Yep. Not much to say really. Those who believe we will stop abortion by giving people more money, well, there is that. As Catholics, the solution can't be supporting contraception as a way of curbing abortion rates. I suppose there could be something biblical about thinking that the more money people have, the less they sin. I'm betting it isn't that easy, however, and I personally believe it's our relationship to the Almighty and Jesus Christ that is the ultimate answer. But that's me. And the priest who spoke at our parish yesterday.
I won't bother with unpacking the opinion piece itself. I think most of the linked to blogpost speaks for itself. Except to say that is Exhibit A for why I no longer get anywhere near his blog or anything he writes. I'm trying to keep my heart and mind on Jesus as best I can, and I'm sure that wouldn't help a bit.
I suppose there could be something biblical about thinking that "the rich he hath sent empty away." I know of no indication that "the more money people have, the less they sin," although there are a number of warnings that sins like sloth can lead to poverty.
ReplyDeleteYes, I think the 'focus on socioeconomic measures' has been overemphasized. It's also worth noting that from a secular POV, when they say poverty leads to abortion, as often as not, they mean 'because they can't afford access to sex ed. and contraception'. Catholics especially who simply repeat the meme are saying more than they should wish to say.
DeleteThe sad part is that, in my experience, there's usually a grain of truth to what he says. The problem is that it's always buried under multiple layers of weird, pretentious..... .I'm not even sure what to call that stuff he likes to spout. It's just strange.
ReplyDeleteThis may sound harsh, but there is usually a grain of truth in almost anything anyone has ever said. Satan included. I balance it by the fruits, and I fear so much of the fruit produced is now rotten to the core, and encourages people not to come to Christ, but rather to snap their fingers and assume voting for the right political and socioeconomic platform is all one needs. I can't think of anything worse than an apologist who doesn't seem to bring others closer to Christ, but one who seems drawn farther away by those around him.
DeleteThere is a troubling lack of joy in his writing. Of course anyone can be frustrated or discouraged by events, but underneath it all a Christian should have an abiding joy. God has shown His love for us; Christ has conquered death and hell! Car troubles, job troubles, health troubles, to say nothing of the disappointments of politics, should not be able to quench that joy. Shea seems to have anger and bitterness at his core, though.
DeleteYep. Anger at the least. I would argue almost abject hatred. Rage. Things that are never good in any field, much less apologetics. And yet he must be aware since he doesn't present himself that way in mixed company, or when contributing to various publications. Which could be worse.
DeleteDoes he really hide it so well, though? 15+ years ago I regularly read his blog, "Catholic and Enjoying It." He doesn't seem to have been totally round the bend at that point, and the exchanges were not so heated as I hear they have become in recent years ... yet over time, it became clear that there was something off. He was NOT "enjoying it." There was something wrong.
DeleteI get the same feel from Dreher, but then he has formally abandoned the Catholic Church.
I consider Dreher a sort of 'Thomas Paine' figure. He's pointing out the obvious, even if he's not the one who can be counted on to do anything about it. But with Mark, the cracks were already there back when I first started visiting about the same time. Nothing major, and I chalked it up to 'nobody's perfect.' But by around 2010/2012, I could see something going seriously wrong. But a big part of his problem is that he continues to get support by Catholics, Catholic leaders and even Catholic clergy. If you reward a child for breaking windows, expect him to break more windows.
DeleteThe best way to stop abortions is to elect someone who will promote them---- Leftist logic.
ReplyDeleteYep. It makes as much sense as believing the more money we give people, the less they'll sin.
DeleteWhich is extra funny because on that side of the paradigm, don't they generally believe that it is the rich who are the most sinful?
DeleteI've learned that looking for consistency from those trying to reconcile secular liberalism and the Faith is like looking for bigfoot.
DeleteGreat analogy there about the left. Their needs change by the minute. What was woke 5 minutes ago may not be woke 5 minutes later and they all fall in line immediately and then they have the nerve to say the right is a cult. LOL
DeleteThe strangest thing in all of this is the ease with which they can declare one group to be sanctified one day, and villainized the next. We see it with #MeToo today, and then 'shut up' about transgender rights tomorrow. We saw it with #MeToo and a host of black men accused of rape because they were men (not black, but men), only to hear a black man later accuse a white woman of being racist because he says so (BLM). They don't even hide it. They say you may be a crusader today and an infidel tomorrow, but follow us anyway. And millions do. As my sons say, we are the generation that once and for all proved an education is not enough.
Deletefrom Crisis magazine, an essay entitled "Our Crybaby Culture."
ReplyDelete"Andrew Sullivan has made a second career of seeing in “Christianists” precisely the same danger to the Republic as that posed by Osama bin Laden. Some Evangelical politician sends a letter to his fellow believers asking for prayers for his campaign? That is exactly the same thing as bin Laden’s conviction that God is on his side in his murderous war on every American man, woman, and child."
Of course, since then, so has the author of the piece.
Yep. That puts me in mind of an interview ages ago, during the John Roberts confirmation hearings. James Dobson reportedly sent a card to Roberts offering prayer and support. This triggered Barry Lynn of the euphemistically named 'Americans for Separation of Church and State.' To his credit, a young fill-in host, Anderson Cooper, asked Lynn where he was when Christian and other religious leaders were meeting with Congress to oppose restrictions on gay marriage. I remember Lynn being gobsmacked by the question and stammering a bit, until he gave what I call the Barry Principle. Basically those leaders were simply advocating for the truth. On the other hand, any religion that preaches hate and discrimination has no business being in the public forum on government grounds. So there you have it. Religious liberty id for correct-thinking religions as defined by Lynn (and a slew of others). I've never forgotten that interview, and things like Sullivan and others often bring that back to mind.
Delete