Papal Visit
Want to know more about the Pope? With the papal visit to the United States two weeks away, Edward Cardinal Egan, Archbishop of New York offers a pithy, short bio of Pope Benedict XVI.
Meanwhile, Bill Donohue, Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, is so certain the media will get more than a few facts wrong, he has made a prediction: “Look for Pope Benedict XVI to be compared unfavorably to his predecessor, John Paul II. All of a sudden, those who had no use for Pope John Paul II will now anoint him a positive force, the purpose of which is to discredit Benedict. Here’s what they will say….. ”
The Pew Forum, perhaps not having read Mr. Donohue’s prediction, printed this: “…..the current pontiff continues to be less highly regarded than his predecessor, Pope John Paul II……”
Not all media is getting it wrong. TIME magazine coverage is given a thumbs-up by EWTN. Click onto this link and go directly to News for more on papal visit media coverage.
As for this blogger, I remember well how vilified Pope John Paul II was early on in his pontificate. Our own St. Louis Archbishop John L. May, then head of the NCCB (National Council of Catholic Bishops), accompanied the pope on his first papal visit to the U.S. Archbishop May had the delicate task of informing the pope there would be pickets upon his arrival. JPII took it all in stride, smiling and saying he understood this is the American way.
Sherry Tyree, 66, a graduate of John Burroughs School and Washington University, is a founding member (1984) and Vice President of Women for Faith & Family, a national Catholic women's organization that supports and defends traditional church teachings. Sherry is married to Dr. Donald A. Tyree, professor emeritus, School of Business, St. Louis University. 
I’m puzzled by your implication that the Pew Forum got it wrong. They are reporting the results of a survey, not offering up an editorial opinion. I suppose one might feel that the survey was badly designed, administered, or analyzed, although Pew is generally considered pretty solid in those areas. If you don’t have methodological issues with the survey, I think your comments skate dangerously close to misrepresenting the Pew article, although I also applaud your choice to provide a link so your readers can easily check for themselves.
If we accept the Pew results, I would suggest they are simply telling us that this Pope, after three years, is less well known and liked that his predecessor, the second longest serving Pope in history. Not exactly a devastating condemnation of his Papacy. The results also indicate that those who view the Pope favorably far outnumber those who view him unfavorably, and that Catholics are very positive about his outreach efforts. They also suggest that a major issue is that he is less well known than his predecessor, so isn’t it great that he is coming for a visit and will have a chance to become better known?
If I seem to picking too small a nit in focusing on your Pew Forum reference, it is because it is the one reference you cite to support Mr. Donohue’s opinion, and – for me at least – it is jarring when it turns out it doesn’t.
Enjoy the coming visit and best regards.
You make a valid point, Mr. Kirk, and it’s not nit-picking. The Pew statement is a reflection of public opinion, not media spin. A couple of comments: Despite Pew stating that public approval of Pope JPII floated around 75% during his pontificate, those who demurred — including the press and lots of feminists — were ubiquitous, condescending, confident and very, very noisy. It was only after the Denver Youth gathering that the U.S. press began to reassess Pope JPII. Before then he was thought to be old hat, old world. But in Denver, there were all those bright, young Americans swarming the area, clearly charmed by JPII. I remember the press being floored by the fact that these kids picked up their trash. Amazing.
So, the chattering classes began to hold back their fire and take another look, a perplexed look. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, though, was still a safe target, or a safer one at any rate, and although press coverage of him was less frequent, it was highly critical indeed.
Criticism of Cardinal Ratzinger was so common that many in the press were shocked when he was elected pope.
It may be, then, that the current public opinion of Pope BXVI, lower than that of his predecessor, is a result, in part at least, of that prior press coverage.
Meanwhile, if you’re interested in a rather snide LATimes article, go to Papal dress code by Michael McGough/ April 6.