And this time he really really means it.
Oh goodie.
Rod Dreher was invited by Time magazine to write a piece about Pope Francis. Of course, he was happy to oblige, and he did so in a way that only Rod Dreher could. Literally, as it turns out. I can't set it up any better than Dreher does himself:
I tried to think of something nobody else had said.
And what might that be, you ask? The title of the Time piece says it all:
I'm Still Not Going Back to the Catholic Church
And he's exactly right. No one else had written on whether Rod Dreher is going back to the Catholic Church.
Read the whole thing, as Dreher himself would say (and did say). Executive Summary: Dreher goes into some length about how the Church did not preach "God's judgment", in effect preaching "Christ without the Cross", and that this lack of interest in teaching repentance was reflected in its reaction to the Scandal. Pope Francis doesn't help, not because of what he says (which Dreher likes), but because of how Francis will be misinterpreted. Same old saw, but a bit more expanded. Whatever.
The odd part about all this is that his Time essay didn't really say why Rod Dreher really isn't going back to the Church -- it just left the impression that it did. Instead, as he says in the TAC pimping of his Time essay, the real reason he isn't going back is "because [he does not] believe in Catholic doctrine any longer". And he only tells us what the problematic part of the doctrine is when pressed in the comments: it turns out that the stumbling block is papal infallibility.
I'm confused, and at a loss for words. I'm sure y'all won't be.
P.S. The Time commenters are a bit rough on him already.
Thanks for writing this Pikkumatti. Writing against the Catholic church is a great meal ticket, and we know how Dreher loves meals. I guess Pope Francis is the next in a long line of "Catholic Prufrocks" who the working boy simply cannot abide.
ReplyDeleteI have got to hand it to Time. They can let this Embittered Ex-Catholic weild his Axe against the Church; yet refuse to cover the slaughter of Christians in Egypt or Africa. Priorities!
ReplyDeleteJonathan Carpenter
Dreher lives in Orthodox La-La Land. He doesn't yet seem to understand that the Orthodox deal with scandal by sweeping it under a rug where it can't cause scandal to the faithful. I've had a number of Orthodox priests tell me "We're Orthodox, we don't air our dirty laundry for the world to see". And, as an Orthodox Christian, you *do* try to get justice for scandal or wrongs committed by the clergy, expect to be shunned and ignored by the laity, and for the church hierarchy to do basically nothing. This is just the norm, especially among ethnic Orthodox and in the old countries (what else can one expect when they equate their national identity with their religious identity?)
ReplyDeleteDid Catholic bishops try to hide scandal as well? Absolutely, but the laity and the media seem to have held them to account, and a lot of public admission of wrong and a lot of soul searching seems to have happened.
Judge, if what you are saying is true, Dreher's becoming an Orthodox who doesn't report on any scandals is even more ironic and his argument against the Catholic church's way of dealing with the scandals even weaker and less worthy of consideration.
DeleteSo -- as always -- every mistake the Catholic bishops make is amplified and megaphoned at top volume, and every mistake made by Jews, Prots, Orthodox is shrugged off and minimized. Dog. Bites. Man.
Hey, I know of a number of *matushki* (priest's wives) who were raped at one point by so-called monastic "elders". Scandal like this has been all over the place in the Orthodox world.
DeleteOf course, at the time, when it was reported, the bishops just hid it. In fact, I'd say that Russian and Greek bishops are far more corrupt, and far better at hiding clergy misconduct than American bishops will *ever* be.
But, of course, nobody in Orthodoxy will tell useful idiots like Dreher the what's what.
[NFR: Because if any doctrine taught authoritatively by the Roman church is untrue, then it's all up to be questioned. I never really understood the teaching on contraception, but I lived by it because I did believe in the authority of the Roman church to teach these things. If you tell yourself, "Well, the Magisterium got that one wrong," the whole thing logically unravels. -- RD]
ReplyDeleteForgive me if I inadvertantly offend anyone by saying this, but Dreher's truth standard - what he himself decides to believe is true at any given moment - is no stronger or weaker for Orthodoxy than it is for Catholicism than it is for caramel sauce.
And the other side of that is that any one of those can rot away and collapse like a house of cards for him at any given moment for the same reason: they are functions of mood, no different from what governs Pauli's choices of what music video to post at a particular moment, not of true religious faith.
"To be deep in history..., at least as Dreher reveals he grasped it in this previous NFR is exactly the same sort of transient, aesthetic mood, what Pik refers to as Dreher's constantly confusing his taste for truth. Unlike the shallow Protestant yokels who pulled Dreher's pants down, Dreher will become deep in history, he'll become psychologically the next best thing to a Time Lord, like Dr. Who. Try pulling his mental pants down then, puny mortals.
This is why I keep saying a lot of Dreher's behavior, from his relentless obsession with his sister to his drug addiction to now this bizarre public exposition in Time (why would anyone of sound mind frame an assignment to write about Pope Francis in that peculiar way?), points to more and more of the pillars keeping Dreher's center holding beginning to crumble, so that more and more the only thing he finds himself able to hold on to is literally nothing more than the going through the motions of Orthodoxy, the liturgical standing up and sitting down, the fasting and feasting and so forth, because now that the aesthetic novelty of the newest religious drug high has worn off there's nothing but the husks of ritual behavior left to claim him.
What we're seeing in this Time essay is really not a slam on Catholicism. Instead, it's a now embarrassingly public howl on how religious faith itself, any religious faith, inevitably fails what Dreher needs it to be for his own purposes.
Keith
What we're seeing in this Time essay is really not a slam on Catholicism.
DeleteThere's probably a lot of truth in that, Keith. A lot of it is the failure of Rod to be satisfied, impressed, stimulated, stroked properly, etc. by anyone with whom he deals.
So Dreher isn't impressed by Pope Francis. Guess what? My kids aren't impressed with me very much when they want another bowl of ice cream or another pack of Pokemon cards or to be allowed to stay up late and I, the paterfamilias, throw down the ixnay. They need to grow up, too.
Like Jim Henson with his Muppets, Dreher lets one of his Kermits speak for him, in this case by not silencing him:
ReplyDeleteBob McMaster says:
September 30, 2013 at 2:56 pm
Second, if you changed your mind about the truthfulness of papal infallibility, would you convert back to Catholicism? My feeling is that from reading your blog & book (which was excellent, by the way) was that you wouldn’t because of the emotional damage rendered by the abuse crisis.
