The New York Times as a religion

The New York Times as a religion
"In my house growing up,” says the newly appointed editor of the New York Times, “the Times substituted for religion. If the Times said it, it was the absolute truth.”

James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal takes that remarkable quotation as the basis for his argument that the Times is now acting like a corrupt religious institution, unwilling to admit error and zealous of protecting its own institutional prerogatives.

Should I be surprised that such a remark comes from the rival WSJ? :smiley:

Jill Abramson’s quote was published in the NY Times.

Do you think it’s wrong to call out the NY Times’ new editor for her claim that the NY Times is God?

I saw no statement that the NYT is God. :confused:

Let’s not get carried away… from what I understand that part of her statement was deleted from the final story:D

The newspaper-as-religion trope immediately set right-wing ideologues seething, all the confirmation they needed that the “Valhalla” (Abramson’s word) of godless lefties was in the hands of … a godless lefty. Suspicion grew when the Times cut the “religion” quote from the final version of its story on the management change.

God == absolute truth.

Do you really think that she was arguing theologically? Or might it have been hyperbole?

But, never mind. I consider it the best newspaper in the world, read it daily, and don’t see a real rival to it except perhaps the WSJ. That said, I’m sure you read the paper you believe to be the best. :thumbsup:

eww no offense too anybody that is a new yorker but i couldnt stand to live their thank God for the country side :smiley:

The NY Times is viciously anti-Catholic.

Archbishop Dolan right to slam NY Times for anti-Catholic articles
Archbishop Timothy Dolan has come out swinging against The New York Times, accusing it of anti-Catholic bias in two recent articles.

He is right.

Anti-Catholicism is the last acceptable prejudice it seems to me in America. If the same comments that were made about Catholic religious figures were aimed at Rabbis, immams or Dali Lamas there would be widespread outrage.

Open Season on the ChurchBy Father Benedict Groeschel, C.F.R.
Open Season on the Church

Inflated, often baseless charges go unanswered and so appear to many to be true

Well, we’ve reached it at last: it’s now officially open season for shooting at Catholic priests. Almost every day now we are treated to new distortions, straight-out lies and manipulations by the media. Some of them are simply vicious — nearly rabid! The New York Times, to no surprise, leads the pack.

Anti-Catholicism and the New York TimesBy Patrick J. Buchanan
“Anti-Catholicism,” said writer Peter Viereck, “is the anti-Semitism of the intellectual.” It is “the deepest-held bias in the history of the American people,” said Arthur Schlesinger Sr.

If there was any doubt that hatred of and hostility toward the Catholic Church persists, it was removed by the mob that has arisen howling “Resign!” at Pope Benedict XVI.

To the extent that it is anti-Catholic, what does that have to do with the news it prints? Do you think that its sports pages are viciously anti-Catholic?

Read with discernment. Learn where they are an incomparable source of news and where you have to read and take their biases into account. The newspaper is more than its editorial page, you know.

But, tell me, what newspaper is better in your mind than the Times? What major paper do you read daily?

Incomparable? What exactly do you compare Jayson Blair’s work at the NYT? What about the anti-Catholic falsehoods from the NYT’s Maureen Dowd?

Discernment means not reading blatantly anti-Catholic rubbish like the New York Times.

Dowd is a columnist; Blair isn’t representative of all their reporters.

Discernment means not reading blatantly anti-Catholic rubbish like the New York Times.

Your opinion, noted as such, and noted as well, your right to hold that opinion.

Does being a columnist gives someone the right to present falsehoods as facts?

Blair isn’t the only problematic “reporter” at the New York Times:

The same opinion held by Abp. Dolan, Fr. Groschel etc., backed up by facts and not seeking to exonerate the New York Times’ anti-Catholicism based on article from the sports page, fashion page etc…

The New York Times sports page pulls for the New York Yankees, Satans Team. That is about as anti-catholic as you can get!

You are the one saying that they are presenting falsehoods; I see it as presenting their own opinions - which may or may not line up with “the facts.” I would stand up for a right wing columnist as well, allowing him or her to assert their own opinions whether I agree with them or not.

The same opinion held by Abp. Dolan, Fr. Groschel etc., backed up by facts and not seeking to exonerate the New York Times’ anti-Catholicism based on article from the sports page, fashion page etc…

Those clerics have a perfect right to say or believe what they want - and to let us know what they believe about the NYT. And, even to the extent that the NYT Editorial page is no friend of the Catholic Church, what do you want Catholic Americans to do about it? Shut them down? There is a 1st Amendment BTW.

I read the Times and the WSJ daily. I make up my own mind, weighing what each says and taking into account the prejudices of each. Fr. Groschel et al may do the same. And, if you can’t bring yourself to read the Times, that’s fine - read what you will.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that the attacks on the Catholic Church are limited to the editorial page.

The Times ran a purported “news” story by Laurie Goodstein entitled, “Vatican Declined to Defrock U.S. Priest Who Abused Boys" that implicated Pope Benedict XVI in an alleged cover-up.

Maureen Dowd went into attack mode in an editorial based on the content of the purported “news” story in the NYT. Other publications rightly criticized the NYT.

Dowd’s Pope Attack ‘Is False’
Maureen Dowd’s fiery Wednesday column is drawing plenty of attention–not all of it good. Critics say that in denouncing Pope Benedict and calling for his replacement–preferably with a female–Dowd may have gone too far. The New York Daily News editorial board argues that some of her claims were downright false. John McCormack at The Weekly Standard expanded on the Daily News’s response, saying Dowd “libels” the pope.

The Times is anti-Catholic smut. I don’t read anti-Catholic smut.

Then, for heaven’s sake, don’t read the Times!

Don’t take the Lord’s name in vain. :frowning:

The Lord’s name is not “Heaven.” :slight_smile:

The second commandment’s prohibition extends to irreverent language about Christ’s Church, the saints, and sacred things of which “Heaven” most certainly is.

Fr. Wade Menezes did an excellent bit on this on EWTN. If I can find the video online I’ll send a link.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit