
I was surprised by a recent piece of extended commentary in La Civiltà Cattolica, the Jesuit newspaper that functions as a quasi-official mouthpiece for the Vatican.
Written by the editor in chief, Jesuit Father Antonio Spadaro, and Argentinean edition editor Rev. Marcelo Figueroa, “Evangelical Fundamentalism and Catholic Integralism in the USA: A Surprising Ecumenism” is a collection of uninformed assertions spiced with malice. It argues that Protestant and Catholic support for American conservatism amounts to an “ecumenism of hate.”
It’s hard to take this seriously. Father Spadaro and Figueroa seem to know very little about the history of religion and politics in the United States. For instance, they say “religion has had a more incisive role in the electoral process and government decisions over recent decades, especially in some U.S. governments.” This is wrong. The great reform movements in our history — abolition, prohibition and civil rights — have been motivated and articulated in explicitly Christian terms. Princes of the Church, such as Cardinals Mundelein and Spellman, were frequent guests at Franklin Roosevelt’s White House.
If anything, religion exercises less political influence today than in the past. For 100 years, every mayoral candidate in Boston had to kiss the cardinal’s ring if he hoped to be elected. Today, Cardinal Sean O’Malley is largely irrelevant to Boston city politics.
Father Spadaro and Figueroa also seem to know very little about American Protestantism. They insinuate that all conservative Protestants are fundamentalists. They claim that Calvinist philosopher R.J. Rushdoony (1916-2001) exercises wide influence. In fact, he was an interesting but obscure figure who gained no significant following.
They demonstrate their ignorance of his work by implying that he encouraged an “apocalyptic geopolitics,” when, in fact, his form of Biblicism was post-millennial, a view of end times associated with gradual reform rather than conflict and cataclysm.
They insist upon the significance of Norman Vincent Peale, an anodyne and mostly forgotten figure from the mid-20th century who repackaged therapeutic self-affirmation in vague Christian terms.
About Catholicism in America, Father Spadaro and Figueroa have less to say, but they zero in on “Catholic Integralists,” who they suggest are taking orders from “Church Militant” (an obscure website).
These Catholics, we are told, join forces with “evangelical fundamentalists” in order to gain “religious influence in the political sphere.” They use “fear” to motivate “value voters” and advocate a “spiritual war.” All of this serves “the nostalgic dream of a theocratic type of state.”
This analysis is so slapdash that I find myself scratching my head. In some places the contradictions are patent. Father Spadaro and Figueroa condemn George W. Bush for promoting “political Manicheanism.” Meanwhile, the entire commentary is laced with dualistic caricatures — the “ecumenism of hate” versus Pope Francis’ ecumenism of “inclusion, peace, encounter and bridges.”
The authors say that “religions cannot consider some people as sworn enemies and others as eternal friends.” Yet Steve Bannon is denounced by name, as are Bush and Donald Trump.
The contradictions can be quite damning. Father Spadaro and Figueroa tell us that “the religious element should never be confused with the political one.” An important warning, to be sure, but the entire purpose of the article is to use their roles as close associates of Pope Francis to lend religious credence and authority to what is transparently an attack on American conservatism and its influence, not just in the United States, but globally. And there’s a sad predictability to singling out Bannon, Bush and Trump. That trio is almost always part of today’s progressive litany of “Evil Ones.”
The contradictions in “Evangelical Fundamentalism and Catholic Integralism” reflect the Francis papacy fairly accurately. The Holy Father tends to meet his critics with Manichean caricatures.
Those who worry about the doctrinal coherence of allowing divorced-and-remarried people to receive Communion are addressed as Pharisees. Those who advocate prudent limits on immigration are ideologues of “exclusion.”
As Father Spadaro and Figueroa report, “Francis wants to break the organic link between culture, politics, institution and Church.” That’s all well and good, but in the contemporary political culture of the West, the rhetoric of “inclusion” and accusations of “fundamentalism” that come in shotgun blasts immediately ally one with an aggressive cultural progressivism that uses political power to achieve its ends.
It’s an illusion to imagine that this papacy is detaching the Catholic faith from partisan politics when its semi-official spokesmen harrumph that the true faith does not “build barrier-fences crowned with barbed wire.” Such language is not a sober statement of principle. It is a partisan intervention into the debate about immigration that is roiling politics throughout the West.
