How About a Little Clarity Cardinal Cupich?

Phil Lawler is mad and I agree. Cardinal Cupich, Fr. Martin, Fr. Rosica, and the rest of the minions love to throw out arguments that are completely and utterly fictional. Notice I have ZERO problem naming names. OK, I write under a pseudonym, but that’s because I want to be able to keep doing work in my Catholic locality much to the chagrin of the local minions. The minions, however, do it because if they named names they would actually have to have an honest debate, and they don’t really want to do that, so they throw the mythological meanies out there. I challenge them to put up or shut up. Be specific. Cardinal Cupich, of all people, claims to want clarity. So, Cardinal Cupich, be clear.

Here is Phil Lawler’s tongue lashing which everyone should be modeling.

https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/the-city-gates.cfm?ID=1562

 By Phil Lawler (bio – articles – email) | Mar 09, 2018

 In his latest column for the Chicago archdiocesan newspaper, Cardinal Blase Cupich—who styles himself as a champion of civil dialogue within the Church—lashes out at people who disagree with Pope Francis:

“For this reason, it is not surprising that we occasionally hear voices, unfortunately often expressed in print and broadcast media claiming to be Catholic, who criticize Pope Francis for introducing topics such as discernment, dialogue, mercy, gradualness to help us understand better our Christian lives.”

Is that the way the cardinal proposes to “accompany” people who are “at the margins” of the Church? By questioning whether they are really Catholic—and going on to speculate about whether their thoughts are motivated by fear or by a failure to believe in the Resurrection?

But beyond that, I have two more questions:

1. Yes, there have been people (myself included) who protest when terms like “discernment” are used to camouflage an unwillingness to call a sin a sin, and a scandal a scandal. But those are complaints about the way these words are used—one might say misused. But who are these people who criticize the Pope for introducing those terms into the discussion? Name one.

 

This is where it gets very interesting. For one thing, he points out that there is quite a difference between promoting discernment, dialogue, mercy, gradualness, etc., and Cardinal Cupich’s use and definitions of such terms. Cardinal Cupich and the minions are using very liberal definitions and interpretations and calling them the same as the Church. It’s a wee bit like they used Josef Pieper’s “Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power” as a playbook rather than a warning.  It’s creepy.

2. And by the way, which of those terms did Pope Francis introduce? Cardinal Cupich himself mentions that Pope Benedict XVI spoke of “gradualness”—although the cardinal gives a highly tendentious rendering of the retired Pontiff’s thoughts on the subject. The words “discernment” and “dialogue” appear in the 50-year old dictionary on my desk. And I seem to recall reading something about “mercy” in the Bible.

Right. Nobody’s against those things. They are against the contradictory definitions put out by the minions.

Here’s part of the description of “Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power.”

…language has been abused so that, instead of being a means of communicating the truth and entering more deeply into it, and of the acquisition of wisdom, it is being used to control people and manipulate them to achieve practical ends. Reality becomes intelligible through words. Man speaks so that through naming things, what is real may become intelligible. This mediating character of language, however, is being increasingly corrupted. Tyranny, propaganda, mass-media) destroy and distort words. They offer us apparent realities whose fictive character threatens to become opaque.

If this doesn’t sound like Cardinal Cupich and the minions, I don’t know what does! For all the “clarity” Cardinal Cupich espouses, it’s more like mud. In their “say it often and it will be true” world, they are causing mass confusion with the laity who just want to see their priest as someone they can trust. The distortions of Church teaching among the minions is incredible. “Church teachings and those following them are simply mean, vindictive people.” Please.

Back to Phil Lawler:

Do I sound angry? Yes, I am angry—at the tactics of those who, while speaking in lofty terms about open dialogue and respectful debate, do their utmost to impugn the motivations and question the good faith of those who disagree with them.

Exactly!  When the minions constantly preach “tolerance” and then have none for anyone who disagrees with them, the ad hominems are launched. Their tactic is to say “THEY believe in the teachings of the Church.  THEY want you to struggle. THEY are mean.  Listen to OUR nice, soothing sirens’ songs and we’ll lead you.”  Blech! 

While I was trying to provide you with an Amazon link for Pieper’s book, I came across a good book review. Here’s a snippet. Thank you James E. Egolf, whoever you are! Never thought I’d be using an Amazon review. 

