Intolerance for Advocates of Christian Morality

 Discussion on The American Spectator · 171 comments

Phil Robertson Won't Shutup and the Media Hates It http://spectator.org/blog/57213/phil-robertson-wont-shut-and-media-hates-it

You commented · 7 days ago

In the 1980s I was shocked to see people interpret current events to announce that God sent AIDS to punish Gays. We've come a long way from there, and Phil Robertson is a welcome relief. Fornication is so common and so accepted today, but fornicators don't organize act up campaigns to discredit those who call the behavior a failing under Christian ideals -- neither do the adulterers or the swindlers. Yet gays and abortionists are so insecure about their behavior that they have to reinvent morality and turn it into a public relations contest. Why is it that intolerance is never about mistreatment of those who advocate Christian principles?

Knights La Salette Youtube

comment on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gL1RvQdj7Bc

Recently I was listening to Robert George, a Princeton philosopher who is staunchly Catholic.  He similarly has a grim view of the challenge from the left, but is uplifting and optimistic.  The download is here http://94b3a76e023813757a0f-ae89554633acf7b3ce455bd027c59041.r69.cf5.rackcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/MiltGeorgep102513.mp3 -- it is the Dec. 12, 2013 episode at Miltrosenberg.com, an archive of excellent intellectual conversations on a broad range of topics.

The Knights La Salette youtube is not exactly inspirational. The theme is not a new tactic, "who we are is who we were" is close to the ploy used to rally struggling Germans in the early 30's as the new Arians.  The Fulton Sheen videos remembered so nostalgically are really not that endearing (see https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=fulton+sheen&sm=1).  The Knights speaker remembers Luther as a "Judas-like figure" -- John Paul II was far more respectful (seehttp://www.nytimes.com/1983/11/06/world/pope-praises-luther-in-an-appeal-for-unity-on-protest-anniversary.html).  The speaker harkens back to the astonishing St. Edmund Campion who recited latin prayers as he was martyred by Anglican Christians.  Then the speaker laments a counter-revolutionary near victory in England thwarted by an agreement to lay down arms and negotiate in good faith (as though compelling Catholic faith by the force of arms was something to be admired).

The growing darkness in America is troubling and it may become a challenge as profound as the darkness of WW2 atrocities. Is God calling us to be faithful and tragic witnesses like Ann Frank? To be secret resistance like Dietrich von Bonhoeffer?  To be open but respectful dissidents in the pattern of MLK and Gandhi?  To be fierce militants honoring the memory of Fulton Sheen?

I wonder if the nostalgia for 1950s and 1960s Catholicism is really a psychological avoidance of the new challenge for our age; this nostalgia seems to be mostly about finding fault in believers who are not Catholic enough, and much less about compassion or about preparation for facing the prospects of risking our lives to follow Jesus.  If there are Christians claiming to embrace faith as militants, are they sending contingents to stand with Christian brethren in China, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and in other places where just attending Mass provokes reprisals?   I feel that my failure to stand up for faith on those frontiers -- and risk what they risk -- is nothing to be proud of.

When the life risking moment comes, some may be compelled to draw a sword and strike the opponent like the reprimanded Peter during the arrest of Jesus (who then humiliated himself by denying any association with our Lord). Isn't it striking that this most humiliated man was elevated to leader of the faith and then served that role admirably?  And isn't it striking that before he became the Risen Christ, the abandoned Jesus wasn't just tortured and killed, he was stripped naked and publicly humiliated?

My sense of the coming darkness is that prideful, ego-centered, self-important, self-assured performers like Fulton Sheen are of no use at all.  I think the movie OF GODS AND MEN Of Gods and Men #2 Movie CLIP - Nearest In Love (2010) HD embraces the challenge far more appropriately.  Can we continue to be servants to the needy in the face of great adversity?  Right now we are so spent from whining about the adversity, that there is precious little energy left for service to the needy.  Perhaps it's time to try the reverse of those allocations -- it might be miraculous.

What difference Christmas makes

from http://neveryetmelted.com/2013/12/24/wall-street-journal-christmas-eve-editorial-2/

When Saul of Tarsus set out on his journey to Damascus the whole of the known world lay in bondage. There was one state, and it was Rome. There was one master for it all, and he was Tiberius Caesar.
Everywhere there was civil order, for the arm of the Roman law was long. Everywhere there was stability, in government and in society, for the centurions saw that it was so.
But everywhere there was something else, too. There was oppression—for those who were not the friends of Tiberius Caesar. There was the tax gatherer to take the grain from the fields and the flax from the spindle to feed the legions or to fill the hungry treasury from which divine Caesar gave largess to the people. There was the impressor to find recruits for the circuses. There were executioners to quiet those whom the Emperor proscribed. What was a man for but to serve Caesar?

