I guess with the money spent on coverage, it shouldn’t really surprise us that the news nets have gone absolutely berserk with their coverage of everything Papal. I haven’t seen this much of a frenzy around a plume of whitish smoke since I attended a Day on the Green concert at the Oakland Coliseum in the late 70s.
So much for the ungodly press. Even a degloved, baby-dangling, Jacko in pajama bottoms doing the moonwalk across a jury box can’t break into the Vatican coverage.
But does it strike anyone else as odd that there has been a bit of shock and a lot of disappointment created by the fact that the Catholic hierarchy picked a new pope who is really into, well, the pretty hardcore religious stuff about being Catholic? I mean he seems pretty into the strict old school rules and has on several occasions implied that he’s definitely bought into this whole Jesus Christ as savior line of thinking. If you read between the lines, he seems to outwardly prefer that theory over, say, being Jewish (I hear that he never even briefly considered being a rabbi or doing the whole L Ron Hubbard thing). Were you really expecting someone who thinks that condoms and birth control make sense and that atoning for the crimes of the American priesthood is of utmost concern? Or maybe the nominee would’ve refused to walk out onto that balcony until women had their chance to vote on the matter? Is it that shocking that this will be a rigidly faith-based Papal tenure?
Does it ever seem like there’s one story happening and another one being covered?