In addition to contradictions and self-deceptions, “Evangelical Fundamentalism and Catholic Integralism” manifests an unfortunate authoritarianism. Father Spadaro and Figueroa create an atmosphere of condemnation, and they do so while insulating themselves from any responsibility for the truth of the matters they discuss.
For example, I’m not sure if Father Spadaro and Figueroa are attacking First Things, the magazine I edit. Our founder, Father Richard John Neuhaus, believed that we should be light and salt in society, speaking in the public square with an unashamedly religious voice. One of our goals is to renew the moral and religious consensus in the United States, which we believe is necessary for a healthy society capable of democratic self-government and resistant to consumer culture. In that sense, we certainly seek more “religious influence in the political sphere.”
Does that make First Things an organ of the wicked “Catholic Integralists,” those who “profess themselves in ways that until recently were unknown in their tradition and using tones much closer to evangelicals”?
As a Catholic, am I supposed to repent and bring myself and First Things into conformity with Pope Francis’ teaching on the role of religion in public life? Does the initiative Evangelicals and Catholics Together promote an “ecumenism of hate”? Should it be disbanded?
The atmosphere of condemnation raises these questions. But nothing clear is stated. In fact, I suspect the careless approach Father Spadaro and Figueroa take is deliberate. The dog’s breakfast of assertions sets a tone, but does so without the inconvenience of articulating a position that must be defended.
As a consequence, other agents and emissaries can attack First Things as anti-Catholic, while at the same time insulating this papacy from responsibility for defining and applying fundamental principles that can be analyzed, assessed and criticized in light of the larger tradition of Catholic social doctrine.
I’ve never been tempted by ultramontanism, the exaggerated emphasis on papal pronouncements in Catholic life, and so I have no spiritual difficulty dismissing the particular charges leveled in “Evangelical Fundamentalism and Catholic Integralism.” But the larger implication of this effusion from two intimates of Pope Francis dismays me.
Like the article, the Francis papacy runs on exaggerated rhetoric rather than clear and informed analysis. Instead of relying on the disciplined language of tradition, Pope Francis, too, often bandies about the clichés of our time. This cannot help but make him sound like a partisan in today’s culture clashes.
And Father Spadaro and Figueroa clarify the way in which this papacy traffics in a method of authoritarian manipulation that will be, over time, widely demoralizing, because it casts judgments without clarity and implies punishments without accountability.
What precisely is Pope Francis’ teaching on the role of religion in public life? Does the turn to a more “pastoral” approach mean bishops should now refrain from teaching about sexual morality? Is it now wrong to pronounce the marital bond indissoluble, or to regard certain acts as intrinsically disordered? Is one even permitted to ask the Pope these and other questions?
I’m sorry to draw these unhappy conclusions, but one must face reality. Exaggerated but diffuse denunciations create an atmosphere of intimidation that refuses to take magisterial responsibility. We’re in for a rough ride.
R.R. Reno is the editor of First Things magazine.
The central thesis of the Fr. Spdaro article is accurate. Daily, the comments on this website confirm it:
“However, the most dangerous prospect for this strange ecumenism is attributable to its xenophobic and Islamophobic vision that wants walls and purifying deportations.”
The reflexive dismissal of the Pope among professed Catholics is really striking.
Do you wonder that Almighty God is keeping Blessed Pope Benedict in the wings? He has not yet fulfilled is earthly purpose.
Ruth Ruhl-LaMusga
It’s often comical to read about how evil America is. If America is so evil, then why are millions of illegal and legal immigrants trying to get into America each year? And, why does America have the lowest poverty rate in the world? Also, why do Americans repeatedly offer the most financial help in time of natural disasters in foreign countries?
I conclude that America and its citizens are great.
I don’t think many Americans are trying to get into Mexico illegally.
http://www.catholicworldreport.com/2016/10/13/fake-catholic-groups-and-the-catholic-spring-emails/
“Page 117, of the pope’s book, On Heaven and Earth, in regards to same-sex unions
“If there is a union of a PRIVATE NATURE, THERE IS NEITHER A THIRD PARTY NOR IS SOCIETY AFFECTED. Now, if this union is given the category of marriage and they are given adoption rights, there could be children affected. Every person needs a male father and female mother that can help them shape their identity. - Jorge Mario Bergoglio
Approval of same-sex sexual unions is approval of same-sex sexual acts.
