One of the bedrock teachings of Catholic morality is "You shall not do evil that good may come of it." That principle is not abrogated by the false New Prolife Catholic dogma "Opposition to white conservative MAGA types with white skin taketh away the sins of the world." See how that works?
Sorry, but I'd trust Fred Phelps to describe the Gay Rights Movement before I'd listen to most progressive Catholics discuss anything Christian, much less Catholic.
Yep. That's as prolife as it gets, right? There is some debate, since the Texas law says nothing about punishing people who are 'standing near' a woman who had a miscarriage. There were no links or references in his post, so there's enough plausible deniability if someone really calls him on it. But by all accounts, added to the timing, this is his Seamless Garment, Whole Life, New Prolife reaction to the first real SCOTUS attempt to push back against Roe v. Wade since Roe v. Wade. Something, it's worth noting, Mark insisted conservatives on the court would never do.
If that's his idea of New Prolife, I'll happily stand with the old brand that really is about being pro-life, at least as understood through the historical Catholic faith.
Pre-Publish Updates! What? What's a pre-publish update? Even as I put this post together, yet another image of Mark's Twitter account came my way:
Wow. What can you say? Note a key justification for attacking opponents of the leftwing culture of death is based on Mark judging and condemning the ulterior motives and inner hearts of those who oppose the Left. That is hardly unique to Mark, BTW. I've notice a tremendous amount of leftwing ideology is justified by condemning not the actions and ideals of its opponents, but their motives and hearts. Always a bad sign when you must ignore Jesus to attack others in the name of Jesus.
Now Mark would argue he is still pro-life. In that regard, he can insist he doesn't support Planned Parenthood's counterattack to preserve Roe v. Wade, he simply aligns with Planned Parenthood in attacking those who would end Roe v. Wade because they really don't care despite what they do. That's what comes from ignoring the admonition to let your yes be yes, and instead resting on letting your maybe be possibly.
I write this because, being out of the loop, I've not had time to really get my mind around much of what has happened since last week. I know, I said I would avoid Twitter - most of the time. Mark's egregious alignment with the pro-abortion forces of the culture of death for debauchery in the name of being pro-life, while continuing to be called upon by Catholic outlets and ministries to speak on Catholic Social Teaching, is worth calling attention to.
I'm more convinced every day that Mark isn't mentally stable.
ReplyDeleteIf not mentally unstable, certainly a personality type that is beyond reason.
DeleteShea is about as pro-life now as Benedict Arnold was an American patriot after his betrayal.
ReplyDeleteYeah. I know some still insist he's prolife. If that's prolife, then the term prolife no longer has meaning.
DeleteI'm convinced Shea was always a leftist. However, to make it in the apologetics field years ago, he had to conceal his real political and religious orientations. But as liberalism grew in the Church, he felt freer to voice his real beliefs. He's on a roll now, but when the eventual anti-liberal reaction happens, he'll be in a boat without a paddle. His liberal 'friends' will be too busy running around like headless chickens too help him, and the actual Catholics won't ever trust him again, because of the way he slandered and libeled them for years.
ReplyDeleteI dunno. When I first stumbled across him, there were pieces he wrote that just wouldn't have come from anyone left of center. He did call out conservatives, and I'm fine with that. It isn't as if conservatives are always beyond reproach. But it was shortly after I began following him that it seemed something was happening.
DeleteShea's post yesterday linked to this July article he published:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.catholicweekly.com.au/mark-shea-ungarbling-some-bafflegab/
(guess it wasn't getting enough attention)
To quote him (because, unlike Shea, I'm willing to cite sources and not lie about whom I'm speaking):
Recently, PragerU sent out a tweet that is worth considering since it demonstrates for those still capable of thought the degrading effect that living in an ideological bubble has on the human heart and mind. It read:
“Since the Left is so much more interested in fixing society than in fixing the individual, politics inevitably becomes the vehicle for societal improvement.”
It says everything about these MAGA false prophets that they regard this as a self-evident indictment. And that brings us to our first point about the intellectual degradation so deeply at work among people who proudly call themselves “Deplorables” while never stopping to ask if their ideas, acts, and thinking are, in fact, deplorable. What is being practiced here is what CS Lewis’ Uncle Screwtape calls Flippancy, a form of false humour the little devil praises unreservedly:
Yes, a man who purports to be a Catholic evangelist has to now to contort himself in such a way as to not recognized oh say... Matthew 7:5 and dismiss the same as deplorable, insidious and flippant. A "catholic" dismissing the words of Jesus. Do I even need to say more?
And yes I checked! There is no reference to Matthew or Jesus at all in the entire article.
