« Worth a Thousand Words? | Main | I Hate Mondays »
April 24, 2005
Raise the Sullivan Warning...
It's time to raise the Andrew Sullivan Freak-Out Advisory from 'disgusted' to 'nauseated.' (UPDATE: As you can see, it has been raised.)
Sullivan's at it again, this time in the Times of London:
Christ as head of state. It doesn’t get more explicit than that.Sorry, but when you're describing uber-liberal Dionne as a 'moderate,' your political judgment is automatically suspect.This is one reason why Ratzinger’s election has sent shockwaves across America. In the debate between reformists and traditionalists, there was no figure more polarising. Many of us Catholics thought he would be a big influence in the conclave. But after his fire-and-brimstone homily before the conclave on Monday, we assumed he would cede to a unifying, moderate candidate. How wrong we were.
When the news came through, my phone lit up with voices of panic, dread, fear and even sobs. A leading lay Catholic moderate, The Washington Post’s E J Dionne, described his response as “petrified”.
The Conclave was full of conservatives, becuase the current College of Cardinals is full of those who believe the Catholic church should (shocker!) hold fast to God's teachings. I know this is hard to take for a guy like Sullivan, whose feelings have turned his political philosophy into an incoherent mess. The only consistency in Sullivan's recent political writings is his invective against people of faith. His transformation from reasonable conservative into anti-religious bigot has been a long time coming, and this column is proof of how far he's fallen.
In a society with a huge gay population, the Pope has declared that homosexuals have an innate tendency towards “intrinsic moral evil” and are therefore “objectively disordered”. He has also argued that the exercise of conscience is a sinful delusion if it doesn’t comport with church doctrine.Substitute "conscience" for "my feelings" and you get a truer sense of what's driving Sullivan's anger at the election of Pope Benedict XVI. One's conscience should be driven by the Holy Spirit's guiding and the tenets of scriptural truth, not the desire to live how one wants. Sullivan has been tickling his own ears in his quest to develop a Theology of the Self.
If this forces liberal Americans to leave the church, so be it...And this is his vision for the American Catholic church in the future: purged of wayward priests, lackadaisical believers and the liberal throngs that still cling to Catholicism’s basic tenets and rituals, while differing with it on social, cultural and sexual issues. A smaller, leaner, rump church, dominated by ultra-conservative lay groups such as Opus Dei is his goal.If liberal Catholics leave, they aren't being forced out. Maybe the election of Pope Benedict XVI will act as a wake-up call to the liberal Catholics who regard church as a sort of liturgical therapy or a nice exercise in staying connected to your faith. The church doesn't exist to serve your needs - it exists to glorify God and do His work. Maybe a smaller church, more focused on God's teachings, will do just that.
A key part of Karl Rove’s attempt to build a new Republican majority has been a bid to bring conservative Catholics into the Republican fold. In America, Catholics have long tended to vote Democrat. But although American Catholics remain more liberal than most Americans, that has waned in the past few decades.Huh? What? Did I accidentally get onto a Democratic Underground discussion board here?And the distinguishing characteristic that marks the new Republican Catholic voters is their higher rate of church attendance and their more conservative theology. By emphasising issues such as abortion, stem cell research, end-of-life decisions and homosexuality, the Republican leadership has pried enough Catholic swing voters into its camp to gain a small majority.
Benedict will only help that process along. That’s why the man who must have been celebrating more than many others last Tuesday was Karl Rove.
So the election of Pope Benedict is now somehow part of Karl Rove's evil plan to TAKE OVER THE WORLD? Maybe Catholics voted Republican this year for the same reason a lot of other Americans did - they thought Kerry was a terrible candidate with no message other than "I'm not Bush." It's disappointing to see Sullivan decry the increased majorities in the House and Senate and the first president to win a majority of the popular vote as a "small majority." Boy's got to lay off the Democratic talking points if he wants to maintain even the slightest shred of the credibility he once had.
In the raw Ratzinger could, of course, be a little counterproductive. The culture wars in America are already aflame, his elevation as Benedict XVI amounts to a barrel-full of petrol on the fire.And then we come to the point of Sullivan's whining - "modern, open-minded" Catholicism is desirable. Traditional, Biblical Catholocism is something to be avoided. After all, it's the dirty fundamentalist theocrats that believe all that nonsense in the holy book, right?Those of us struggling to live as modern, open-minded Catholics can only hope the church isn’t burnt in the process.
