing with him or supporting his opinion. Is there something wrong with that? Isn’t that what a news outlet is supposed to do?

            Also, since Fox published Juan Williams’ article against drone attacks, the statement “Fox says drone strikes are bad” is not inaccurate, right?

            • ivan_the_mad

              It’s not sanctioning his first amendment right, it’s (presumably) paying him money to publish his stuff. There’s nothing wrong with that, but it’s not “just his opinion” any more when Fox publishes it. They’re not some impersonal machine that provides airtime and page space to whomever, they actively choose their content and assume a level of responsibility and ownership. That’s why if Moody were to write something like “Benedict is a secret Nazi pagan Muslim Feeneyite Freemason Dallas Cowboys fan”, Fox would most certainly be a party to a libel lawsuit (which would mostly filed by angry Catholic Redskins fans).

              No, it’s not inaccurate to say that “Fox says drone strikes are bad” when the article in question was authored by Williams any more than it is inaccurate to say “Fox says such & such” regardless of which news anchor, talking head, or columnist actually said or wrote whatever.

              • Rosemarie


                So then Fox News doesn’t endorse only one point of view, namely the conservative POV. Rather, it endorses numerous views based on the opinion columns that it posts. One opinion piece supports drone attacks, another opposes them; Fox News puts both on its website and thus endorses both views. Right?

        • Mark Shea

          Right. FOX is just an impartial marketplace of idea. MSNBC is a total whorehouse for the Left. There’s no obvious ideological bent at FOX or anything.

          • Rosemarie


            Even if there is an ideological bent at Fox News, that doesn’t mean that one particular *opinion* piece, clearly labeled as such, expresses it. That’s my point. Others here have heard more positive reportage on Fox News of the pope’s resignation. A single opinion piece proves nothing. But I guess we all hear exactly what we want to hear.

    • Meggan

      If someone with the NYT wrote an opinion piece we’d hear many comments about how The New York Times hates Pope Benedict and the Catholic Church. If you can blame NYT for it’s content then you can blame Fox for it’s content.

  • FWIW, I just watched a segment on FOX that said nothing negative at all. Perhaps it’s not all FOX that is altogether bad, but simply the opinions of the author in question.

    • Rosemarie


      No, Dave, FOX is altogether bad. It really, truly is. Keep repeating “FOX is altogether bad!” to yourself, no matter what you hear or see on the Fox News Channel itself. You can’t trust them; they like to trick you into thinking that they are presenting different viewpoints by, well, presenting different viewpoints… but it’s actually a devious deception to obscure the fact that they really only present one viewpoint. See how that works? Diabolically clever!

  • stephen didovich

    what moody said was kinder than what i saw online about Benedict that he was a
    conservative leader in the midst of scandal so he didnt follow moodys perscription
    so what i also heard public radio conspiracy theorists suggest a big scandal will befall the Church and like in Japan when a company gets caught in scandal the
    man at the top resigns and Pope Benedict was acting like Japanese buisnessmen

  • The Church is Christ, not the Pope or any other human being. Peter did not conquer death. It doesn’t matter who stays and who resigns. The Church is the channel of grace, but She is not the source.

    Have faith in God’s love for His people.


    You went on board
    The voyage done you came ashore
    A different man with a different face

    Away from the land it seemed a great ship
    The horizon never near us, waves uncounted
    But now it is over

    The Church is Christ and not the Holy Father
    Pass by who stays and who resigns
    Have faith in God’s love

    Nothing lives except He baptizes
    With the blood of His sacrifice
    And the waters of His baptism

    The great seas are His, and the wells within us
    From which he draws the streams of love
    That water Paradise

    February 11, 2013

  • chris

    Is Michael Brendan Dougherty an opponent of the church? While I’m a big B16 fan, he wasn’t perfect, and many of his critics do have something of a point.


    • Perfect? Like whom?

      • chris

        Is pointing out that B16’s pontificate has some major downsides make someone a bad catholic? I appreciate why Benedict is resigning, and I agree with his reasoning. It could set a very bad precedent, and his disastrous management of the bureaucracy leave his successor with several big problems.

  • FYI: Timothy Stanley wrote the best article I’ve seen yet. http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/11/opinion/stanley-pope-resigns/index.html

  • Joe

    Moody: “He was a nerd! Not a jock like JP2!!! What a total failure! He was so boring that a wild night for him was a single glass of riesling and playing Mozart and Beethoven!”

    What a tool!

    Note to self: Buy a bottle of riesling, put on Beethoven’s Piano Sonata No. 8, and curl up with a good book. I want to party like a pope.

    • John C

      Amen to that, Joe. Great pope, wonderful writer and teacher, and courageous in his own quiet way. The notion that he cowered under John Paul’s gigantic shadow is mindless poppycock. I suspect that Benedict is one-half the reason some people refer to JP as “the Great”.

  • Arnobius of Sicca

    Personally, I thought the Church was blessed to be given JP2 and B16. They were different men, but they complemented each other in serving the Church.

    If FOX can’t see that, it’s their loss

  • An Aaron, not the Aaron

    I heard one of the chittering ninnies on CNN ask John Allen whether a new pope would change any of the “policies” of the Church. Predictably, she cited the MSM favs (women priests, condoms, etc.). Of course, Allen didn’t point out that they aren’t policies. Expect more of the same in the next month; and expect there to be little daylight between Fox and the rest of the news herd on the coverage.