There was the persecution of men who dared think differently, who heard strange voices or read strange manuscripts. There was enslavement of men whose tribes came not from Rome, disdain for those who did not have the familiar visage. And most of all, there was everywhere a contempt for human life. What, to the strong, was one man more or less in a crowded world?

Then, of a sudden, there was a light in the world, and a man from Galilee saying, Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s….

And so Paul, the apostle of the Son of Man, spoke to his brethren, the Galatians, the words he would have us remember afterward in each of the years of his Lord:
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

This editorial was written in 1949 by the late Vermont C. Royster and has been published annually since.

Other Musings via Disqus

You can keep your filibuster, if you want it.

[from Nuclear Option Watch (Update – BOOM!)]

Mark30339 | November 21, 2013 at 3:12 pm

So as we approach the anniversary of the public murder of an American President by a lover of the Soviet state, the Left publicly murders legislative comity, while their incompetent POTUS comedy plays on. Iron-fisted, single-party rule is being thrust upon us. The triumph of defeating soviet totalitarianism has morphed into American totalitarianism.
There is no silver lining, this is a devastatingly low point. While there has been precious little reaching across the aisle for many years, the memory and tradition of such comity was always present. Say good-bye to middle-ground and to common ground and to steady governance. The political pendulum will swing ever more widely and ever more rapidly — with Republicans and Democrats in perpetual savaging of each other.
The Left has given us this wasteland. General Sherman said that the South chose the remedy of war, and it was incumbent upon him to give it to them abundantly. The Left has released the Kraken of all-out acrimony, and I do not know how the Right can avoid responding in kind. The essential fabric of self-governance and acceptance of elected authorities has been torn apart this day. What will thrive next are factions of relentless INSURRECTION on both the Left and the Right. We can no longer hope in a cooperation for the common good. Government imposed order with increasing levels of brutality will fill the coming days. And the manipulation of elections with government resources will become so profound that no one will believe fair elections are even possible. Ben Franklin said the country had a republic, if they could keep it. If he is looking down on us now, he will more likely say: “Venezuela says hello!”

Christians and Nuclear Deterrent

Mark Tooley has an opinion piece on politically advocating for nations with the bomb to disarm.  Our mortal lives are precious, but the passage from Daniel testifies to surrendering our goods and even our bodies to remain in harmony with a divine creation that is ever more precious.  In the end, I cannot advocate for a government to abdicate defense and impose that policy on people who are not freely choosing to go all in on Jesus' way.

My comment:

Mark30339| 3.21.13 @ 2:20PM

I take no pride in assenting here. The article and comments certainly do hold logic, but should show more compassion for the unfortunate Japanese civilians who suffered horribly from deployment of our nuclear powers. Our material lives are of such a value that we wish to harbor destructive powers that presumably frighten and coerce potential invaders. Yet our Judeo-Christian tradition harkens back to Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed'nego, who refused to be coerced by the the fearsome Nebuchadnez'zar. They "yielded up their bodies rather than serve and worship any god except their own God." If we are both Christian and supportive of the nuclear deterent, let us at least acknowledge the embarrassment of being too feeble in faith to face our enemies with the same forgiving and weaponless grace that Jesus modeled for us.

chemman| 3.21.13 @ 6:22PM

You are mixing up what we as individuals are called to do in the face of our individual enemies with that which a nation is called to do. They are not necessarily the same.

Mark30339| 3.22.13 @ 6:20PM

Or rather, they are not necessarily different things. I cannot advocate for our government to unilaterally disarm because that kind of faith leap can't be imposed on a population by decree. But it embarrasses me that we enjoy our peace and security because we are willing to rain down nuclear annihilation on other populations. Note that the citizenry of Poland was counseled to resist and confront non-violently. It was not just a coincidence that the US was applying pressures on the Soviets without provoking armed conflict. Reagan and John Paul II (and especially their staffs) were in constant coordination in this non-violent confrontation. See The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism by Paul Kengor (Sep 18, 2007) and its related youtube speech at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqjQadIE954.

Conservatives Running the Church

A Pope Away From a Perfect Church is an article in today's American Spectator and it implicitly exalts "conservative" views on policy and leadership by dismissing liberal views as "being without life" and running a victory lap just to rub dissenter noses in their superiority.  I do not know what good we do for the body of Christ by drawing conservative vs. liberal battle lines.  I do not endorse the current trend of bending theological principles to advance political policies now in vogue -- but please don't call me a conservative because of it.  I am open to the notion of ordaining women as deacons because there is sound scriptural precedent for it -- but please don't call me liberal because of it.  My comment to the article follows.