Prior to being elected pope, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, by condoning same-sex sexual acts in relationships that he referred to as private, did not include children, and were not called marriage, denied the Sanctity of the marital act. To deny the Sanctity of the marital act, is to deny that God, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Is The Author of Love, of Life, and of Marriage, and thus deny Salvational Love, God’s Gift of Grace and Mercy. To deny The Divinity of The Blessed Trinity, is an act of apostasy.
A Catholic knows through both Faith and reason that there is no such thing as a “private” relationship. It is Through, With, and In Christ, in the Unity of The Holy Ghost, that Holy Mother Church exists.
“4There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.”
“675 Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers.574 The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth575 will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh.576”
A world without borders, without national and local sovereignty, does not preserve culture or traditional religious values, nor does it result in a world that is a “mosaic”, a phrase I heard Pope Francis use in describing the world. Globalism does not accomplish this either. A large part of globalism is “free trade”. The problem with free trade is that you can’t have it without losing some national and local sovereignty to international bodies, it causes nations to overspecialize in their economies, and it creates a lot of volatility in the jobs market because international companies can pack up and move to other nations when it suits them. I am for free enterprise with reasonable national and local regulations within our nation, but it stops at the border. With other nations we should have limited bilateral trade agreements, mutually beneficial to both nations, which preserve the diverse jobs base our country needs.
When many non Catholic are asking if the Catholic Church really is catholic, we should be alerted.
All these innumerable attacks FROM WITHIN the Church are getting ever more aggressive. Some call the attacks “DIABOLICAL”.
May I add, the Word of God, Christ Himself, is being brought into line, fused into this new political, social engineering and modernistic progressive Catholicism. I read recently a statement from an Argentinian intellectual who wrote that to understand Pope Francis better one should read about Peron and Peron`s political, social philosophy.
Fr Spadaro`s article reveals, in my opinion, a lot of contradictions. His Ecumenism of Hate describes more the alliance of political progressivism with the emerging Catholic progressivism of this present particular pontificate. The name calling, using all sorts of labels, without any reasonable factual evidence or context is but one example. Christianity is being bent to fit into this political, philosophical and social doctrine of what I would describe as militant modernistic progressivism. It was spawned from the Enlightenment movement that was very much part of the Masonic lodges and which is very representative of masonic philosophy which has become global in character and influence. People like George Soros, the atheistic journalist and publicly acknowledged freemason Francis prefers to chat with and give personal interviews receive more kinship from this Pontificate than do people like the Dubia Cardinals, traditionalist communities, three dismissed CDF priests etc, even so called stiff altar boys. The whole Spadaro article is representative of this new militant post modern progressive Catholicism.
Modern false accusers have taken a step beyond all bounds of facts and logic. When an accuser says you’ve done something that you didn’t actually do, facts can defend you. But when you’re accused of holding views that don’t exist at all, or doing something that is physically impossible, there’s no proper defense.
Spadaro has gone beyond the classic “When did you stop beating your wife?” He’s more like “When did you stop x4t2nzing your mqxtnprite?” You then protest “But I never x4t2nzed my mqxtnprite because those things are nonsense!” And Spadaro can then riposte “Well, show us the tapes of a time when you were NOT x4t2nzing your mqxtnprite.” And you can’t show those tapes.
When Mary appeared at Fatima she warned that Russia’s errors would spread around the world. That prophecy was fulfilled in Communist Russia and the spread of atheistic Socialism. Russia is no longer Communist, but Europe as a whole is following a form of Socialism that is atheistic, or at the very least, unfriendly to traditional religious values. These “errors” are what religion-minded Conservatives in America are fighting against. Our government may be secular, but it should never support or allow abortion, nor should it prevent people from exercising their religious freedom and freedom of conscience. Furthermore, Capitalism is a tool that with reasonable regulations can and will provide the jobs that will provide the people the dignity to provide for their needs. Socialism has not done a very good job at that and while some of their goals may be noble it usually takes Conservative principles to make even their programs work.
Carl Kuss, Thursday, Jul, 20, 2017 5:45 PM (EDT):
“The unholy alliance of Christianity with Capitalism”
The confusion and ignorance of this poster never ends.
Perhaps the fact of the development of the economic laws of free enterprise that owe so much to the Catholic Late Scholastics, and endorsed by St John Paul II as a development in social teaching, is unknown to him. Free enterprise, like everything else, works best when those who engage in it observe the natural moral law and the precepts of the Catholic Church. No other economic system has ever enabled such a creation and distribution of wealth as has occurred since its development.