[NFR: True, I wouldn't. I know myself well enough to know that I was way too fried by all that to go back. It really was like staring into the Palantír. -- RD]
And this is why I can’t take you seriously when you talk about theological matters. You’re explicitly saying that your feelings trump truth when it comes to religion. How is that different from Moralistic Therapeutic Deism?
"No, but half-heartedly seriously, you guys, it's really half-heartedly all about something terribly technical and intellectual religiously, like papal infallibility, or circles, or those weird crystal balls in TLOTR or something, because any smaller fig leaf would leave the true me way too directly exposed to ridicule. Anyway, this let me cross-plug my book on Time and my Time piece here, and that's all that's left that's really important any more, isn't it? So it's all good."
Keith
Keith, thanks. I've read some more of this. He's really digging himself into a hole this time. He's exposing himself as the illogical being which we've known him to be for some time.
Delete"It's about doctrine, really."
*So would you go back if you again believed the doctrine?*
"No; I got fried on the Catholic church by the whole thing."
*So... really it's not about doctrine. QED*
That's my synopsis of the exchange with Bob McMaster.
The other gem here is "I never really understood the teaching on contraception." I could do a whole post on this. A guy debates with his friends about abstract philosophies from Nietzsche and pals, but he doesn't understand the Church's teaching on contraception even though he talks about it in his first book. It's either a lie or he's stupid. And I don't think he's stupid.
Eh, I don't think he's stupid either, I just think he's a philosophical and theological lightweight in the extreme. He's a pseudo-academic and a journalist who only delves into the very surface of things before getting bored and moving on to the next thing to learn about. And he loves speaking via impression and generalities. Details are for the technicians and sophisters, I suppose.
DeleteFor Christ's sake, he's how old and just now reading the *basic* texts of the Western canon, after claiming to be a conservative intellectual for this many years? It utterly boggles the mind.
In other words, I'm more and more convinced that Dreher is more a half-educated hick from Louisiana with the constitution of a teenage girl than anything else.
DeleteThank you, judge373. And I could not agree more.
DeleteDiane
Judge: He is a Limosine Liberal pretending to be Conservative.
ReplyDeleteJonathan Carpenter
Given the way he found himself "fried" by the Scandals in ways ordinary Catholics didn't, Keith the Psychic throws an open wager on the table: there is something deeper in Dreher's past involving what he regards as the sexual molestation of young Dreher he has yet to talk about publicly.
ReplyDeleteIt'll be something more than a prank de-panting, and it could easily involve an older relative.
Something not lightweight is driving his life long hysteria about sex, morality, and his salvation.
Keith
I was inclined to disagree with you on this point, Keith. If we are to believe what Dreher is saying about what the Catholic Church was lacking at the time (I know, it's dicey to believe what he says), I think he just used the Scandal as an excuse for what he was going to do anyway. Also, his serial over-sharing about his days as a randy stud is relatively recent, AFAIK.
DeleteBut then I read today's Dreher offering and now I'm not so sure.
P.S. The comments on the linked Dreher post are as preciously snarky and aren't-we-so-smart as Dreher's post.
I think he just used the Scandal as an excuse for what he was going to do anyway.
DeleteI think you're right. His un conscionable silence WRT Orthodox sex scandals confirms this. Obviously he really doesn't give two flying flips about sex abuse or its victims.
Also, his serial over-sharing about his days as a randy stud is relatively recent, AFAIK.
It's new to me, certainly!
dianonymous
Sweet! I got an NFR!!
DeleteHe hasn't been silent though, he's actually attacked victims of clergy sexual abuse in Orthodoxy!
DeleteJust look here: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/how-hard-is-it-to-run-a-church/
"But it does seem clear that the laywoman who made rape allegations against a troubled priest-monk closely associated with the nuns is really unstable, and hard to credit."
Nothing of the sort was clear, and his slander of a victim is disgusting. The woman's allegations led to the downfall of Jonah, and the nuns of this monastery were kicked out of ROCOR. In other words, the hierarchy of both the OCA and ROCOR believed her. The nuns, in the documents they released, called the victim a "Jezebel", among other terrible things, and outed her on their website, which Dreher here advertised and brought to his (broader) audience.
Dreher's disgusting. He doesn't give a shit about female victims.
Pik, Dreher was recounting his drunken approach to sex on Beliefnet at least as far back as 2006 or so. His recent serial over-sharing is a re-post of that, if you will, similar to his re-posts of the they-pulled-my-pants-down episode.
DeleteI have no doubt Dreher left the Catholic Church for his own reasons and used the Scandal as publicly palatable cover. My own belief, and he's given no evidence that doesn't constantly underwrite this, is that it was over the practical matter of the contraception being practiced by a high-visibility, moralizing religious writer.
H-VMRW gets vasectomy or puts young trophy babe wife on the Pill after only 3 kids = shockingly hypocritical career threat.
Sobbing until "fried" inside over those wicked Catholic priests and what they did to those poor, defenseless children = of course, what everyman would not? And poor, emotionally wrecked baby boy Rod to have suffered so through it, to boot.
But the more I've been so fortunate as to learn from the thoughts and conclusions of others on this blog, the more my thinking is beginning to move into another dimension so to speak with respect to this relentlessly public mental Elephant Man.
And to put it succinctly that POV would be this: the Rod Dreher we see is not the real Rod Dreher, and the real Rod Dreher is not the one we see, but the two are inseparably connected.
This then lets me conclude that Dreher at heart has never really been a Catholic or now even an Orthodox. Dreher at heart is an uncontrolled mental waterfall which he converts vocationally as a writer and tames daily with Ambien. What Dreher is is a Practicing Religious Writer - which is ultimately very different from being either a Catholic or an Orthodox.
A Catholic would conform to the Church's tenets on contraception or papal infallibility; for a PRW ultimately concerned only with the ideas of Catholicism, the required behavior of Catholicism becomes an ever-increasing burden until (3 kids) that burden must be shed.
With Orthodoxy, by contrast, he only has to stand up and sit down which is like using his elliptical but in a prettier setting and he only has to fast so long before rewarding himself by gorging like a crocodile at the feast ending it. In the meantime, the ideas and surrounding aesthetics remain rich enough to sustain the core being, that is, the PRW(nowO,notC).
