And nothing more, for there is nothing more we can do. Prayers for him, and prayers that faithful Christians will not be spiritually corrupted by his false gospel:
Or temporally harmed by his false accusations:
And to quote Forrest Gump, that's all I have to say about that.
St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle; be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do Thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the power of God, cast into Hell, Satan and all the other evil spirits, who wander throughout the world, seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.
Evidently, he fancies Africa's high birth rate is a function of the Church imploding in the occidental countries. Or whatever.
ReplyDeleteContemplating Shea, I'm recalling the late Jeffrey Hart's downward spiral.
Yep. I'm convinced at this point there is no sense wasting more time. There is no reasoning or reason to do with him or what he says. Again prayers are about it.
DeleteWhat a contemptible person Shea has become. One can't express any disagreement with the Church's direction on certain things without Shea hinting that you're a racist?
ReplyDeleteHe has warmed up to the old 'be liberal or be Nazi' tactic. And there seems no end to the topics he's willing to use to distinguish between the good and the evil. It's a very seductive tactic.
DeleteAs if to drive the point home, I just saw he posted about that whole Rings of Power show. The one that takes Tolkien, keeps a few names, and turns it into a Game of Thrones production with appropriate demographic fixes for Tolkien's racist book. Mark's take? He likes it, it isn't a big deal, if you do fine, if not fine. The problem? I've watched liberalism do that for decades. If they support something, they shrug and say it's no big deal. That way if you make any big deal about it, you're obviously the problem - even though we know full well it is because of the political based messaging that the series is so important in the first place. Mark appears to have warmed to the duplicity of such tactics over the years.
DeleteMark my wards, one day Mark Shea will denounce GK Chesterton in whole. He's already described Chesterton as "deeply anti-semitic:"
Deletehttps://markpshea.com/2021/09/16/dr-dawn-eden-goldstein-writes-a-necessary-piece-on-chestertons-anti-semitism/
However, his taken then was that GK Chesterton was a sinner and that this does not mean he couldn't be worthwhile in other areas. But we all know that in modern liberalism this position cannot be defended: once you've admitted that someone is evil then he must be evil through and through.
Rudolph, it's all the rage. We are quickly becoming the generation that defines its righteousness by forever dredging up the sins of dead sinners. As one of my sons has said, a generation of modest historical impact has limits on what it can do to justify its high opinions of itself.
DeleteMark my wards, one day Mark Shea will denounce GK Chesterton in whole. He's already described Chesterton as "deeply anti-semitic:"
DeleteBelloc once wrote a volume on the Jews. It take some effort to locate Chesterton's remarks on Jews in the scores of volumes which bear his name. Not much of a subject for him.
Art, earlier this year Dawn Eden went on quite a crusade, speaking to Chesterton's racism and anti-Semitism. I remember she spoke at an event hosted by Dale Ahlquist on reconciling Chesterton's clear and obvious racism with otherwise liking Chesterton. I think this was part of a series where she looked at the anti-Semitism of a variety of Catholics from back in the day. A very 21st Century emphasis.
DeleteAs long as people keep reacting to him, comment on his childishness and feed his ego he will continue to get what he wants: Attention.
ReplyDeleteSadly, if everyone who sees him for what he is stopped mentioning him, he would still have plenty of attention and encouragement. I notice that for a while, Deacon Greydanus appeared to have distanced himself somewhat, and it was quite some time without seeing him reference anything Mark was ranting about. In just the last few months, however, he has not only visited Mark's sites and given him thumbs up, he's also reposted some of Mark's even more egregiously partisan rage-fests. As long as Mark is rewarded for being what he has become, I'm sure he will continue along the same track, no matter who else ignores him.
DeleteHere in Texas the number of children killed as passengers in motor vehicle crashes is above the number killed by firearms. Yet we never see Mark denouncing the 'Auto Cult' or demonizing 'Car and Driver' or suggesting that only government agents can operate motor vehicles. As a parent and a grandparent I fail to see how having a family member killed by an auto is less traumatic than death by firearm.
ReplyDeleteShea is nuts.
Yes, Mark went over the edge years ago. Any attempt to reason with him fails unless you support his political partisanship. Even then he seldom engages with people as much as merely repeat leftwing platitudes or buzzwords. Whatever caused his collapse, he's beyond reaching by us mere mortals. Which is why prayer is the only thing to turn to at this point.