The great Pope St John Paul II in “Centesimus Annus”, 1991, #42:
If by “capitalism” is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”.
Without the great contribution of the Industrial Revolution, sparked by Catholic economic and social thought and action in the West, we would still be eking out an existence as before that development. Catholic teaching, especially social teaching outlines the morality of this interaction.
Over twelve million bucks to help refugees raised by the US KC’s and this is the thanks from Father Spadaro and Figueroa ???
Raakhee, Points of clarification. When you say, “Muslims do believe Allah (swt) will be glorified when Europe adopts His law.” Do you mean Sharia law? And would you say the same thing about America? When you say, “I believe the Church is trying to compensate for financial losses from parish and school closures with refugee services.”, particularly when you say financial losses from “school closures” you are speaking about Europe?? Here in the states Catholic Schools are not funded by the state, thus very expensive. They are never money making propositions for the Church- never have been! “Compensating for financial losses—with refugee services.” Are you speaking of government money going to the Church to support refugee services—or are you speaking of hard earned money from Catholic people going to support refugees who have been driven from their homes? Here in the United States, the Knights of Columbus, a charitable organization, has given millions of dollars to help refugees. The money comes from the pockets of individual Catholics.
There is no doubt that the Vatican from the top is rapidly moving to the “progressive” left. If you research the history of Francis before his election and look at his appointments over the past several years it becomes clear
what his agenda is. Most of his key appointments are “progressive” cardinals from the third world. He is simply “stacking the deck ” in anticipation of making
changes that cater to the liberal left minions. GOD HELP US ALL !!!!!
I can’t believe Carl Kuss can write “Father Spadaro’s solid and deep analysis” with a straight face. But one suspects he hardly read Fr Spadaro’s rant. He merely appreciates the fact that it rants against people he cordially despises, too.
In my opinion the Author is exaggerating. If someone points to a problem, that person exasperates the problem because that problem does not exist: that’s a corrupt answer, a corrupt method that satisfies those who want to impose their own ideas at all times. And saying: “Does the turn to a more “pastoral” approach mean bishops should now refrain from teaching about sexual morality? Is it now wrong to pronounce the marital bond indissoluble, or to regard certain acts as intrinsically disordered? Is one even permitted to ask the Pope these and other questions?” is a exaggerated way to present some questions.
I believe one must interpret this article also as part of Pope Francis’ effort to foster immigration to the West. It’s interesting that this has come out around the same time as Pope Francis’ requested interview with Eugenio Scalfari at La Repubblica, the one in which he accused America of having a distorted view of the world in the context of refugees and Islam.
I am not Christian myself, but I believe the Church is trying to compensate for financial losses from parish and school closures with refugee services. That is wonderful, but I don’t have confidence in your leaders that they see Islam clearly. I have the impression they have a paternal, condescending attitude to Islam, and do not realize that Muslims do believe Allah (swt) will be glorified when Europe adopts His law. Muslims believe Islam with the same strength as Catholics do their religion.
May the God of all humanity guide us to peace!
Interesting that they characterize efforts to protect the unborn as hate. Tells us plenty about the kind of men they are.
If anything is “deeply connected” with anything it is the Legion’s connection with its criminal, deceitful, pervert founder.
When your formation is based upon the thoughts and example of this monster, well, you get what you get and the LC priest here is a perfect example.
God Bless Holy Benedict.
El Diablo is surely laughing himself silly today!
In his repeated letters to our local papers, a Democratic Party supporter used Francis’s words to attack our Evangelical neighbors as “Hypocrites”, “hateful” “money hungry” etc. for their voting for Trump in large numbers. I mean this attack was really vile and uncalled for. I wrote a letter to Francis informing him of this. I pointed out the deep divisions within the Church and, frankly, his bad will toward faithful bishops and Cardinals- now deemed, “rigorists” for their principled stands on a number of things. I did not receive a reply. This thing by Father Spadaro and Figueroa gives support to those who say these things. What Spadaro and Figueroa don’t seem to realize most of us who voted for Trump-including the Evangelicala, did so on the basis of our consciences. We were not left with much of a choice. I struggled with the idea of sitting out the election but realized that if enough people did that Clinton would inevitably be our president. As much as I disliked Trump- and I still do, I could not force myself to do other than to vote for Trump.
