As if to prove my point

It doesn't take long before the media gives you some reason to think your suspicion about its approach to the Church is well founded. Just today, hot on the heals of the Vatican's open embrace of carbon neutrality we have another example of 'religious greening' courtesy of the Sydney Morning Herald. 

Now, I have no problem with anyone legitimately trying to reduce his carbon footprint, my objection is that the Church is inviting the press to ignore her. 'What does he mean by that?', you say. 'I thought your gripe was with the fact that the Church was in the press?' Not so fast!

My point is this. The coverage that the media gives to the Church is appalling. Not only slanted and designed to present the Church surrounded in controversy, but orchestrated so as to focus people's attention away from the heart of the issue onto some peripheral topic of the media's choosing. My disquiet is not simply over the 'bum rap', rather that the media are making the Church play by their rules and we are helping them do it.

The SMH  is notoriously anti-Church. If you want proof- just search its archives. The only  article not critical of the Church will be the one the Church's conversion to 'greendom.' Now if the Church gets precious little coverage, can we afford to have what little it gets turn the attention away from what is important? With critical debates in Australia about stem cell research, abortion out of control and with WYD 2008 just one year away, the only positive articles we find are about hybrid vehicles and solar panels. I repeat, I have no problem with it, I just don't think want it to be the most important item on the agenda. Nor the only one.

We cannot play into the press' hands and help them to take the attention from what counts. The Church is not relevant when it is green, the Church is evergreen, something ancient and something new- relevant in season as well as out of it!