DeleteIt's becoming almost comical at this point. If he doesn't care about what you care about, then it's no big deal, you need to calm down, have some perspective, etc etc. If, however, it is something he cares about it, then it's just the most important thing EVAR!!! and we must do something NOWNOWNOWNOW... and how DARE you not be as UPSET about this as he is, you just hate children and puppies and rainbows and the pope and...
ReplyDeleteHe's a bad public intellectual. He would do better giving that up and focusing on being a grandfather.
What did he ever do for a living but produce verbiage? I think that's been his primary occupation since age 38. His wife was at one time a CNA, but she allowed her state registration to lapse about seven years ago. He and she are 64 and 68 respectively.
DeleteHe once acted. LoL
DeleteIn Seattle? Not much there but what they call 'regional theatre'.
DeleteNate, that's a trick I've seen used before. I once called out a Methodist minister who was playing the 'it's not that big of deal' card about something (I think something to do with LGBTQ issues). I said then that's a great way of saying things are swell and proceeding apace, so let's not rock the boat. It's also a slick way of acting as if the only way to see it has been stated, and those who disagree are 'making a big deal out of nothing' (from which we can then make assumptions about their motives and why they are making this big deal). Again, I notice Mark has warmed to the duplicity inherent in so much modernist discourse.
Delete@art deco - his IMDB page: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3209448/
DeleteWhich is funny because his "self" credit is separately listed: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm7432796/
What has happened to him is both tragedy and mystery. But arguing with him is beyond counter-productive, merely reinforcing the ideological titanium dome under which he dwells.
ReplyDeletePrayer is the only possible approach here, along with the witness of personal kindness.
Tragedy yes. Mystery, hard to say. And yes, for some time attempts to talk reason have ended up as productive as debating with a one year old. That he's lifted up by others who should know better is a large part of the problem. As for kindness, that has its limits. When he pushes a false gospel, and launched false attacks on people meant to do them harm, the kindness meter begins to drop quickly.
DeleteMultiple friends of mine have been blocked by Greydanus for pointing out the fact that he enables Shea. It's all the more galling when you consider the fact that Greydanus loves to chastise people on the right who say or believe much less ghastly things than Shea does. In fact, Greydanus is more than happy to associate with unabashed abortion supporters, transgender "rights" advocates, hyper-partisan Democrats, and the like. But the second you claim that the 2020 election was stolen or call his best friend a contemptible blowhard, he blocks you.
ReplyDeleteEven more ghastly is the fact that Greydanus rarely posts anything in support of the pro-life movement on Twitter. He's a deacon, for crying out loud. A non-Catholic like me shouldn't be more dogmatically anti-abortion than he is. The man is an honest-to-goodness coward who is too afraid to alienate his liberal readership. He has all the time in the world to tweet about comic book movies and the like, but on the rare occasions when he actually does talk about abortion, he makes sure to preface his remarks with some sort of dig at the pro-life movement. They're too Trumpian! January 6!
Regarding those who perpetually feel the need to caveat professed belief with a disclaimer distancing themselves from others who profess same belief over a particular political candidate: This article, and subsequent FT podcast interview, completely validated what I was seeing in my own circles of those who saw themselves not only too good to even pragmatically vote R last election cycle, but too good to even ASSOCIATE ideologically with those who would be so base as to publicly support Trump. To me it smacked of a certain unwillingness to look foolish in the eyes of the world. And I really didn't care if you wanted to vote for the guy or not. What I could not abide seeing was the dishonest reasoning: "My conscience won't let me." It would have been far more honest for most of them to simply say, "My sensibilities won't let me." Or say nothing and simply not vote for the guy. It just seems like an ongoing protection of one's pride, or how some want to be seen in the eyes of the world, that they have to continually make qualifications on social media posts like the ones you mention Greydanus adds above.