I'm still in shock at the rank arrogance of Catholics like Andrew Sullivan, who believe it's their right to put their own feelings above God's teachings. Who believe it's okay for a minority of Catholics - those in the West- to dictate where the church should go. During the run up to the Iraq War, American liberals, including Sullivan, decried the "unilateralism" of the Bush administration. Now they're attempting a little of it themselves.
"Before you remove the speck from your neighbor's eye..." indeed.
Posted by slublog at April 24, 2005 01:44 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.slublog.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1184
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Raise the Sullivan Warning...:
» HWWNBN Advisory Adjustment from Ace of Spades HQ
Slublog makes the case. Expect Tom Ridge to raise the Freak-Out Advisory to "Nauseated" shortly. Please: Go about your lives as your normally would. For example, if you planned on doing nothing today but chugging Red Bull and Everclear and... [Read More]
Tracked on April 24, 2005 03:19 PM
» Kevin, Allah, and Ace: Your Services Are Needed! from Decision '08
UPDATE 2:35 pm central: The advisory level has been raised. Slublog gets the credit, but I don't mind that, this isn't a contest; the important thing is to keep everyone safe...Ace gives a timely reminder to just remain calm and keep going about your... [Read More]
Tracked on April 24, 2005 03:40 PM
» Take the Threshold -55 Test of the Bigoted Ideologue from Threshold Negative 55 - The Action Potential of Rational Thought
Thanks to the liberal scriptures of the New York Times and other mainstream sources of liberal ideology we are provided ample opportunity to see deep into the motivations that fuel liberal advocacy. In this case it is just another example of discrimina... [Read More]
Tracked on April 25, 2005 04:56 AM
Comments
Gobsmackingly vile!
Posted by: Sharkman at April 24, 2005 09:22 PM
Terrific takedown of the Ninny Who Shall Not Be Named. I guess, in his view, Catholics should not go to church and should not pay attention in any way to the Catechism. And Catholics who do attend to the teachings of the Church are bigoted, racist homophobes who wish for nothing less than the return of the Inquisition.
He has mastered the arguments and invective of the Left. Ted Kennedy, John Kerry and Tom Daschle should be proud.
Posted by: Brad at April 25, 2005 12:21 AM
"If liberal Catholics leave, they aren't being forced out."
I agree that it will be good that the churches shrink. thereby (hopefully) more people will shift their brains back into reality.
Posted by: ptt at April 25, 2005 06:10 PM
I agree that it will be good that the churches shrink. thereby (hopefully) more people will shift their brains back into reality.
Man, I love to see leftist hostility toward religious faith. It lets me know we'll keep winning election after election. Keep up the good work!
Posted by: Slublog at April 25, 2005 09:02 PM
I am never amazed when I see liberals attempting to dismantle the foundations of moral behavior. Granted, morality is a relative concept, but the line for liberals appears to be a moving target; an afterthought that is often contemplated post facto.
Liberal advocates attempt to lower the bar on what is deemed morally acceptable by associating the concepts with self appointed adjectives such as “progressive”, “open” and “accepting”. Usually the adjective is applied to themselves rather than the actual concept. e.g. progressive thinkers believe that quality of life is based on your ability to verbalize your will to live.
However I am not convinced that liberal advocacy has room for the positive connotations of such notions. There is ample proof that liberals have become progressively close minded when debating those who hold differing views on faith and morality. Tolerance of people who openly embrace life through the teachings of their faith is for the most part contrary to the liberal norm. It is fine to believe in the sanctity of life, have a sense of right and wrong and live life in an otherwise virtuous manner as long as those beliefs aren’t rooted in religion.
Case in point, Derrick Jackson in today’s Chicago Tribune, Catholic Church steps backward with Benedict.
This is more of the same bigoted garbage that is typically spewed by the left. Not that I expect Jackson or any of the other talking point parrots to be original. He is just one more bigot in a long line of blowhards on the left who believe that their views trump that of others.
Posted by: Terry at April 25, 2005 10:32 PM
rkjwykigs htumldi foxoibdra
Posted by: gcxvvoidk at May 23, 2006 05:07 AM