![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pecuniumLast week I posted a comment to Pewsitter pointing out the logical problems with the stance taken by a poster there, and the person he was praising.
No surprise, (since it did, functionally, call him, and her; and a lot of people who agreed with them, hypocrites), it wasn't published.
So, why have comments? I didn't use foul language. I didn't say they were hypocrites; just pointed out that the moral certainty they were espousing had been lacking when it was a Republican, and his lackeys, who were getting honorary degrees from Catholic universities.
If asking a question isn't allowed, what is? Are the comments only to be echo-chamber praises of the "brave" people who get to pontificate without public disagreement?
Then again, that's pretty much par for the course for reactionary religious types. They pick and choose what they want to follow, and then pretend all the rest isn't there.
It seems to me it ought to be harder for Catholics; we have a doctrine, and dogma, and the Pope, etc. to tell us what are, and aren't things which we need to pay particular attention to (and the last two popes have spoken out against the War in Iraq, Torture, mistreatment of the poor, etc.; which Pewsitter doesn't seem to oppose. Looking at their splash page, well the only way to know it's not a bunch of narrow minded Protestant bigots is the repeated mention of being Catholic).
But, people being people, these folks are quite capable of holding mutually conflicting beliefs, and condemning others; even when those
others don't.
[addendum]
It has been suggested I am judging their sincerity: I am. The fellow who wrote the original post said this:
Additionally, the declination of this award by Ambassador Glendon should send a message to all members of the Catholic educational establishment, namely: Catholics are no longer going to tolerate secular interpretations of our most sacred Catholic principles. Either you are Catholic in your beliefs, or you are not. There can be no middle ground...
Notre Dame…return to the fold. Rescind the offer of an honorary degree to the President and respect Catholic teachings and principles. The bestowal on an honorary degree on any individual that so blatantly disregards our respect for human life through his political, personal and government policies has no right to any honorific degree from Notre Dame or any other Catholic educational facility.
If the speaker believes there can be no middle ground, and Papal Dicta are inviolable, not merely when speaking ex cathedra (which applies, because the issue of abortion has not been addressed ex cathedra), then the plaudits given to Condoleeza Rice by Boston College, and to Micael Mukasey by Notre Dame, should have been every bit as anathema as the award being given to Obama.
When someone makes a binary statement like this one (which is broader than, "Abortion is so wrong it needs to be opposed with every fiber of our being."). there is every right to hold the speaker's position up to scrutiny. To see if they really believe it, or if it's a convenient piece of rhetorical posturing, meant to fool the unwary into thinking there is more to it than a personal interest.
So yes, I am judging their sincerity, and finding it lacking. They do not mean what they say; no matter how much they seem to be saying what they mean.
No surprise, (since it did, functionally, call him, and her; and a lot of people who agreed with them, hypocrites), it wasn't published.
So, why have comments? I didn't use foul language. I didn't say they were hypocrites; just pointed out that the moral certainty they were espousing had been lacking when it was a Republican, and his lackeys, who were getting honorary degrees from Catholic universities.
If asking a question isn't allowed, what is? Are the comments only to be echo-chamber praises of the "brave" people who get to pontificate without public disagreement?
Then again, that's pretty much par for the course for reactionary religious types. They pick and choose what they want to follow, and then pretend all the rest isn't there.
It seems to me it ought to be harder for Catholics; we have a doctrine, and dogma, and the Pope, etc. to tell us what are, and aren't things which we need to pay particular attention to (and the last two popes have spoken out against the War in Iraq, Torture, mistreatment of the poor, etc.; which Pewsitter doesn't seem to oppose. Looking at their splash page, well the only way to know it's not a bunch of narrow minded Protestant bigots is the repeated mention of being Catholic).
But, people being people, these folks are quite capable of holding mutually conflicting beliefs, and condemning others; even when those
others don't.
[addendum]
It has been suggested I am judging their sincerity: I am. The fellow who wrote the original post said this:
Additionally, the declination of this award by Ambassador Glendon should send a message to all members of the Catholic educational establishment, namely: Catholics are no longer going to tolerate secular interpretations of our most sacred Catholic principles. Either you are Catholic in your beliefs, or you are not. There can be no middle ground...
Notre Dame…return to the fold. Rescind the offer of an honorary degree to the President and respect Catholic teachings and principles. The bestowal on an honorary degree on any individual that so blatantly disregards our respect for human life through his political, personal and government policies has no right to any honorific degree from Notre Dame or any other Catholic educational facility.
If the speaker believes there can be no middle ground, and Papal Dicta are inviolable, not merely when speaking ex cathedra (which applies, because the issue of abortion has not been addressed ex cathedra), then the plaudits given to Condoleeza Rice by Boston College, and to Micael Mukasey by Notre Dame, should have been every bit as anathema as the award being given to Obama.
When someone makes a binary statement like this one (which is broader than, "Abortion is so wrong it needs to be opposed with every fiber of our being."). there is every right to hold the speaker's position up to scrutiny. To see if they really believe it, or if it's a convenient piece of rhetorical posturing, meant to fool the unwary into thinking there is more to it than a personal interest.
So yes, I am judging their sincerity, and finding it lacking. They do not mean what they say; no matter how much they seem to be saying what they mean.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 07:18 pm (UTC)"Zero-tolerance" thinking never did appeal to me because of its tendency to throw out a lot of babies with a very little bathwater.
I know of very, very few people who have achieved perfect integrity, and I don't count myself among them. Which is not to say that I condone hypocrisy, but I try to be understanding of others, even when they don't extend the same generosity.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 07:42 pm (UTC)I don't even object to them picking and choosing (per se, I happen to think the things they don't care about are pretty damned important; but that difference of opinion isn't the thing which got my dander up).
What I object to is them making this declaration that all Catholics have to obey all teachings. It's not just that they want to obtrude the Church into civil matters; and then not actually obeying all those teachings. Sins, and stones, beams and motes.
As I get older I find this sort of thing upsets me more than it used to. I worry that I will become a nasty old crank, but I also don't want these cranks taking over my church; even if my church and I don't see eye to eye on everything.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-13 03:33 am (UTC)If you're a crank because, "In my day, this would never have happened," -- well, not so much since people have been hypocrites since at least as long ago as Jesus criticized his contemporaries.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-13 03:35 am (UTC)Of losing my charity, and capacity to see the reasons behind the choices I see as benighted.
I worry about being a "Damned Kids! Get OFFA MY LAWN!" sort of person.