Maureen Dowd Wages War on the ‘Starchbishop’ of New York for Having the ‘Gall’ to Oppose Gay Lobby
New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd is a nominal Catholic. She doesn’t believe at all in the church’s teaching that homosexuality is a sin. When Timothy Dolan, the Archbishop of New York, opposes “gay marriage” in New York, the best Dowd could do in her Saturday column was call him the “Starchbishop” and drag out (repeatedly) the sexual abuse scandal of the 1960s and 1970s. If this kind of knee-jerk thinking is annoying at the dinner table, who'd enjoy it in the newspaper? Archbishop Dolan was born in 1950. Maureen Dowd was born in 1952. Can Dowd really blame Dolan for something that she was “equally” as responsible for in the Catholic church of their childhood? Dolan didn't become a priest until 1976 and didn't get a bishop's responsiblities until 2002. But Dowd is offended that the prelate would dare intervene or speak out on a matter of sexuality: Certainly his effort to kill the gay marriage bill, just one vote away from passing in Albany, shows a lot of gall. The archbishop has been ferocious in fighting against marriage between same-sex couples, painting it as a perversity against nature. If only his church had been as ferocious in fighting against the true perversity against nature: the unending horror of pedophile priests and the children who trusted them. Abusive priests were (and are) a horror. But Dowd drags this out as the liberal argument against any church tradition. If Dolan argued like Dowd, every time Dowd started to write, he’d drag out her scandalous front-page story insisting Nancy Reagan and Frank Sinatra were lovers: “Can you really trust a journalist who has this standard of accuracy?” Or dragged out the Jayson Blair fabrications every time the New York Times editorialized against anything. Archbishop Dolan’s job is to evangelize the public with the Word of God, not the Word of Dowd.
Posted by
on June 20, 2011. Filed under