And the same thing with Dreher's reflexive Ewww! response to sex itself and his particular fixations on young female tartiness and the molestation of both sexes. The way the PRW writes about these things is par for the course of the blogging/writing beat/world he inhabits, but the sheer frequency of his responses in these quarters tells me that, like some unseen planet perturbing the orbit of a visible one, there's something deeper that's the Unseen Real Rod (the PRW).
Anyway, that's my current working theory of bizarro world and its sovereign: Seen Planet Rod = Only Publicly Real; Unseen Planet Rod warping orbit of Seen Planet Rod = Real Rod.
Keith
Something not lightweight is driving his life long hysteria about sex, morality, and his salvation.
DeleteEh. It's probably nothing as singular and dark as a youthful traumatic episode. Much more likely to be an ongoing disorder that most of us who comment on this site have long since discerned that Ray has had for a long time, but that he tries to keep concealed.
-TMFKS
With Orthodoxy, by contrast, he only has to stand up and sit down which is like using his elliptical but in a prettier setting and he only has to fast so long before rewarding himself by gorging like a crocodile at the feast ending it. In the meantime, the ideas and surrounding aesthetics remain rich enough to sustain the core being, that is, the PRW(nowO,notC).
DeleteNow that you mention it, Keith, I think aesthetics have a lot to do with the Great Conversion (and perhaps with his underlying faith, as you note). I remember more than a few Dreher Beliefnet posts in which he whined about ugly Catholic churches and lousy Catholic music at Mass. In hindsight, while he may or may not have been searching for somewhere that papal infallibility didn't apply, he certainly was looking for a prettier setting and better music.
P.S. I stand corrected on his drunken rutting posts as a recent thing. Either his 2006 posts were before my time reading his online stuff, or they didn't register with me then. Thanks for the update on that.
TMFKS: That Dreher may be his own Courage Man fits the hypothesis just as well and would have the additional value of explaining Ruthie's antipathy to him. Thus the Scandal was caused not by traditionally understood pedophiles but by failed Courage Men, a type Dreher loathes even more.
DeleteKeith
"Dreher's disgusting. He doesn't give a shit about female victims."
DeleteJudge, it's this weird, out-of-proportion of Dreher's with women, especially young women, and sex that leaves me with the nagging feeling that he's something more than just Courageous. Something formative happened to him in that arena that didn't happen to other people who hold all kinds of different values about women and sex.
Keith
Judge, that's very interesting re the rape victim whom Dreher refused to believe! What a difference a beard makes.
DeleteReminds me of his reaction to the Blanco-monastery scandal. I must concede that, to Dreher's credit, he did come up with one of the all-time great headlines: "Felonious Monk." But, in a related piece, he fell all over himself making semi-excuses for the felonious monk. His gist was: We're all sinners; we're all tempted; we all need God's mercy, even this monster monk. Which is certainly true -- but he never extended the same courtesy or consideration to Catholic perps! Au contraire. IIRC, in this extraordinary piece, he even stated that he and his wife had been "blessed" by their association with Blanco. Ohhhhhkay....
This is a refutation Dreher's buffoonery written by none other than George Weigel.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nationalreview.com/article/359863/its-fun-be-catholic-again-george-weigel/page/0/1
Jonathan Carpenter
Pauli: ...
ReplyDelete(1) Anti-Catholicism — which comes in many forms.
(2) $$$
You are most probably right on both counts. Also, I've always wondered why anyone would ever bother to pay money to read Time magazine and its thin, watery, liberal gruel.
Pauli's comment "$$$" fits with Dreher's hiding of the ball, in the Time piece, regarding why he really left the Church. He couldn't use the "why Pope Francis isn't bringing me back" angle if he let on that the real reason he left was disagreement with the doctrine of papal infallibility.
ReplyDeleteIOW, what Time was looking for, and what Rod had to sell, needed the elements of anti-Catholicism, repackaging of the Scandal, and some sort of connection to Pope Francis. Dreher actually showed a good deal of creativity in meeting those requirements.
Truth and honesty took a back seat, but you gotta do what you gotta do, I guess. It's Time magazine after all, even if its only remaining subscribers are doctors' waiting rooms.
I think the bottom line with Dreher is that he can't get past high school.
ReplyDeleteI think the bottom line with Dreher is that he can't get past high school.
ReplyDeletePauli writes, above, "A guy debates with his friends about abstract philosophies from Nietzsche and pals, but he doesn't understand the Church's teaching on contraception even though he talks about it in his first book. It's either a lie or he's stupid. And I don't think he's stupid."
ReplyDeleteIn Pauli's new blog entry re:Obamacare, I do write that I think Dreher's an idiot for those contrarian mental spasms that he thinks are an adequate substitute for thoughtful political analysis, but there are plenty of times where I think he actually does know better.
It's a credit to his intelligence, but not his character.
Father Z's blog was equally as hard on Dreher.
ReplyDeletehttp://wdtprs.com/blog/2013/09/dreher-pope-francis-only-confirms-my-decision-to-leave-the-catholic-church-a-hard-look-at-where-we-are/ Jonathan Carpenter
LArryW2LJ comments: "I think Mr. Dreher would serve better by writing more articles like this."
DeleteStephen King and Joyce Carol Oates tag-teaming couldn't write more articles like this than Rod does.
So true!
DeleteI was disturbed by how positive Father Z's response was. Not to mention most of the responses of his comboxers. Can they really not see through this poseur? Can they, as Catholics, seriously give Dreher more of the benefit of the doubt than they give Pope Francis? WTH?
One comboxer whined that Pope Francis just harps on that "mercy mercy mercy" stuff. Good grief. That's the Gospel. Yes, God requires repentance, and Pope Francis has never said otherwise. But, at its heart, the Gospel is all about that mercy mercy mercy stuff. If you deny this, you're not a Christian, let alone a Catholic.
No wonder Mark Shea has issues with Fr Z's blog. I am gaining new admiration for Mark.
Dianonymous
One comboxer
Jonathan, Fr. Z seems to be agreeing with Dreher's commentary, saying things like "I should memorize that paragraph."
DeleteThe way I look at it is that Rod cherry picked the Church for problems and things he didn't like. Now he's cherry-picking Pope Francis for things he doesn't like. It's almost like he went in search of traces of clown masses. Instead he should have found a good parish -- Byzantine if necessary -- and said "F the bozos".