Nathan has a point.  Those who see themselves as conservative seem to delude themselves as a group holding a monopoly on virtue and sound leadership.  A large portion of "conservatives" are those who place themselves front and center at Our Lady of Authority Worship; they parrot the policy laid out by those in authority, they heap praise and fealty on the Pope and his minions, they rush to minimize and distort the horrors committed under the watch of those in authority, and they fiercely attack those who seek improvement in Church leadership.
.
I am impressed with the skillful challenge Cardinal Dolan has pursued on Obamacare regulations -- yet I am shocked at how much tedium and minutia is offered up at meetings of the USCCB.  I am intrigued at Benedict's postures toward improved relations with Eastern Orthodox, but his lording over us with "consubstantial with the Father" and other quibbles with the English Mass is demeaning.
.
It puzzles me that special overseers need to be appointed to compel reforms for our nuns when no such overseers were necessary for Legionnairies for Christ, Opus Dei, or dioceses riddled with scandal or bankruptcy.  It also puzzles me that males in authority refuse to acknowledge their own scriptures and at least give females a seat at the table among those ordained as deacons.  I hardly think that the abuse scandal would have been covered up so well and so long if we had a contingent of deacons who were also mothers.
.
And the unyielding policy of refusing communion to those who are remarried seems harsh and callously detrimental to the children raised by such persons.  Let us find another sanction, and let us find a way to deploy the sacrament of reconciliation to restore these people to some level of communion with the Church.
.
And finally, when does the leadership aggressively reverse our Church postures of comforting the comfortable and neglecting the afflicted?  A small minority quietly perseveres in mission work, while the priorities remain expanded luxuries at our churches and maintaining  Catholic schools that only the rich can afford.
.
So now I suppose the conservatives will advocate that people like me need to be silenced and relegated to some kind of re-education program to get our minds and our Faith right before facing the crushing judgment of the conservative church's grand and glorious God.

Cleansing

A commenter known as Normal_Guy (now CamoCoyote) offers up pregnancy due to rape as a justification for aborting the child.  He writes:

Being raped is offensive enough. Carrying the consequence to term is extending the offense. A woman cleans herself physically, symbolically and emotionally after she is raped. Aborting a pregnancy as a consequence of rape is more of the same. I find it difficult to believe there are people that would insist their daughter, sister, mother or wife should give birth to a baby resulting from being raped???

I believe the count is at 54 million unborn lives snuffed out legally since Rowe v Wade. How many were the comprehensive "cleansings" prescribed by the Normal_Guy? Pregnancy from rape is quite rare, let's over-estimate and say 50,000. Under Normal_Guy thinking, we justify an industry that performs at least 999 killings for every 1 rationalized cleansing. Put in other words, each of these rape victims are "cleansed" with the blood of 1000 children -- including the blood of her own child. And somehow we assume that post-19th century rape victims with-child fare better with their abortion option than enduring women in the same situation for the many centuries before. Because the society of this age has no concept of sharing pain and carrying the burden of victims communally, it multiplies the horror onto others. People think this cycle of violence is only found in war and terror; think again.  For the sake of approximately 50 thousand pregnancies from sexual assault, Americans have snuffed out 54 million innocent lives so far.

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, SJ

Comment to Evolution and Original Sin by Nathan O'Halloran, SJ

Nathan's summary of Teilhard's ponderings on original sin is very informative. It should be mentioned that in Teilhard's time (the early 20th century), his writings on theology were extensively muzzled by Church authorities. Pope Benedict is recognizing Teilhard's insights nearly a century late (better late than never). The Augustinian/Pauline notion of how Adam's single "gotcha" disobedience taints us all has never resonated with me -- it simplifies human creation with rigidly logical dualism. I do not reject the standard original sin doctrine, I sense it to be thoroughly incomplete.


Why not embrace Teilhard's notion that humanity was created with a profound potential for sin and separation from its Creator. "In the beginning, when God created the heavens and the earth, the earth was a formless wasteland, and darkness covered the abyss . . . ." The building material for man, earthen clay, seems imbued with a great potential for darkness, although it certainly need not develop in a dark way.

Adam and Eve, the prototype original humans, were persuaded to indulge a yearning to be like gods themselves and so they ate of the tree of knowledge of good and bad, their eyes were opened, and suddenly they became so self-conscious and self-absorbed that they perceived a shame in their nakedness. An ego-centered, comparing mind that sees everything as good or bad, better or worse, worthy of envy or worthy of disdain, takes root in mankind. Life is no longer perceived as a unified harmony, and becomes something commenced in pain, lived in toil and surrendered in death and bodily decay. Adam and Eve's legacy is that each succeeding generation embraces life in this fallen way -- it is taught and reinforced by example, again and again and again. We quickly forget and abandon the unified harmony that enveloped us in utero and in infancy.

Part of the Good News is that this fallen way can be unlearned, and part of the notion of being born again is learning to perceive God's unified harmony and learning to keep the judging ego in check. Our Lord provides a great gift with his Parable of the Prodigal Son. It seems that until we descend and humbly surrender like the prodigal son, we tend to live like the prodigal's brother, in a hard-hearted delusion of virtue.

Teilhard led a life filled with great triumphs and great difficulties. It is interesting that the importance of his observations of conditions from a century ago have great relevance and recognition now.