Pieper begins this book with a serious treatment of Plato’s (427-347 BC) serious dispute with the Ancient Athenian sophists who taught men to use clever words and communication to deceive men with total disregard for truth. Plato argued that the sophists were very dangerous men because of their intellectual prowess and supposed sophistication. The unlearned could be easily misled and become dangerous because of the respect given to the sophists which they did not deserve. Readers may ask what is the relevance of the dispute between Plato and the sophists to modern Western “Civilization.” One answer may be studied in the Bolshevik (Communist) Revolution in Russia in 1917. Those who engineered this revolution were members of a declasse intelligensia who knew the use and abuse of language.

Pieper then makes a solid point that any communication (language) between an honest man and a liar is useless since the liar has nothing to offer leading to knowledge. Pieper states in effect that the honest man may just as well be talking to thin air, or hot air. The liar is trying to manipulate and gain power over the honest man which is destructive to the honest man if he unaware.

Pieper has an interesting explanation of the destructiveness of flattery. The flatterer is trying to intellectually disarm those whom he flatters to gain advantage. A knowledgeable man who is honest is immune to such flattery. However, flattery can be used to undermine the victim to the advantage dishonest person. A good example is in the Book of Genesis whereby the snake successfully flatters Eve to her destruction as well that of Adam.

Again, who comes to mind here?!?!  I almost always get that creepy visual of satan talking to Eve whenever I read or watch Cardinal Cupich, Fr. Martin, Bishop McElroy, and the rest of the minions. They are preying on people. It’s not always that the people are unaware of the Church’s teachings or that Cupich, Martin, et. al., are contradicting them, but since the minions are so good about preying on peoples’ fears of being lonely, struggling, being judged, being ostracized, etc., some will listen. Classic predator style. This is why we should care and also be very, very upset along with Phil. #CatholicCyberMilitia 

Advertisements

Cesspool of Hatred or Fount of Catholic Zeal?

I’d like to juxtapose some statements of Fr. Thomas Rosica to some from Pope Francis found in these two articles.

http://www.cruxnow.com/cns/2016/05/17/vatican-pr-aide-warns-catholic-blogs-create-cesspool-of-hatred/

and

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-if-we-annoy-people-blessed-be-the-lord/

It seems rather funny that these two articles hit the internet a day apart.  They could not be more different from each other.  Let’s imagine a conversation between Pope Francis and Fr. Rosica, using their own quotes and points directly from these two articles.  (Parenthetical interjections mine, mine, mine.)

Fr. Rosica: Many of my non-Christian and non-believing friends have remarked to me that we ‘Catholics’ have turned the Internet into a cesspool of hatred, venom and vitriol, all in the name of defending the faith!”  (Note it is the non-believing non-Christian friends he’s citing.)

Pope Francis: It is better to be annoying and a nuisance than lukewarm in proclaiming Jesus Christ. If we annoy people, blessed be the Lord.  We can ask the Holy Spirit to give us all this apostolic fervor and to give us the grace to be annoying when things are too quiet in the Church.

Fr. Rosica: The character assassination on the Internet by those claiming to be Catholic and Christian has turned it into a graveyard of corpses strewn all around.  Often times the obsessed, scrupulous, self-appointed, nostalgia-hankering virtual guardians of faith or of liturgical practices are very disturbed, broken and angry individuals, who never found a platform or pulpit in real life and so resort to the Internet and become trolling pontiffs and holy executioners! In reality they are deeply troubled, sad and angry people.   (Planks and splinters are coming to mind here.  Anyone else?  I just want to hold up a big mirror here.)

Pope Francis: There are those who are well mannered, who do everything well, but are unable to bring people to the Church through proclamation and apostolic zeal. Apostolic zeal implies an element of madness, which is healthy and spiritual.  It can only be understood in an atmosphere of love and is not an enthusiasm for power and possession. (And that’s really, really the difference for those of us who “never found a platform or pulpit.”  We really didn’t want this job.  It found us when we looked at what our children had to face, what was happening to the faithful around us, those being offered on the altar of political correctness, etc.)