To me, it's all a parenting style. I come in the room at home and it's loud as hell. I yell "Everybody stop shouting!" My oldest son states correctly "I wasn't shouting." "Then I wasn't talking to you," I reply.
Pope Francis says "Let's all take a breath on abortion, etc." I wasn't running off at the mouth about abortion, so I feel no need to tone it down. However I feel like I know who he's talking to. I was at a wake for a really popular Catholic guy in Cleveland and this guy showed up in a PRO-LIFE T-SHIRT. Wearing a printed t-shirt to a wake is disrespectful and goof-ballish. And -- I say this guy's first name to anyone in Cleveland's pro-life movement and they agree "Yeah, _____ can really get obnoxious." Every time.
Fr. Z is hit and miss. He can be informative, but 3 out of 5 times I'm reminded why I left the trad scene.
DeleteFrancis made me re-think the wisdom of associating with the trad scene within a month of his selection. That business with washing the feet of the girls from juvie hall giving a lot of them apoplexy opened my eyes.
DeleteI mean, they may have had chapter and verse of canon law memorized, but as between them and Francis, I knew where the Church of Jesus Christ was.
Plus the fact that they were as outraged that they were women as that they were delinquents tipped their hand a bit. I started realizing just how Dreherian and "let's play dress up in silk clothes" a lot of them actually were.
-TMFKS
Amen, Man from K Street! I am getting fed up with the ultra-trads, too. I do know some very nice trads who are not like that at all. But so many of the online ones are just cranks.
DeleteWe have 2 indult TLMs in Cleveland. On the east side there's Immaculate Conception. On the west side there's St. Stephen's.
DeleteIf you're in Cleveland on a Sunday and you want to go hang out with folks who go to the TLM. go to St. Stephen's. I have nothing to add; all Catholics know what I mean.
You are right Pauli. I should have paid more attention to Father Z. This blog you will like. It is titled "Rod Dreher Crunched in the Head"
ReplyDeletehttp://skellmeyer.blogspot.com/2013/10/rod-dreher-
crunched.html
Jonathan Carpenter
The puppet master decides to let Miss Piggy deliver his karate chop this time:
ReplyDeleteUPDATE.2: A reader in the comboxes makes a devastating comparison:
“Each of us has a vision of good and of evil. We have to encourage people to move towards what they think is Good.” — Pope Francis
“At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.” — Justice Anthony Kennedy, from the Planned Parenthood vs. Casey ruling, upholding the right to abortion.
We've seen this modus operandi before. This is how he handled Ruthie. This is the same passive-aggressive revenge he used on her. The warm, opened mouth and exposed teeth below eyes that don't smile telling us in exquisite detail the saint's faults and because of them the psychic damage she wreaked on him. Or, in this case of boldly screaming Update 2, Miss Piggy in the back seat with a loop of piano wire so his hands stay clean.
Bless that astonishing Pope Francis' heart, Dreher tells us by proxy, why he's just like that abortion-enabling Supreme Court Justice Kennedy.
Why can't those comboxers see through this poseur, Diane? Because they're like the classic nebbish chump trying to save and make an honest woman out of the whore they're just sure must have a heart of gold, because then their world wouldn't be populated with calculating, mercenary whores. Meanwhile the whore cheerfully role plays along while taking the chump's money and giving him a disease, leaving the chump more certain than ever that next time for sure he'll save her, if only he tries harder.
Dreher is no idiot as Bubba once suggested. He's a stalking, calculating predator of the disaffected, and he knows his prey right down to their DNA.
Dreher's article in Time wasn't written merely to bash the Church in order to line his own pockets, it was also written to harvest the disaffected who showed up there visibly and invisibly for his own consumption.
His blog disciples don't just materialize out of thin air. He baits them with corn like the Time article.
Keith
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteA couple of comments:
Delete1) The quote of Pope Francis is not an exact quote -- it is translated from Italian. The loaded phrase "what they think is Good" has a very specific sense in English. One wonders what its sense was in Italian, much less in context. Add in that a major role of the Church is formation of conscience (helping people rightly think what is Good), and the comparison falls apart entirely.
In any case, it is a significant stretch to equate the two -- but of course it sure looks good to do so in a blog post. Especially if your primary combox cheerleaders are all too happy to pile on the Catholic Church. (It was interesting to see how much more pro-Catholic the Time commenters were as compared with the Dreher commenters -- of course, there is not a "moderator" in the way.)
2) I was a borderline Dreher "nebbish" for quite some time. You can find me saying things like "I'm sure Dreher has something good to say, if he'd only change the subject" on this very blog, to be sure.
I'm cured now. The uptake of the pieces I note in the OP rubbed my nose in the obvious conclusion that he is a fraud and poseur. The fewer eyes that take his stuff seriously, the better.
Along those lines, it appears that there may be people out there who do take his Time piece seriously, at least enough to write about it. I'd think those people would be disappointed to learn that Dreher's real (stated) problem with the Church was papal infallibility. Not to mention that his real (actual) problem with the Church is that the buildings weren't very pretty and the music sucked, but that conclusion requires years of study, as we all know.
Nuts.
ReplyDeleteSomething I just read made me realize something. I've envied Rod for years, in the strict sense of desiring that something good he has -- his reputation as an insightful writer on the Catholic Church -- be taken away from him. This reputation is, functionally, only an apparent good, since it enables his self-destruction; but frankly, it's more out of indignation at what he gets away with than out of concern for his soul that I wrote the comment I removed above.
God bless Rod and have mercy on me.
Tom, I appreciate this and I understand why you took down the comment.
DeleteI am literally scared watching Dreher take his anti-Catholic writing to a new level (i.e., TIME magazine) thinking of what he must be doing to his own soul. He's actually countering the attempt of the Pope and Catholics of good will to get former Catholics to return to the church.
His errors must be pointed out, but always in the spirit of charity, even when it's hard. And I'll be the first to admit that it's pretty damn hard.
Tom, I for one appreciated your comment. I hope that diesn't mean I'm an incorrigibly bad Catholic. ;) But seriously...I think indignation is warranted. It is unbelievable what this guy is getting away with -- all because he has discovered that Professional Anti-Catholicism is a money-maker -- and yes, it is dangerous. He endangers more than just his own souls. He endangers a LOT of souls, especially the ones too gullible to realize that his alleged "honesty" is a schtick.
