In late October, the New York Archbishop submitted an op-ed article to the New York Times, citing recent instances of anti-Catholic bias by the newspaper. The newspaper refused to print it. The archbishop subsequently posted the piece on his blog. Though that was the extent of Archbishop Dolan’s role in this issue, he came under fire anyway.
Andrew Rosenthal, editorial page editor of the newspaper, said, “The idea that when you criticize the bishops, or the hierarchy of the church, that you’re attacking the church itself, or, as Dolan implies, the religion itself, is just false.” This was a patently false characterization.
Dolan made four complaints: 1) he cited the “selective outrage” by the Times regarding clergy sex abuse scandals—a news article featuring abuse by Orthodox Jews was not followed by a call for more investigations, legal probes, etc. 2) a contrived news story about a troubled priest who had a consensual affair with a troubled woman appears on the front page 3) reports of Catholic outreach to Anglicans is treated as exploitation, and 4) Maureen Dowd writes a screed against the Church. In other words, Rosenthal’s response was wholly without merit.
Commonweal, a Catholic magazine on life support, faulted Dolan for responding in a way that was “not fruitful.” Just as unconvincing was a writer for IrishCentral.com who defended Dowd by saying the columnist is “one of the most Catholic people I’ve ever met.” She did not say how many Catholics she had met, nor did she disclose her measuring stick.
WCBS-TV closed its report on Dolan with a snide remark about the Church mistreating women. As we pointed out, the station is an expert about mistreating employees: people are still talking about the 1996 “Massacre”—the mass firing, without prior notice—of seven stalwart employees. The motive? Money.
In other words, Dolan’s critics didn’t lay a glove on him.