I've seen this more than twice
I have noticed that when people who are Christians cannot or do not want to engage the substance of an attack on the actions of a Christian friend that they often say things like "I don't think attacks should be made against [this person]. After all, he/she is a brother/sister Christian. We should show them respect and love."
Sure I'll buy the love part, but hold the mayo and the respect. It's always good to have respect and love for people as humans, but do I have to have respect for, say, Jesse Jackson as a Christian when he engages in extortion against other human beings? Or consider that many people have big problems with the actions of President Bush and they claim he should be tried for war crimes, etc. I myself would never say "Lay off the guy, he's a Christian, dammit!" I mean, if a Christian commits a crime he should do the time, right? And though most of the regular readers know that I'm being facetious here I use that example to accentuate the grounds on which I would not defend the President.
I have gone around and around with people on the whole issue of cutting Christians an extra break for screwing up, the practice of -- aside from any merits -- giving business people your patronage just because they go to your church, etc. I totally recoil from this type of ghetto behavior which really should be seen as alien to the Gospel.
I'd attack this post, but since Pauli is a fellow Christian, I won't.
ReplyDeleteYou sure as heck better attack me if I'm wrong about anything, buddy. Otherwise when I end up in hell it will be on your conscience.
ReplyDeleteI think you have managed to write a post that one could not honestly and consistently attack.
ReplyDeleteIf I say you're wrong, and that Christians should never criticize each other, then what am I doing engaging in the criticism?
Not that I want to -- it's just interesting that your argument here is literally irrefutable.
You're right, John! That is funny; I hadn't thought of that. But universal negatives have a way of presenting that problem. It's like if I said "I'm lying" and someone said "No, you're not!"
ReplyDeleteTo be fair, I don't think the most recent instance to which I'm referring intends to condemn all types of attacks, and more than anything is urging respect and the avoiding of "intemperate attacks". However, it does simultaneously avoid the issue of whether any attack is warranted in the case, sort of hiding behind arguably intemperate attacks which were made in the combox.
So to a degree I'm caricaturing what is being said, but I still think there is plenty of sanctimony in the stock condemnation.
I'm with you - this is among the laziest style of attacks. You can never criticize everyone - no, all we can do is fold our hands and pray while some loud mouth git defames our religion. My other fave is when a reader complains about the subject matter of the blog host's blog. "Why do you have to be negative, blah blah blah." Oh fly a kite is my usual, though rarely said out loud, response.
ReplyDeleteRight, Paul. Unfortunately there are many who know not the simple joys of kite-flying. It's at least as relaxing as unloading a 9mm at one of those human shaped targets.
ReplyDeleteMaybe I should start a new category: Best Catholic Kite-flying 2007. I would naturally include Protestant, Jewish and Hindu kite-fliers as well.
LOL. 'funny y'all should mention this....
ReplyDeleteThe other day I was browsing a thread at Jimmy Akin's excellent blog. Within just a few posts, the comboxers turned the thread into a referendum on Whether We Should Even Be Talking About This Seeing As It Entails Criticizing a Fellow Christian. From that point on, all possibility of rationally discussing the original issue went Phut.
LOL!!!
Diane
P.S. Paul Zummo: Do I detect in your diction the telltale indications of a fellow Red Dwarf fan? :D
P.S. As the one who lauched the "intemperate attacks" in the combox in question, may I say: Mea cvulpa, mea culpa...?
ReplyDeleteDo I still think Rod Dreher behaves like an anti-Catholic bigot? Yes. But I realize that it was both impolitic and uncharitable to say so.
Actually, I'm ambivalent. I'm not sure "anti-Catholic bigot" *was* intemperate. Tom K said "anti-Catholic." I simply added the word "bigot."
ReplyDeleteLOL!
But hey, at least I didn't call Rod a "git." I guess intemperateness, like so much else, is in the eye of the beholder. :)
(Not that I object to "git," mind you. In fact, I'm still chuckling over it.)
Diane
Those people should read the intensely scatological invective fired at Martin Luther by Saint Thomas More. People weren't such wusses back then.
ReplyDeleteDiane: "I realize that it was both impolitic and uncharitable to say so."
ReplyDeleteYes, but no more impolitic or uncharitble than some of the things I've said in the past.
