Liberals and Communists Squirm as World Mourns John Paul II

Mourners pay their respects to Pope John Paul II at St. Peter's Basilica at the Vatican in Rome Wednesday, April 6, 2005. White House Photo by Eric Draper




Clearly, the images out of Rome and from around the world are threatening to some.

China, for example, is uncomfortable with the attention being paid to the Pope's passing.

In today's Wall Street Journal:

There is perhaps no greater testament to the power of John Paul II's life and ideas than the message being sent by communist China. As the Pope lay dying, Chinese authorities relegated information about the state of his health to the back pages of the state-run media and the bottom items on television news. Fostering discussion of this champion of freedom was too dangerous, it seems.

After John Paul's death, China offered condolences to the Vatican, tacking on a hope for improved relations...

But China's actions betray the government's fear of religion, and the persecution of Catholics continues as usual. An arrest spree of Chinese priests and bishops, on as yet undisclosed charges, coincided with the Pope's final days. The bishop of Wenzhou, James Lin Xili, was detained on Palm Sunday; Father Thomas Zhao Kexun was picked up a few days later in Hebei province, as was lay worker Gao Xinyou in the diocese of Wenzhou. Other Catholics had been arrested earlier.

It's interesting to speculate which of John Paul's lifelong messages most frighten Beijing's commissars: His anti-communism, or his warning about the limitations of capitalism without moral roots. Perhaps what frightens them most of all is the thought that independent Chinese religious leaders might emerge who can speak with moral authority.

It's not surprising that a repressive Communist regime would be threatened by John Paul's message. China has a fear of religion, knowing it has the potential to empower the very people the government attempts to control.

Predictably, some liberals in America are engaging in strong-arm thought control tactics of their own.

As the line stretches for miles, while an endless stream of mourners flows through the doors of St. Peter's Basilica to mourn the beloved John Paul II, the mainstream media scrambles to counter this outpouring of emotion with efforts to campaign for their liberal agenda and encourage change in the Church.

During this time of mourning, I find it unseemly, though completely in character, for the MSM to be splashing poll results and editorials that discredit the Pope's conservatism.

The mainstream press is jumping all over an AP Poll reflecting the "cultural divide between the United States and the church," saying "it is time for the Roman Catholic Church to embrace the modern era."

There will be ample time for that sort of commentary after the Holy Father is laid to rest. Now is a time for Catholics and others to acknowledge the greatness of this man, united in their grief and respect for him. Nonetheless, media outlets reveal they do not have the self-control to refrain from bashing John Paul and from focusing on divisions among Catholics.

Again, I believe it is appropriate to express negative views of the Pope's legacy and report on public opinion regarding the future of the Church. However, I take issue with the insensitivity of the timing.
The fact that the MSM cannot resist lobbying for their culturally liberal agenda, even for a few days, is very telling. Of course, no Americans are being arrested as in Communist China; but some liberals are obviously threatened and hoping to influence the direction of the Church at this moment of transition.

In today's New York Times, Thomas Cahill rips Pope John Paul II to shreds as though soliciting votes for a politician:
But John Paul II's most lasting legacy to Catholicism will come from the episcopal appointments he made. In order to have been named a bishop, a priest must have been seen to be absolutely opposed to masturbation, premarital sex, birth control (including condoms used to prevent the spread of AIDS), abortion, divorce, homosexual relations, married priests, female priests and any hint of Marxism. It is nearly impossible to find men who subscribe wholeheartedly to this entire catalogue of certitudes; as a result the ranks of the episcopate are filled with mindless sycophants and intellectual incompetents. The good priests have been passed over; and not a few, in their growing frustration as the pontificate of John Paul II stretched on, left the priesthood to seek fulfillment elsewhere.

...Whereas John XXIII endeavored simply to show the validity of church teaching rather than to issue condemnations, John Paul II was an enthusiastic condemner. Yes, he will surely be remembered as one of the few great political figures of our age, a man of physical and moral courage more responsible than any other for bringing down the oppressive, antihuman Communism of Eastern Europe. But he was not a great religious figure. How could he be? He may, in time to come, be credited with destroying his church.

I wonder how many of the faithful and grateful, standing in a line miles long just for a brief moment to pass John Paul's body in the Basilica, think he will be "credited with destroying his church." I would guess very, very few, if any.

I understand why the reaction to the Pope's death would make his detractors squirm.

Communists and some liberals cannot bear the reality that John Paul II's message touched billions of people, that this humble holy man was more powerful than they will ever be. The most threatening aspect of all has to be that the Pope's power was grounded in the Word of God, very scary to communists and numerous liberals.