I don't think the Scriptures inform much of his politics unless they somehow conform to his politics. Otherwise, he seems quite happy to ignore any suggestions. I just wonder if his attack on Prager could be seen as anti-Semitic, since any criticism of anyone Jewish by conservatives - such as Soros - is labeled by Mark as being driven by anti-Semitism.
DeleteA man in a bunker-bubble with the likes of the former Professor Weiss and Dan Conway desperately needs to heal himself before handing out the prescriptions.
ReplyDeleteI don't recognize the writer I used to know in these screeds.
I do strongly dispute the notion that he was a leftist all along. No, he's been a Catholic who over-emphasized the papal office all along. The reigning pontiff is more than a steward of tradition and court of last resort for him: instead, the holder of the Chair of Peter is the supreme earthly father figure for him, one who must be followed and imitated. So when a left-wing Jesuit ascended to the Chair, it was inevitable that Mark would start sounding like him. And then adding in the characteristic invective that he always has used in the blogging/social media format. Throw in the cold-civil-war level of American political polarization, and voila'-- Mark Shea in 2021.
Still, I think that Catholicism is still his center--though at the rate America is fragmenting, who can say what the next five years will bring? I've seen right-side Catholics abandon ship. Yet, if we found ourselves in an impossible world where Bernard Fellay received the white zucchetto, you'd find Mark denouncing the Assisi gatherings and the 1970 Mass within two years.
DP, I think you're missing something here. Mark Shea started to manifest his leftist bent while we had John Paul and Benedict as our Popes. He was outwardly very respectful to these Popes, but at the same time, he was pushing his leftist notions about a-bombing Japan was a mortal sin, the death penalty was barbaric, homosexuality should be decriminalized, etc. He was severely criticized by many people on his old CAEI blog for taking these positions. And remember, Mark was raised in the ultra-liberal Seattle area, so there's a very good possibly he absorbed a great deal of the leftist atmosphere of that area while growing up, especially during his college years.
DeleteAnd remember, Mark was raised in the ultra-liberal Seattle area, so there's a very good possibly he absorbed a great deal of the leftist atmosphere of that area while growing up, especially during his college years.
DeleteHis father was career military. One of his father's postings was in the Pacific northwest and they settled there when his father left the service. If I'm not mistaken, his family has lived around Seattle, not in Seattle, and he actually lives in Snohomish County. Suburban and exurban politics can be radically different from those of core cities. Also, Washington State's politics were different. By way of example, from 1952 to 1984, Lyndon Johnson and Hubert Humphrey were the only Democratic candidates to carry the state. The Democrats did not have a lock on the Governor's chair until 1985. (The state no longer has in-person voting, so they're stealing big time now).
The big problem with your observation is that Mark had already swung to the Left before Pope Francis. I do think you're right about his approach to the papacy. Being a former evangelical, that can happen. Sometimes in the world of evangelicalism, people cling to this or that tradition or ritual or format because there are not the long roots of doctrine that Catholics or Orthodox have at their backs. Mark may have brought that tendency with him, and simply applied it to the papacy.
DeleteRecall also that Shea at age 25 was enmeshed in the evangelical subculture in Washington state. If I'm not mistaken, his father was a freemason, so he wasn't a young man for whom evangelicalism was a point of departure. (Laura Ortberg Turner would be an example of a liberal writer for whom that was the case).
ReplyDeleteWhile we're at it, if his motives were mercenary, he'd have chosen some other way to make a living than writing books for small audiences. (I assume he's had other work all these years, but I cannot recall him alluding to it).
I've suspected for some time that Shea's chronically intemperate remarks on public life are a function of deeply personal distress. Not much of a clue as to what that might be.
Your last paragraph on "Shea's chronically intemperate remarks on public life are a function of deeply personal distress" is certainly the best explanation for his behavior. If you ever read Paul Johnson's Intellectuals or E. Michael Jones's Degenerate Moderns trilogy, or Eric Hoffer's The True Believer, you will see that "deeply personal distress" on full display.
DeleteIt's impossible to guess what happened to Mark. That it happened and is used to advance ungodly teachings in the name of the Church is obvious, and is the biggest problem. More than that are those within the Church who should know better who keep encouraging him along.
DeleteI bet anyone who points out to Mark the $100,000,000 in taxpayer funding for crisis pregnancy centers written into the bill will get blocked.
ReplyDeleteI love Mark and I want him to go to Heaven, but my opinion of his character has gotten rather low.
That's actually the first time I've heard about anything to do with pregnancy help. In fact, most like Mark suggest there's not a brass farthing for anything, just rapist men wanting to kill women.
DeleteAs for Mark, I more pity him, but with a taint of fear. I have no ability to imagine what Mark would not do at this point in order to seal his allegiance to the Left, or at least his unhinged hatred of those who resist the Left. Those types may warrant our love and pity, but as the old saying goes, loving our enemies doesn't mean we have to deny they are our enemies.