Paul, in preaching of the Lord, was a nuisance, but he had deep within him that most Christian of attitudes, apostolic zeal. He was not a man of compromise, no! The truth, forward! The proclamation of Jesus Christ, forward!  St. Paul’s fate was one with many crosses, but he keeps going, he looks to the Lord and keeps going.  He is a man who, with his preaching, his work, his attitude irritates others, because testifying to Jesus Christ and the proclamation of Jesus Christ makes us uncomfortable.  It threatens our comfort zones, even Christian comfort zones, right? It irritates us. The Lord always wants us to move forward, forward, forward, not to take refuge in a quiet life or in cozy structures. (Right, we could just duck and cover and hide in our little Catholic bunkers but we would be abandoning the cross.)

Fr. Rosica:  The Internet, can be an international weapon of mass destruction, crossing time zones, borders and space. It is an immense battleground that needs many field hospitals set up to bind wounds and reconcile warring parties.  Christians ought to be a constant encouragement to communion and, even in those cases where they must firmly condemn evil, they should never try to rupture relationships and communication.  (Who says the goal is to try to rupture relationships?)

If we judged our identity based on certain ‘Catholic’ websites and blogs, we would be known as the people who are against everyone and everything! If anything, we should be known as the people who are for something, something positive that can transform lives and engage and impact the culture. (Now, see, that would be the problem we have with Fr. Rosica and friends’ tactics.  We don’t see them as transformative, engaging and impactful in a positive way.  We see them as permissive, enabling, and harmful.  We’re the ones out there trying to tell people they don’t have to embrace sin. We’re on the forefront trying to stop the destruction of youth, morally and physically, and we are using modern technology to do it.  This is what scares the old guard.  We are making progress!)

Pope Francis:  St. Paul was a fiery individual who was always in trouble, not in trouble for troubles’ sake, but for Jesus because proclaiming Jesus is the consequence.  The Church has so much need of this, not only in distant lands, in the young churches, among people who do not know Jesus Christ, but here in the cities, in our cities, they need this proclamation of Jesus Christ.

So let us ask the Holy Spirit for this grace of apostolic zeal, let’s be Christians with apostolic zeal, onwards, as the Lord says to Paul, take courage! (Amen, Holy Father!  Amen!)

Imaginary conversation done. Isn’t it weird how those just fit together?

I think Fr. Rosica and friends had high hopes for the internet, but then realized that they were going to get some pushback when people didn’t like them twisting the Faith.  (FYI, Fr. Martin. SJ almost immediately posted this Fr. Rosica talk to his social media accounts to share with everyone what a “cesspool of hatred” the Catholic blogosphere is.  You to admit that Fr. Rosica is a little more lyrical than Fr. Martin when it comes to the ad hominems.  “Cesspool of hatred” is so much more poetic than the “haters” Fr. Martin used.) The internet is the one place where the faithful can call the liberals on their spin.   We can bypass and run around them.  In the history of the Church, the laity has never had so much input.   He’s quite right that it can cross time zones and borders (not sure about space – maybe a little too poetic).

Fr. Rosica does lob some pretty lofty grenades at Catholic bloggers, yet he never seems to stop and ask himself what his role in all of this might be.  Bloggers are the ones waging a war.  Bloggers are the ones against everyone and everything.   Bloggers have archaic notions. Bloggers are hateful, venomous and vitriolic, sad people, etc., etc., etc.   As usual, he does a bang up job of being rather contrary, does he not?  He’s really just saying, “I can fire off some artillery and be completely justified.  The laity that disagrees with me, they must just sit on their hands sporting duct tape over their lips, or else they are mean and pathetic!”  I don’t think the bloggers are the ones saying, “You can’t take people to task!” and then turning around to take people to task themselves.  I don’t think we mind or feel martyred when people tell us we’re great big meanies. Frankly, we couldn’t care less.  I think “Bring it!” would characterize us. What drives us nuts, however, is the lack of honest debate.  There is no debate unless you consider “You’re vitriolic!” as debate, in which case you probably flunked Debate 101.

I can’t speak for all Catholic bloggers, but I can safely assume most have the goal to support the faithful and the Faith under attack.  It is most definitely a war.  I have no problem with that depiction nor one of a field hospital.  The question is, who are the enemy combatants (aka – the ones fighting for their own agenda which is contrary to the Church)? Who are the doctors and nurses? Who are the ones fighting the unjust aggressor?  And just what is the best medicine?  Disinfecting wounds is rarely a pleasant thing.  Usually, a tremendous amount of pain comes before the healing.

So, the clergy really needs to ask themselves how to handle the laity challenging them?  Is it good to constantly whine about it, or should you jump into the conversation?  Is it good to say “Hey, I’m just going to sue you because what you said was wrong?” (ahem, Fr. Rosica!) or would it be a little more beneficial to rebut the accusations point by point? I thought dialogue was the word of the day?  I thought you were supposed to meet people where they were?  Well, here they are!   That is the problem with Fr. Rosica.  He’ll bend over backwards for one part of society, and then feels free to backhand another. It just so happens that the ones he backhands are the ones who advocate for following the Faith. He doesn’t want to have a discussion of the issues.  He simply tells everyone how full of venom they are and blocks them on social media.  They’re talking some serious issues, yet all he can do is peddle ad hominems.   He can continue to try and silence the portion of the Catholic blogosphere that disagrees with him, but I’m reasonably sure they aren’t going anywhere.  #meetthelaity

On France: We Should’ve Followed the Lead of Pope St. Pius V

Our hearts are broken. A country that was once considered one of the most Catholic countries in the world has been overrun by Islam and attacked by jihadists. Can we just forget about climate change now? Get your heads out of the sand (I’m talking to you, liberal Catholics!) and realize that there are FAR more important things in our world. We can sit and worry about the weather, or we can worry about what’s really going to affect our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

You see, Islamists have long known what liberal Catholics have forgotten. We were supposed to be an army of God, and we were supposed to be raising an army of God. However, we’ve pretty much birth-controlled that out of our population in the last century. We’ve become narcissistic, we’ve become secular, and we’ve certainly given up on raising up an army. Children are now just here to give us pleasure. If they don’t give us pleasure, we don’t want them. Islamists know what God told his people all along. God-fearing children are arrows in our quivers, but Islamists know we’ve given up all our ammo – no faith, no family, and the Rosary has become an antiquity of the past rather than a weapon against our foes. They’re striking us now because they think we are weak. They are completely right. So, while the liberal Catholics continue to push for climate control measures, false mercy, and gay marriage, Islamists laugh at us and plan their revenge for Lepanto. Is it any wonder why we’re seeing this? While they promote their false teachings as truth, our liberal religious and priests are promoting truth as mutable.

Don’t believe me, Cardinal Kasper, Thomas Reese, Father Rosica, Father Martin, Joan Chittister, Archbishop Cupich, and all of you other heterodox religious and clergy? Watch this video: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2015/09/23/muslims-warn-nj-school-board-were-going-to-be-the-majority-soon-n2056048. The woman toward the end is totally right.  While they’re building an army for their false God, liberal Catholics are celebrating our unencumbered lives and how great that is for the environment. You tout that the “majority” of Catholics don’t follow Church teachings, as if this is a reason they should be changed. God gave us a roadmap for the spreading of his people. “Gen 1:28 And God pronounced his blessing on them, Increase and multiply and fill the earth, and make it yours; take command of the fishes in the sea, and all that flies through the air, and all the living things that move on the earth.” You kind of forgot about that when you were plugging “civil unions”, women priests, gun control, climate control, and Communion for the divorced and remarried. Talk about misplaced priorities! Congratulations, you’ve aided and abetted these jihadis. Try picking up a history books. ISIS did.

While you liberal Catholic “leaders” are pushing for climate control, women priests and gay marriage; while you are advocating for Communion for the divorced, gun control; while your ilk floats this “coexist” mantra only hours before the Paris attacks:

Reese

the jihadists are salivating, because they know it means our death, both physically and spiritually.

One more thing: you college kids around the country who are whining about words and thoughts that are counter to yours “invading your safe space,” you don’t have a clue what an unsafe space is. You are pampered, privileged, and haven’t a modicum of understanding about the reality of this world. How do I know this? Because you probably haven’t bothered to pray for the dead in France. Instead, you take the time to send out ridiculous tweets like this:

mizzou

What you deserve is to have some sense knocked into you. Again to all of you liberal religious and clergy out there who are promoting a false view of mercy and reality and encouraging the use of situation ethics, you’re created an entitled society like this.  You’ve already swayed a whole generation who are cooperating with you about the next one. What comes next is all on you.

Our Lady of Lepanto, Our Lady of Victory, Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us!