Monday, March 23, 2015

Two weeks of penance and counting

So I visited CAEI today.  In addition to reminders about one of two radio shows and another speaking engagement, there were only a couple posts.  One, in typical fashion, repeating the MSNBC meme that the GOP is not only idiotic, but also vile and wicked as well.  In fairness, Mark like many of his readers, is a proud non-conformist and sees calling a pox down on both houses as the only acceptable Catholic position.  So Democrats get no better, though in recent years Mark has been more friendly to moderate Republicans and Democrats in a pinch.

But the post that caught my eye was his take on the story that women want to take Andrew Jackson's picture off the 20.00 bill and replace it with a feminine hero.  At the rate we're going, most will likely be women and minorities within a generation, so I guess this is the first step.  Mark mostly makes fund with it, but he drops the 'Jackson as crazy racist' that is common in progressive and non-Anglo-European, Catholic views.  That is, America was pretty much a racist, imperialist, genocidal men who were wicked and evil and devoid of much value.

I decided to play a little, and suggested that racism as a deal breaker means rethinking my statement that racism shouldn't be a strike against Chesterton's popularity contest canonization.  The results are predictable.  Of course Jackson was evil, a genocidal murderer, a tyrant, evil, a liar, dishonest, and unworthy of any regard.

The fun was watching the usual liberal stereotypes, childish responses, and hilarious attempts to remain consistent while explaining why suddenly racism may not be that big a deal, when set against American genocide.  I only took it somewhat seriously.  But it shows the absolute plummet of credibility that marks the blog, and unfortunately, a fairly large swath of Catholic apologetic media today.  But this is ground zero for the bizarre evolution, so there I will remain for a couple more weeks.


  1. You didn't link to the actual article but to the front page itself, I had to go hunt for it.

    I skimmed that tussle between you and JRoberts. Wanted to reach through the screen and slap him when I read: Phil Robertson was defending segregation and Jim Crow. That is not comparable to supporting home rule. No he wasn't, and I defy the poster to prove that.

    Here's what's even funnier in a broader perspective. Look it up in a search, and you'll see that Shea has no problems with feminism in the general (especially given that Fisher totes is one yo). Yet BOY does he have a problem with libertarianism, frequently devoting numerous posts tearing down Ann Rand. You know, as if that one person is responsible for the entire movement even though there's a diversity to it.

    But feminism? It has NUMEROUS problematic leaders & founders. In fact McCain's entire sex trouble series (linked to in that link there) pretty much proves that feminism can't work with anything like Catholicism.

    But no, Shea continues to devote far more effort tearing down libertarians, which are fewer in number, diverse enough that at least one of their branches (if not more) are perfectly compatible with Catholicism, and less politically powerful too. (I mean who shows up to protest pro-life measures?)

    It's like Evan Sayat said. It's not about thinking, it's about feeling. Which gets even more frustrating when you keep seeing Shea advocate for thinking, even as he studiously avoids the practice.

  2. Yeah, Mark is quite the feminist. Pro life, but feminist nonetheless. I've often thought he picked up on that from Simcha Fisher. She is heavily into the whole pro-life but men must grovel attitude. Many in the Catholic blogosphere are. The Church has certainly made sounds like modern feminism, except of course where female priests are concerned.

  3. BTW, JRoberts is some of the most entertaining reading on the Internet. Him, Hornorsilk, and Dan C (who hasn't been around and is hopefully OK), were the hilarious trinity. Hornorsilk is probably says the least loony things, and that is saying something. That Mark has not only not swooped in to trash them (even when they are calling for restraint against such things as gay marriage or even abortion measures), but has at times even supported them (including when Dan blasted Fr. Longenecker and Jim Akin), just shows how far from reality it is to say "Mark Shea, Conservative Catholic." I might as well say Dave Griffey, Michigan Cheering Ohio State Fan. Though that could make more sense. If only he admitted he was a post-modern pro-life liberal Catholic, I would have no problems.

  4. Hornorsilk is Simcha Fisher's husband, isn't he? (Boy what a sad, beaten-down self-flaggelator he must be)

    but has at times even supported them (including when Dan blasted Fr. Longenecker and Jim Akin)

    I'm going to go out on a limb and guess this was over the "Divorce and remarriage is adultery but hey not really" thing at the bishops conference? Did Mark actually attack the two of them (both by far his betters) as well?

    Btw, I've seen even worse on Facebook, where a friend of Mark's from his parish named Andy Simons insisted at length that the Catholic Church doesn't say that abortion is murder, and tried his hardest to spin away the evidence that anti-abortion laws reduce the number of abortions, and Mark came in to defend him in his claim about Catholic teaching and insisted that "Andy is fully pro-life."

    There was also a discussion where Mark kept insisting, repeatedly, that he "saw no evidence" that Stephen Colbert was pro-choice or pro-gay-marriage, despite people showing him clip after clip after clip of him ridiculing pro-lifers and arguments against gay marriage, shilling for partial-birth abortion, repeating Planned Parenthood talking points about "only 3%" of their services being abortion, etc.

    So, none of that stuff prevents you from being "pro-life" in Mark's book, but if you don't think that more government welfare will reduce abortion, then you are literally a baby-killer.

    IMHO? Mark isn't genuinely pro-life himself. A servant cannot serve two masters, and his master is the values of secular leftism. He supports socialist welfare for its own sake, because he is a left-wing ideologue, and not because he is truly looking for a practical means to reduce abortion. But he feels guilty about this inside, and so he rationalizes and lies to himself about it, and tries to deflect his guilt by loudly and preemptively projecting it on to others and accusing them at every opportunity.

    The self-righteous sneering and vindictiveness you see from Mark Shea is that of small, compromised man who is trying to hide his own shame from himself, who lives in perpetual terror of his paper-thin rationalizations coming unraveled around him and forcing him to look in the mirror, and who tries to prevent that by lashing out at those who threaten to unravel them.

  5. Consistency has indeed ceased to be one of Mark's strong points. After Sandy Hook, when some of us dared to say slow down about the move to do anything to gun owners, Mark and other blasted us, accusing us of horrible things and allowing others do say worse. Then one of Mark's internet friends (Dale Price maybe? I can't remember), posted an article agreeing with us. Mark linked to it and said 'finally someone who isn't crazy, even if I disagree.' The person said nothing we weren't saying, but it was OK - he was a friend of Mark.

    The issue with Dan C, BTW, was over something about Pope Francis. When Dan blasted those others by name, several of us challenged Mark to correct him. Instead, all Mark wrote was 'I haven't read their stuff.' Which was stunning.

    As to why? Who can really say. Theories abound. I think, personally, Mark has fallen in over the years with some very moderate to liberal individuals (some who are no doubt anti-abortion), as well as just knowing those who are, being where he lives. Seeing that Conservatives aren't always gods, he has thrown the baby out with the bathwater. But he still can't (or won't) admit it. Hence the rage. Plus, again, the 'conservative who hates conservatives but thinks liberals rock' has gotten him quite a boon in his career. So there you go.

  6. Well it's like Evan Sayat was talking about, you can see it happen with Mark in real time. One of those features being that he stopped hearing/reading/listening to what the right actually said, and instead heard/read about it from the left.

    And really, how long can you maintain a "pox upon both houses" when you only listen to what the devil is saying about God instead of the Lord's actually words?

  7. Well never let it be said that I'm unfair. I see on Shea's front page, TWO articles actually bashing leftism. Time to see how his comments within them are...

    Also in news...


Let me know your thoughts