DeleteI'm not a Catholic apologist; I'm a corporate wage-slave. I don't envy Rod his bully pulpit. But I'm furious at him for his relentless Catholic-bashing. When you publicly and constantly bash my Church, well...them's fightin' words. It's like insulting my mother. I want to haul off and slug the guy.
Pauli, there's no question the Time piece represents a quantum escalation over the sort of elliptical simpering Dreher usually offers in his blog. Why is that? What's changed? Would he have had the same courage to write such a piece when he was a member of his Orthodox church back in Dallas?
DeleteHere's what I think is different now but recognizably similar. The necessary protective barrier of safety has arisen between the fairly cowardly Dreher and his target, just as happened previously with death taking his sister, the prerequisite before it became safe to unload on her.
So what barrier now separates and protects Dreher from countervailing religious blowback or criticism? Well, he's effectively become the patriarch of his very own personal church. He has moved to an even smaller Orthodox communion, he doesn't answer to a Pope, his physical church sits in a remote and hard to get to village, on his own land he had rezoned himself, he's no doubt the deepest pockets in the pews - he's even trying to coin his own catchphrase for it: "Orthodixie" - and he ain't about to get booted off this island. He owns the island.
He's King Rat now in a burrow he pretty much controls entirely. He doesn't have to worry about any blowback from co-workers, he doesn't have any, and all of his important relationships are virtual. He does live in a rented house in town away from his land, but the inhabitants there are the sort of passive sheep who still refer to anyone above their station as "Mr. First Name". So take that, Catholics. Just try and make him hear your reactions or dig him out now.
Frankly, with that sort of moat in place now, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw more escalations like the Time piece. The only possible blowback I can imagine getting his attention at this point would be some sort of public counter-reaction against his book in protest, but a Dreher just doesn't move the needle the way an HHS mandate does.
Keith
Well, several of my responses to the TIME piece seem to have disappeared into cyber-space, so maybe King Rat controls *that* hole, too.
DeleteNo one reads Time anymore, do they? I don't feel indignant about Dreher's position. It's clear he's obsessed with the catholic church, and I'm sure anyone vaguely familiar with his writing assumes he's catholic because he won't shut up about it and they don't focus on the details of his life.
DeleteFrankly I think this is one of Dreher's more reasonable efforts, for Dreher. I'm not a huge fan of this Pope because I think he panders. And I'm extremely dissatisfied with my local priests, even while not a one of them wears a clown costume (but they may as well. ba dum bum). CCD, PSR, whatever it is they are calling it now, is a travesty. I refer to it as PTSD and disenrolled my kids. The instructors there wouldn't touch a Baltimore catechism with a ten foot pole. the church has deep problems that go well beyond tradism and clowns.
Kathleen
I must disagree, Kathleen. Maybe it depends on where you live. Our diocese is turning into the Biretta Brigade, LOL. Seriously!
Delete. . .Well, several of my responses to the TIME piece seem to have disappeared into cyber-space. . .
DeleteDiane, I looked just now, and you have a good number of them up toward the top -- to which you've gotten some reactions (somewhat predictable ones, at that).
Keep up the good work.
What is there to disagree with, Diane? No one from my generation in my cradle catholic family knows what a biretta is. Neither do my kids. Neither does my husband who went to catholic school for 12 years. Can we please not be in denial about how truly lame most catholic liturgies are in this country? Truly objectively offensively LAME.
DeleteYou should have been at the mass I went to 2 weeks ago in my hometown, where the priest (who starts every mass by asking everyone whose birthday it is this week and clapping for them) stated that the prodigal son never said he was sorry and didn't have to. This guy has way many mental/emotional issues, which isn't surprising given his view of God as the ultimate codependent.
DeleteIn this context, Pope Francis is not what the American church needs. It's nice when people can find their little trad or semi-trad niche -- i was able to do this for about a year -- but when that's gone (my priest was transferred and we're not willing to drive 60 minutes each way to mass) it's arid out there. And I'm pretty well persuaded *that's by design*
DeleteWell, again, I think it depends on the diocese. A diocese is not a "niche" -- it covers a lot of ground. Ad ours is a good one.
DeleteFrankly, I think this may be a North-versus-South thing. There are some bad Southern dioceses and some great Northern ones, but, by and large. it seems, Church renewal (in a good sense) is going where the population's going -- down South.
BTW, I do truly feel for people in bad dioceses. I wish y'all could move down here to NC. :D
DeleteKathleen, if you want a trad (or even semi-trad) niche, the place to start is your household, and build up and out by linking up with like-minded households. You don't need your pastor's permission to observe stricter Communion fasts, or to study chant (and use it in family prayer), or to continually re-consecrate your home to the Sacred Heart on life's milestones. Trads have to understand it has to be brick-by-brick, from the bottom up. It was never going to be from the top down. And it will take at least two or three generations.
DeleteHere's my issue with Trad Bloggers as a class--they're good at talking, not so good at being out there and DOING. Listen to Francis when he's talking about not using Tradition as a "nest protecting our mediocrity". If we want traditionalists to be the leaven in the arid dough of day-in, day-out parish Catholicism, then Don't. Be. Mediocre.
Have big, brilliant families that pursue excellence and have a sense of solidarity. Start dynamic new businesses, and, if we aren't entrepreneurs and are destined to be wage slaves, then use our spare time on enterprises to further knit us together: credit unions, independent scouting, volunteer rescue squads. Our book clubs shouldn't be afraid to tackle the cutting edges of writing on the sciences, technology and evolutionary psychology. Infect their universities, schools, networks, and political movements. People should see traditional Catholics as the crowd that won't accept second-best, in anything, ever. It's the opposite of Dreher's "Benedict Option"--it's learning that you roll with the punches precisely to get into a position to punch right back.
But do accept that aridity is something we will have to joyfully live with, like, as Francis analogizes, those Japanese Catholics who kept home churches going for centuries without the Mass or priests. Until you prevail. The insipid and buffoonish will fade away: they'll go chase after something else, their morale will evaporate when their kids say to hell with church, etc.--but most of all they're going to just die out without offspring--leaving you in charge.
-TMFKS
Infect their universities, schools, networks, and political movements. People should see traditional Catholics as the crowd that won't accept second-best, in anything, ever.