DeleteI also think it shows a lack of intellectual depth to apparently be so clueless as to why people would actually support a guy like DT or wonder about aspects of the election outcome. In contrast, editor of First Things RR Reno, always observed the reasons why DT had support and allowed for it without condemnation - because he is a true intellectual and was looking at the whole picture. He also doesn't seem to tie his identity up in his political opinions or his associations. This is where I think social media platforms for most people are a net negative - particularly if you have a public platform and an overinflated estimation of the worth of your own opinions.
https://www.firstthings.com/article/2020/10/suicide-of-the-liberals
Deacon Greydanus, and Dawn Eden, are among the saddest developments in all this. Ten years ago, both were wonderful examples of what we should be when discussing things online. Now they've become caricatures of all that's wrong with it. Eden has all but reached an olive branch out to the sexual revolution she once rejected, embracing abortion activists and using what internet tools exist to paint individuals she disagrees with as fascists and anti-Semites. Deacon isn't much better, embracing the old 'why do they insist on being motivated by racism when they could embrace liberalism instead' shtick. He avoids like the plague calling out the evils to the left of center, and seems to wait like a vulture for the story that helps buttress 'police brutality' or 'America as racist state' instead.
DeleteIt's worth noting that for a few years, I saw little from Deacon that seemed to connect with Mark, as if he was avoiding giving Mark credibility. Now he seems to have come around and I've seen multiple times he's linked to or promoted Mark in recent months. Birds of a feather I suppose.
As if on cue, I see Deacon has posted on Twitter a Guardian piece about 'obstacles' in Georgia's voting process. Of course the Guardian, that bastion of quality, objective journalism. He adds that it's down by right wingers throwing out obstacles just because they can. Because of course. I knew he was going down the bad way all those years ago when, after joining the 'Skin Roy Moore Alive' posse, he then turned and gave a moderately positive, and barely accusatory, review of a movie that featured an older man seducing a young boy for some man/boy sex. He redid his review, but the memory is still there, especially in light of where he is obviously going.
DeleteTo be fair, that's a great movie. But it's definitely not for a Catholic audience.
DeleteHere he is accusing the right of being pro-rape and pro-pedophilia. Ironically, he's never posted about Ashley Biden's diary.
Deletehttps://twitter.com/DecentFilms/status/1583949524036308994
And the last thing a Catholic deacon should be doing is accusing others of shrugging off child abuse.
I think what hit people at the time was that Deacon joined the assault on Roy Moore, offering no quarter and joining the sudden cultural shift that said any man even thinking of looking at an under age girl is now sex pervert rape cultist. That massive shift from where culture had been pushing us for decades was crucial for torpedoing Moore, and Deacon Greydanus seemed quite happy to accept the premise. Because of that, his 'eh, some pretty nice things here' about a movie that clearly is trying to get us back to the 'just seventeen and you know what I mean' mentality, the damage having been done, is what many noticed with his movie review.
DeleteI only knew of Greydanus peripherally, (and I don't know who Dawn Eden is, though I'll happily stay ignorant) but I generally had a good opinion of him until I came across a post I found shockingly uncharitable for a Deacon. And then scrolling through his feed I realized he's not someone I can take the Gospel seriously from. You can't post about looking at things from the eyes of Heaven and then follow it with posts denigrating others as terrible people for holding certain views without getting a big, fat - in the words of Mike Ditka - "Who ya crappin'?"
ReplyDeleteIt's unfortunate as I've found many faith based personalities unfollow-able over the last decade. I've seen some lives fall apart, and I wonder about others' sanity at times. Some of them would do well to simply give up social media or professional faith based writing and live quiet lives, but it seems nigh impossible for most, if any, of them to do.
Dawn was like Deacon Greydanus - a pleasure to converse with online. Sometimes almost 'too' nice. She was against, as was Deacon, much of the vitriol already defining online discourse. Her harshest - if you could call it that - rhetoric was aimed at the sex culture which she became famous for having turned away from. The irony there, she has now done the 'I'm sorry I was ever mean to the LGBTQ or pro-choice world' tour, and pretty much assumes those who haven't followed her to the left are anti-Semites and fascists. Meanwhile Deacon has gone the same way. As have others. I would never say one side does bad and the other doesn't. But it does seem almost a mandatory trait of the left to assume worst motives among those who disagree and accuse accordingly. So anyone who even thinks of connecting AIDS to the sexual revolution is a homophobe straightaway. Question BLM or Kaepernick? Racist, no doubt. Even think of questioning anything feminism? Sexist, chauvinist or misogynist depending on the day. And you're right, so many have gone down that path, including Catholics like Deacon Greydanus, Dawn Eden, or even Mark Shea - all who once condemned that very practice of judging and assuming worst motives. To me, that as much as anything speaks volumes.
Delete