Diane:
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately I am unfamiliar with that program. No, my distinct prose is the unfortunate result of several years of blogging. I believe that "intemperate" remarks have become my forte.
Paul: Red Dwarf is a raunchy, insane, but often hilarious Brit-com set in outer space. The characters are forever calling each other "gits," among other lovely epithets. Highly recommended, if you can get hold of the DVDs, especially of the first few seasons. It kind of reached its creative and comical apex, IMHO, when Kryton (the excessively fussy droid) joined the other characters. It started going downhill when Kichansky (sp?) came on board. Alas, the lead actor, who played good-natured slob Dave Lister, was arrested for rape a few years ago. :( Guess they won't be making a sequel.
ReplyDeleteWho is Therese, the comboxer over at Tom K's? She rocks!!!
ReplyDelete"ghetto behavior"
ReplyDeleteGhetto behavior? Ghetto behavior?
You'd make a bad Italian Pauli.
Would someone care to answer Jeff Culbreath over at Tom's blog? I feel I am not the right person to respond to him. I think I could easily provide copious evidence of Rod Dreher's anti-Catholic rhetoric--"big fat liars," anyone? "Our Lady of Pizza Hut"?--but the problem is that Jeff Culbreath seems to want to call all the shots, define all the terms, and then airily decide whether Incident X or Behavior Y meets his idiosyncratic criteria. I cannot deal with this; it strikes me as rather pompous and arrogant. And, following Pauli's advice (however feebly), I do not want to dominate the combox over there. So, if anyone eelse has the intestinal fortitude to engage Mr. Culbreath, please have at it!
ReplyDeleteThanks much!
This is kind of why I think calling Mr. Dreher's writing "anti-Catholic" may be counter-productive.
ReplyDeleteThe more we react this way, the more he'll think that all we want to do is bury our heads in the sand and pretend there's not a problem, so he better make it clear there is a problem.
And it will continue to escalate...
This might be a good occasion to ask that something be explained to me. What is/are the crunchy-correct response/responses to the Catholic Church scandals? And I'm talking about Joe Six, not the "official responses" which we all know ranged from inadequate to way, way over the top. (I'm thinking of Bp. Pilla who out of the blue said something to a reporter like "Hey, I'll resign if it makes anyone feel better." The truth is he was dying to resign, but that is another whole story....)
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I know many people who responded with prayer. Christ said "this demon only comes out by prayer and fasting" then he said to pray in a closet and don't let on that you're fasting. So needless to say, this response didn't make news headlines.
Maybe we cowardly lay-Catholics should have done the following: (1) pray, (2) fast, (3) run around telling everyone else they better start praying and fasting, (4) complain about lousy church architecture and styrofoam cups at the bake sale.
This may only make sense to a convert from protestantism like me, but I think someone can be anti-Catholic and not be an anti-Catholic bigot. Scott Hahn called himself an anti-Catholic in his earlier protestant days, but it was strictly based on theology, not ethnicity.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately many protestants become bigots based on this. I was told that when several friends and I left our small Presbyterian church for Roman Catholicism that there was an eruption of anti-Catholic sermons, talks with kids and all sorts of obsession with Catholics for a long time afterwards.
I don't know if this applies to RD, but it seems like he still has the mind and heart of a protestant esp. with his "spirit of protest" against the Catholic hierarchy and how it chooses to wield or not wield it's authority. It seems that to him the matter of church discipline can be reduced to politics so when church leaders failed to meet his rigorous "conservative" standard -- goodbye.
Another thing for the record. Being a convert is a gift, not some kind of fricking sheriff's badge. You tell St. Peter "Hey, I'm a convert," and he'll say, "Yeah, me too. That and $1.55 will get you a cup of coffee. See you after you get out of purgatory."
All right, it's late. Say goodnight, Gracie.
Our Lady of Pizza
ReplyDeleteI gotta admit, that's my favorite line in the book. It might come off as harsh, but the ugliness of many modern American Chruches is a complaint among many loyal, traditional Catholics as well.
But alot of the other stuff he writes is hard to take. I'm really not sure it's anti-Catholic bigotry or anti-Catholicism as Pauli says. Whatever the case, those Catholics trying to defend him are a bit silly.