DeleteDefinitely a good strategy, and the only one possible, really. It does depend on the kid as far as universities go. My God-son is a student at NYU studying film-making. Brilliant guy; oldest of 9 kids. Every other dude their is gay and there is a high level of drug use. He's active in Opus Dei and is not a partier. He could have had full scholarships to all these Catholic schools, but they were nowhere for film. He already has made a number of amateur and semi-pro film shorts, and has worked on graphics and 3D rendering on large projects. He's the type of guy you want to have out in the world being leaven in the culture.
Indeed. Godspeed to your godson. Francis' remark about mediocrity made me think that, while as a Jesuit he's not going to show much verbal support for OD, on some level he is aware and approving of this aspect of Escrivan spirituality: rejecting survivalist compounds of Catholicism, and instead embracing the pursuit of excellence in worldly institutions.
Delete-TMFKS
Right. Fortunately OD has never needed verbal support to thrive.
DeleteGreat idea, TMFKS, except the vast majority o catholics I know are real happy with things the way they are. They totally dig Father Happy Birthday and think he's a great guy. They want their relationship to God to mean never having to say their sorry. HALF OF THE CHURCHGOERS VOTED FOR BARRY. I know the two priests who say my masses voted for him. At my daughter's baptism, when the deacon blessed her (again in my hometown) he announced to the congregation "This one has cleavage!" She was 8 months old. It's beyond scandal.
DeleteThere are maybe what, ten dioceses in america that self-identify as at all conservative? You guys sound like you're whistling in the wind.
DeleteMaybe your animosity toward Dreher has gotten the best of you. The guy isn't *wrong about everything all the time*.
Deleteand ironically, you guys sound like you're advising me to do what Dreher has already done, i.e. fashion myself as a "spiritual entrepreneur", just don't make it official and actually leave.
DeleteThen again, I only have two kids, I guess my family isn't "big and brilliant" enough. Honestly, listen to yourselves.
Delete"Trads have to understand it has to be brick-by-brick, from the bottom up. It was never going to be from the top down." In that case why not go sedevacantist? Because every brick I'm building, and that was built by my elders, is being actively dismantled by a liberal clergy working at cross purposes. Believe it. And Francis is hardly helping.
Deletesorry i keep thinking of new things to say. but if joyfully accepting aridity is so effortless for you all, then can we agree Francis ain't all that as a leader? He's not a good communicator. He could well do further damage to a church that is already reeling. It's all very well to acknowledge aridity at the parish level but to simultaneously pretend all is fantastic at the very top in Rome, well, I'm not buying it. The Vatican is already heavily compromised and this guy is not going to carry a big stick.
DeleteKathleen, the vast majority of saints have lived and fought for the faith in eras when 90% of the church rank-and-file were lukewarm fish. In other words, every point in human history. Of course they like Fr. Happy Birthday. And of course maybe a dozen dioceses are "conservative".
DeleteBut I'm not trying to be flippant when I say "so what?" Honestly. God promised to preserve the church. He never promised numerical increase or majorities in your place and in your time. Say for purposes of argument that in Anno Domini 2013 in the US of A that maybe 15% of Catholics are truly "with the program". The rest, the happy-clappies? Over the rest of your natural life it is inevitable: either they will leave the Church, defect to the culture of death, literally die, and (in some cases at least for a couple of decades) go to various Christian sects, whatever remains of mainstream Protestantism or of Bible Christianity. Offsetting that is the fact that traditionals will be averaging 4-5 children per family.
Kathleen, when we are old and gray the US Catholic population will I think be more like just a fraction under 10%--but that one-tenth will be a ROCK SOLID FULCRUM upon which the world can be transformed.
-TMFKS
And why not go sedevacantist? Because that just concedes the battle to those who say your Catholic Faith depends on the hierarchy. Don't, and instead listen to St. John Paul of Wadowice: "Secularity is the true and distinctive mark of the layperson and of lay spirituality, which means that the laity strive to evangelize the various sectors of family, social, professional, and cultural life America needs lay Christians able to assume roles of leadership in society. It is urgent to train men and women who, in keeping with their vocation, can influence public life and direct it to the common good."
DeleteLet Dreher make it all about gay priests, careerist bishops or pontiffs who speak off the cuff. That's his schtick; it's all he'll ever be able to conceptualize Catholic Christianity about. But we can do better. If we just complain about the Fr. Happybirthdays at St. Barry's we're really on the same mental frequency as the Womanpriest crowd: not understanding that the primary mission is be and bring Christ to the world where we find ourselves and not a question of participating in the "power" of the hierarchy.
-TMFKS
PS. If a deacon (permanent or temporary) had made that comment at a baptism in our parish, a contingent of the husbands and fathers would have slammed that guy's head against a brick wall five minutes after he changed to street clothes in the sacristy. Accidents happen.
Delete-TMFKS
Kathleen, I concur with TMFKS re the deacon's cleavage crack. Moreover, that's the sort of thing that really should be reported to the bishop. And yes, I think the bishop would listen. In this hyper-sensitive climate, in the wake of huge lawsuit payouts....yikes!!!
DeleteRe your parish: What about the daily Mass crowd? In my experience, even the most liberal / lukewarm parishes have a little contingent of faithful -- who comprise sort of a community within the community -- with whom one can find satisfying fellowship. Quite often these are the folks who attend daily Mass...and after Mass, they often stay to chat, either outdoors or in, so you get to know them. Some are eccentric as all get-out, but most are just ordinary people, including moms like you.
TMFKS, you are assuming that the church pews are filled with male catholics who have some testosterone. They are not. Neither are the rectories. Neither is St. Peter's. That's my point.
DeleteYou guys aren't getting my larger point. Francis is a problem. Stop whitewashing the guy. It's lame, and it's what they are doing over at Patheos and America magazine. Francis is part of the problem.
And if Dreher criticizes him, points for Dreher. Even a stopped clock...
DeleteMan from K, you forgot one other alternative for your happy-clappies: they listen over the years, and eventually their faith strengthens. Patience. God works in many ways.
DeleteMeanwhile, we should pray for our priests and clergy, that they may have the strength and love to lead us.
P.S. We've got testosterone in our parish. Easy for me to say -- I just got back from our annual parish men's club golf & fishing weekend in east TX.
bully for you. You sound very self-satisfied. all is well, eh?