Carl Kuss, L.C: I disagree with your statement of “this unholy alliance with Capitalism”. The west does not have unbridled Capitalism, although we had a taste in 2008, when Lehman Brothers collapsed. The government has legislation in place to protect people, but you could argue that their should be more control and enforcement. I’m surprised at the increasing acceptance of socialism among the youth. Jordan Peterson, a professor from U of T, has become famous by standing up to “Post-Modern Neo-Marxist”; and has clearly articulated the dangers (YouTube), and how the humanities in todays universities are handing out useless degrees, and creating an atmosphere detrimental to society, that will ultimately cause its collapse. Capitalism may be today’s Evil Vilan, but don’t forget “Gulag Archipelago” and the warnings by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, because the Neo-Marxist’s are back with a vengeance.
May I add the Vatican intrusion and some say persecution of some Traditional Orders involved the attempted seizure of their assets and likewise in the Malta controversy a large amount of money, millions, in a donation was part of the problem. The Vatican, in the person of Francis, was doubly quick to poke its nose in where it had no business or rights. What shocks me is the insulting and intolerant attitudes towards some of these traditional communities yet not so to their assets and monies and this amid reported lavish living and surroundings of some in the Vatican. We then have to listen to this relentless tirade of the bible of the poor which I believe is disingenuous and a mask for the real agenda at hand. The poor need to be helped but not used.
I believe one is a Christian first and capitalism, socialism or whatever is shaped by ones Christianity. To focus exclusively on the needs of the poor at the expense of the spiritual human need is a betrayal of Christianity. I came from a material impoverished upbringing yet knew happiness and joy because of my Christian heritage. I saw rich people residing in my neighbourhood and was saddened by how some of them lacked that peace and joy I thought was a natural part of life. I also saw fellow poor people squander foolishly what they had because of their spiritual poverty. The rich need Christ as much as the poor. The poor need Christ before all else. To have Christ is everything and all else follows. Distorting the teaching of Christ in the name of poverty is a betrayal and insult to the poor and downtrodden. The so called progressives in the church, I believe, use this banter as propaganda in the cause of their own agenda. I read last years Peters Pence amounted to 400 million and not a penny of it went outside the Curia. Some commentators are saying that the so called progressives outside the church are helping the progressives inside the church by fixing it that Cardinal Pell stand trial to remove him from the Vatican Bank controversy where a lay person appointed has already resigned. The cocaine fuelled gay sex orgy maybe reflects the high living of some in the Vatican. Cocaine and BMW don’t come cheap.
I am concerned that the Church is not in good hands.
We need clarity from the top, not more mixed messages from surrogates.
Thank God for such clear thinking and writing. You nailed the Spodero article for what it is and exposed it for what it is not. One aspect of the article written by Fr Spodero that is very illuminating is its unmasking of the ambiguity in the present Pontificate. If it be true that Fr Spodero reflects Francis`s thinking then here we have it in plain and awful transparency. Yet leaving that aside in focusing on the writing in this article by Fr Spodero I cant help thinking how a priest with such an academic profile could write such drivel. My first reaction was that he should go back to elementary philosophy class to get his thinking and writing in some type of order. Even allowing for it being a biased so called progressive propaganda attack against all that is not in conformity with the progressive agenda it still lacks cohesion and logic. But of course the so called progressive agenda, I believe, is devoid of sound reason, logic and honest transparency; very anti Christian.
Francis started his papacy stressing a personal call to holiness, reaching out to the poor, the marginalized, and emphasized living a a simpler life. It has now devolved into broad political themes and agendas. This does nothing to spread the gospel. He alienates further the people he calls enemies and allies with those who have no interest in holiness.
The Gospel message writ large has political implications, but the message has been lost in political maneuvering.
Fr Kuss, There you go again with the rigorism thing! Archbishop Chaput had something to say about the issues discussed in this article Link to Archbishop Chaput’s comments:
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/archbishop-chaput-civilta-cattolica-got-american-christianity-wrong-98376/
Thank you for this article!
The Church is sorely in need of a real leader.
At once shocking and revolting, the musings of Spadaro and Figueroa lift the veil on the sophomoric connivance presently exhibiting itself as a sort of power within the Church.