DeleteFrankly, if you are this intent on casting Dreher in the worst light possible, ignoring the many elephants in the room to do so, and discounting my experience of the church while you're at it, I think you are the ones with spiritual issues. and I can guarantee you you would not have beat up the Deacon after my daughter's baptism mass. So spare me.
DeleteCan't we respectfully disagree that Francis is a problem? So far, he has actually taken some strict disciplinarian actions that rather belie this media image of the big fuzzy teddy-bear -- e.g., squelching a priest who was pushing publicly for gay marriage. There's also a rumor that the Vatican will bar Nancy Pelosi from Communion. Even Benedict never did that.
DeleteMaybe, just maybe, we're disagreeing with Dreher about Francis because we, well, disagree with Dreher about Francis. ;)
Also, Kathleen...when we first moved to our current home 23 years ago, our little hippy-dippy mission parish was by far the most liberal in the vicariate. Oh the horror stories I could tell! And yes, it was very discouraging. But, even then, there was this little core of people who shared our interest in a deeper Catholic identity and devotional life. And this was a teeny congregation. Surely, in a much larger congregation, you can find a few kindred spirits...? All it takes is a few. Then you can meet at each other's homes for prayer or Bible study and coffee or whatever....
DeleteI'm primarily interested in the mass, thank you. By the way the dioceses I live in and have lived in are among biggest in the country. I'm glad things are peachy in the south, but try going to the typical northeast and/or central midwest parish and then get back to me. I've also been to awful churches in the famed Diocese of Arlington. But I'll take your word for it that the South is teeming with birettas and manly men who beat up deacons.
Delete... because of Pope Francis.
DeleteYou sound very self-satisfied. all is well, eh?
DeleteHow little you know.
Kathleen, I've been to many northern parishes. In fact, in summer 2012 we made an extended trip back to our old stomping grounds and attended several Masses in Vermont. They were kind of depressing because they were consolidated parishes (because of the sex-abuse payouts), but they weren't off-the-wall heretical or anything.
DeleteI'm not at all trying to discount your experiences. I've had very similar experiences on many occasions. But why not see Sunday Mass attendance as a purgatorial offer-it-up kind of opportunity? I mean, it's only one hour. For the rest of your spiritual life...well, there's daily Mass, fellowship with Catholic friends, Rosary prayer groups, the "Domestic Church," etc.
And BTW...I grew up before VCII, and there was plenty of aridity then, too. It just took different forms. (Amazing how fast a priest could zip through a Latin Mass...seriously.) And that was way, way before Francis.
Pauli: "…what he must be doing to his own soul."
DeleteI can't look inside his heart, but if I go strictly by what he writes, I have to wonder sometimes. And I am also now arriving at the conclusion that it is probably better that I not know, and the less I say the better.
Although as a reader, I can draw some conclusions about the quality of the writing: at best, RD is a mediocre writer, and someone who should not be regarded as any sort of serious thinker.
I entirely agree with the substance of what Pikkumatti has said in a different thread: "…it does no good whatsoever for anyone to take seriously the substance of what he is saying.…the only thing that matters to him is that he is saying it…"
Obviously I offer it up, I go to mass every week. You are not understanding my point: don't tell me it's normal that the church is screwed up, we survived the Borgia Popes etc., but in the same breath tell me that Francis is the greatest thing going. Francis is bad news. Dreher was right about that. I'm not looking for advice about my domestic church or my social life or whether my husband should have beat up a deacon (he would have loved to but I wouldn't have let him FYI). I'm pointing out to YOU GUYS that YOU GUYS are being inconsistent. There is no reason to insist that Francis is top notch other than proving Dreher wrong on absolutely every point the man makes, and that's absurd. and it makes htis blog look foolish.
DeleteHow little I know? Well, then enlighten me, Pikkumatti. But that would concede some points to Dreher maybe, and you wouldn't want to do that at any cost? I don't understand your little passive aggressive point there.
Delete"And why not go sedevacantist? Because that just concedes the battle to those who say your Catholic Faith depends on the hierarchy." It does depend on the hierarchy because I need mass to be said, and by someone who believes in God and acts like it.
DeleteGood grief, Kathleen. I don't know whether Francis is "topnotch," but why can't I sincerely think he's a lot better than you think he is? Am I not entitled to my own opinion? I'm not just trying to score points against Dreher. I sincerely like this pope, OK?
DeleteI've had happy-clappy hippy-dippy pastors, too-- one of them for 14 years. There are "workarounds," if you will. Also...Father Happy-Clappy was a hell of a lot more pastoral than his more orthodox successor. I prefer pastors who are both strictly orthodox and pastoral, but if I have to choose between the two, I almost think I'd pick pastoral. Father Biretta is no prize if he's meaner than a rattlesnake. Yes, been there, too.
As the infidel around these parts who has absolutely no business commenting on this thread at all let me offer two observations nonetheless.
DeleteNumber one, I'd much prefer to read about what's both wrong and right about Francis from Kathleen and Diane and others here rather than from that manipulative weasel Dreher (PRW-O), because history tells me they're going to be far more honest intellectually and certain not to turn the matter into a narcissistic, therapeutic self-embrace.
Number Two, unless you're talking about Catholicism in Argentina on Francis' watch, pretty much every thing right or wrong you find with the Church happened under some previous Pope. Francis has only been Pope for 206 days, since March 13. Plenty of time for misgivings about the future, of course, but just not a whole lot of room for much historical evidence yet.
Keith
Wait, Keith is an infidel? I thought he was a heretic. That's an *entirely* different novena!
Deletekathleen, you don't know me well enough to call me "self-satisfied". That's what I meant.
DeleteNor do I see how you came to that conclusion from my comment above, but I guess you did. I can't help that.
As far as Dreher goes, I've not commented one way or the other on whether what he said is right or wrong. Oengus succinctly summarizes my thoughts on him above, so no need to rehash.
Hope that helps.
Only Pope since March 13 and the confusion he has created already is significant. Now we have Obama chiming in saying he's impressed with Francis. if you think that's awesome news for the church, you're deluded. I'm not going to go into reasons why I'm not happy with Francis, you can find that in multiple places on the web. But don't get happy-clappy about Francis just to score points against Dreher. This blog may already be said to flirt with obsession and petulance by those who don't read it closely. If Dreher makes a good point I'm going to hand it to him, and I suggest you do the same. And as an aside, open speculation about whether or not the man was ever molested by an older male relative is, in my opinion, WAY beyond the pale.
Deletein sum, COOL IT.
DeletePikkumatti, I said you "sounded" self-satisfied. and you did.
DeleteBut don't get happy-clappy about Francis just to score points against Dreher.
DeleteYou keep accusing us of this. But your accusation is unfair. I for one am NOT trying to score points against Dreher. I'm just personally getting tired of all the Utra-Trad Francis-bashing, most of which is grossly unfair and inaccurate IMHO.
Good grief. Can't we agree to disagree?
huh? I'm not "ultra-trad", not by a longshot. when you stop bastardizing my position maybe I'll be more receptive to yours, but it's going to have to be better than "I heard he might ban Nancy Pelosi from communion."
Deletelet me ask you, Diane: do you think it's a good thing that Obama appreciates the communiques from Francis? do you think that is good for the church? Because if so, the burden of proof is on you, big time.
DeleteBy the way, I feel compelled to say this, since TMFKS claims beating up errant deacons is the mark of a manly catholic: had my husband chosen to beat that guy up, he would have rightly kicked ass. The man is lethal.
DeleteKathleen, I didn't say you were ultra-trad; I didn't mean that at all, and I'm sorry if I gave that impression. I was speaking generally. All these ultra-trads out there are bashing Francis, and I am getting tired of it. That was my only meaning. Sorry if I was unclear.
DeleteIf Obama likes Francis, it's no doubt because he has misunderstood him. And yes, Francis could make himself clearer. (Although, as Father Z points out, sometimes he is just badly translated -- Father Z cited an example where the original Italian didn't say anything remotely like the English translation...and how can any pope guarantee that won't happen? The pope can't control the media's translation bureaus.)
But anyhoo...don't you thunk plenty of other popes have been misunderstood? Remember when JPII kissed the Qu'ran? Some people still won't let us live that down.
Look...I'm not trying to be difficult. Obviously we disagree. Isn't it OK for Catholics to disagree sometimes? I mean, we're not talking about a tenet of the Faith here. We're talking about something that it's OK to disagree about.
But you haven't persuaded me with any evidence. A Pope that's open to misinterpretation is a big problem for me. The man is a fuzzy thinker and a fuzzier communicator. that's essentially what Dreher said, and I have to agree with him on that point. In the meantime, having my extremely angst ridden church experience dismissed so casually is pretty damn infuriating. Don't give me the "it's all good" crap. It's not even acceptable.
DeleteWOW. From Father Z's combox, two amazing comments.
ReplyDeleteFirst:
Personally I do not get Francis’ emphasis on mercy, mercy, mercy.
That's the quote I alluded to above. It just blows my mind. Saint Faustina, call your office.
Then there's this:
Here’s a twist: I returned to the Catholic Church this past Holy Week, after eighteen years away … most if it in Orthodoxy (the OCA, actually). While Rod Dreher’s general critique of AmChurch is on the money, the Evangelicals, mainline Protestants and the Orthodox STILL carefully fly under the radar of serious media scrutiny regarding clerical sexual abuse. Six years ago my wife and I lost our young adult son to suicide following clergy sexual abuse at a prominent Orthodox seminary. Though the faculty member/married priest perpetrator was deposed – I still left the Orthodox Church raging at the widespread callousness and credulous denial. It was only Jesus Christ’s mercy that eventually saved us from unrelenting despair and bitterness. That same faith led me back to the Catholic Church I joined as a young man & my wife to resume active practice of her life-long faith. (After all, where else were we going to pray for our boy’s soul?)
If WE can return to the Church anybody can!
in Our Lady’s Son,
John Iliff
John Iliff is the father of Eric Iliff, who was repeatedly abused while at Saint Vladimir's Orthodox Seminary; he later took his own life. To date, as far as I know, Dreher has not said WORD ONE about this horrible tragedy.
Re the mercy, mercy, mercy, I suppose if we're cutting the Pope some slack as a bridge-builder (in Latin, pontifex) to those outside the Church, we ought to cut Fr. Z some slack as a bridge-builder to those in the Church belfry.
DeleteNot everyone will cross the bridge, of course, but the good shepherd goes after the one sheep, etc.
Hi, Tom! It was a comboxer, not Father Z, who made the "mercy mercy mercy" comment. Sorry for any confusion!
DeleteI could see this comboxer's point if the pope were saying, "You don't need to repent. I affirm you in your OK-ness!" But Pope Francis has never said that AFAIK. In fact, he has said just the opposite. Soooo....I don't get this comboxer's objection to Divine Mercy.
Saint Faustina's Diary brought me back to the Church. The whole notion of Christ's fathomless mercy is really important to me. I know -- and so does the pope -- that it doesn't mean license to sin. But, as Our Lord told Faustina, it is His greatest attribute.
Diane, yes, I'd read the comment last night.
DeleteI've long thought that, while Fr. Z is not himself barking mad, he is an enabler of many who are. But perhaps the better view is that he is the thin lace thread that keeps some of our brothers and sisters attached to the Church. In which case, who am I to judge?
St. Faustina is one of my patron saints (as are my guardian angel and St. Francis; I'll be pounding down the donuts this week!). I'm cool with Divine Mercy, though I'd want to distinguish between Our Lord's greatest attribute in absolute terms and in relative terms (St. Thomas Aquinas is another patron).
Great points, Tom. Sorry if I misunderstood you!
DeleteI'm not going to go into reasons why I'm not happy with Francis, you can find that in multiple places on the web.
ReplyDeleteThat's your call, of course, Kathleen, but if you delegate talking about your faith to others, including Dreher, Dreher and others like him are going to take up that delegation and appoint themselves your public spokesmen on matters you don't agree with as well as those you do, and Time and other outlets and their readers that don't know any better will continue to take their word for it as if it were yours.
And at that point, why shouldn't they?
Keith
Yeah right, Keith, I'll take that under advisement. are you even catholic? Because if not, pipe down. You have no idea what I'm up against, in part thanks to my fellow travelers who also wish to dismiss what is before their very eyes. Dreher is one wacky guy and he doesn't keep me up at night. I'll take my chances, thanks.
Deletehttp://the-american-catholic.com/2013/10/08/popewatch-vox-populi-vox-humbug/#more-49074
ReplyDelete