May the hubris that demonstrates so boldly the spiritual poverty underlying this tragedy raise its head ever more often. All the better that it be extinguished at the moment God provides.
The unholy alliance of Christianity with Capitalism (and thus with Prosperity Gospel, Theocracy, and Fundamentalism/rigorism) to which First Things (where Mr. Reno is editor) is deeply committed—inspite of its orthodox, cultured and pious demeanor—is not a figment of Father Spadaro’s imagination. These things are connected, and the fact that they are connected is witnessed to by all the squealing which Father Spadaro’s solid and deep analysis has unleashed in Right Wing America. (The fact that I dare to criticize capitalism will certainly trigger the (knee-jerk and Manichean response that being critical of Capitalism makes one a socialist, and so forth and so on, which will only further demonstrate the existence of the Manichean mechanisms of this culture of ours, and enforce the point Father Spadaro is making.) There is much to save and to value in conservative America, but the Age of Trump ought to be an age of soul-searching, or it will turn out bad.
Surprised?? Should we be surprised when Pope Francis has surrounded himself with men of this type?? “Evangelical Fundamentalism” has stood shoulder to shoulder with Catholics in defense of the Non-negotiables” as declared by Pope Benedict in Sacramentum Caritatis:
83. Here it is important to consider what the Synod Fathers described as eucharistic consistency, a quality which our lives are objectively called to embody. Worship pleasing to God can never be a purely private matter, without consequences for our relationships with others: it demands a public witness to our faith. Evidently, this is true for all the baptized, yet it is especially incumbent upon those who, by virtue of their social or political position, must make decisions regarding fundamental values, such as respect for human life, its defence from conception to natural death, the family built upon marriage between a man and a woman, the freedom to educate one’s children and the promotion of the common good in all its forms (230). These values are not negotiable. Pope Benedict XVI Sacramentum Caritatis #83
That statement declares what role Catholics should play in public life. It is Church doctrine. But Francis and his followers are not fans of Benedict or Church doctrine as we discovered in AL. Benedict who has not yet been confined to the grave, whose writings are still not totally dry is out of fashion.
By the fruits we are knowing about the current papacy. Clearly, there is something rotten in the Vatican.
Thank you R.R. Reno for this lucid rebuttal of Fr. Spadero and Rev. Figueroa’s muddled nonsense. As an ardent supporter of the pope’s emphasis on “smelling like the sheep,” I’m equally disturbed by the rhetoric from the papacy and his confidants against traditional Christian orthodoxy. Their knee jerk genuflecting to the progressive cultural zeitgeist emasculates the faith. It is challenging enough to withstand our culture’s dominant secular progressivism and its onslaught against fundamental moral truths, but utterly demoralizing when the papacy itself undercuts those who are at least fighting the tide.
This papacy has been at war with so-called “conservative” Catholics from day one. The Pope’s own language has been at least as incendiary (and ignorant) as anything in this article. We need to own up to the fact that Pope Francis and his close advisors DESPISE conservative Catholics - particularly American ones. I’ll give them one thing - it plays well with “el pueblo” - since the vast majority of Catholics (who don’t know or practice their faith with any fidelity) only know that Pope Francis is taking on the “crusty old conservatives” and the “Yanqui” imperialists. And the more pushback they get on their agenda, the more smug authoritarianism and name-calling we can expect. And by “conservative” Catholics I really mean simply anyone who took St. John Paul II and Benedict seriously. They really, truly, think that we are pharisaical monsters who do not know the Gospel. What does that tell you about what they think of St. John Paul and Benedict?
Father Spadaro and Figueroa have created an instrument of discord. They, along with the current crop of Vatican castigators, are also in the process of creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. In my parish, which is part of the unfortunate Diocese of San Diego, some of the parishioners have become increasingly distraught by not only the cobweb clouds surrounding AL, but also by our Bishop’s personal take on it, among other things. (One of his spokesmen is very fond of tossing about the “Pharisee” accusation.) The parishioners, seeking clarity and solace, were, unfortunately misdirected straight into the arms of the Church Militant. Both extremes, to my thinking, are equally vile. Both are equally destructive. Lord, make haste to help us. Lord, make haste to save us.
There is not much coverage from Rome on the recent raid of a sordid party at the Vatican either. Perhaps they should be exposing that rather than undermining those who defend Christian morality.
Bravo!
And God Bless Holy Benedict.
Sections
Home
Search




