The beheading of John the Baptist

Here, and here.  In contrast to here, where Mark Shea and some of his regulars make it clear that if anything happens to Pope Francis, it will be over the broken, bloody reputation of his accusers.   On the day in which we remember the slaughter of the messenger of God's Incarnate Word, Mark's ministry is a stark reminder of how easily a Christian ministry can become everything the Christian Faith warns against.

Or we could rush out and politicize Las Vegas as quickly as possible

As demonstrated here.  FWIW, most news outlets and, with a few notable exceptions, most politicians have withheld the obligatory making of political hay while the blood shines. 

But some, unfortunately including Catholics, can see nothing other than the 'Us v. Them' partisanship that is ripping society apart.  And it's not even Catholics vs. Everyone, but partisanship based on political theories, policies, agendas and ideals - your relationship with Jesus being irrelevant.

I have no idea what motivated this shooter.  From what I can tell, nobody has.  Including those who know what facts are known. 

But for those who see this as a way to preemptively condemn others, while bodies lie dead in hospitals and loved ones are frantic to learn the fate of those who have gone before, the reactions are telling.  I think it demonstrates a level of political pornography that we increasingly seize upon such events in order to immediately objectify as many human beings as possible, if only for our own ideological gain.

A final warning about bad apologetics

Not to beat a dead horse, but I went back one last time to the post about Mark's blog I from the other day.  I answered briefly a late commenter who, following the liberal Protestant objection, asked why homosexuality is wrong if Jesus didn't specifically mention it?  Never mind he defined marriage as between a man and a woman.  We won't even get into the laughable exegesis that insists the Bible never condemns homosexuality except where it calls for homosexuals to be killed in Leviticus.  

While answering her as best I could, I brushed through to see if anyone answered any of my last comments.  I do love having the last word.  While there, I noticed that, as I said, several had come to the post to cheer on Mark's observation that what the CoC did was nothing less than hate filled homophobic bigotry and evil.  That was not an issue, since that's mostly what Mark said; the Church of Christ had compromised Unconditional Love.  

Then, as anyone with more brains than a sea sponge could guess, a couple people jump on the fact that a second Catholic - that's C-A-T-H-O-L-I-C - school had fired an openly gay teacher.  Pretty darn hateful wouldn't you say?  Clearly compromising the clear teaching about unconditional love, right?  

Those trying to pour water on the firestorm that Mark ignited jumped in to remain consistent, and said that the school, like the Church of Christ in question, had a right to stand on their beliefs.  Mark, however, suddenly looked, well, what can I say?  He was pithy and didn't go into detail, but you can see the problem.  For no other reason than this was a C-A-T-H-O-L-I-C school it is OK.  The teacher could have, well, lied maybe?  I don't know what he meant.  But clearly the school was a mother-beautiful example of Christ like love and firm standing on clear teachings passed down from the apostles.  Not like that evil Church of Christ that, according to CNN (which is always true and trustworthy), asked a woman who openly opposed the church's teachings to leave.

That kiddies is what is known as "Superior-by-Catholic."  It's really a stereotype used by non-Catholics, but clearly there is a basis for it.  The idea is that if anyone else does it, even if it's the slightest deviation from holiness, it's just not good enough!  But if Catholics or the Catholic Church is a million times worse, well shucks, we're all just crazy sinners, and besides, those standards don't even apply to the Church since it's obviously right.  Again, for most Catholics, that's an unfair stereotype.  It's certainly not taught by the Church in any documents I've found.  And it shouldn't be the M.O. of a serious Catholic apologist.  But on the Internet, across the Catholic blogosphere, alas it's not hard to see where it came from.  And nothing demonstrates that bizarre expression of non-Traditionalist Catholic Fundamentalism than Mark's condemnation of a Church for doing 10 of what he gladly excuses a Catholic school for doing 10,000 of earlier in the year. 

Yes, I know someone could argue that this was different, it was only a school as opposed to an actual church, missing the obvious fact that a church in Evangelical Christianity might be different in form and nature than a Catholic Church.  But then you'd have to wonder what all the hubbub was about when it came to asking mere Catholic schools to pay for Sandra Fluke's birth control, correct?  Well, not so fast!  

See where bad apologetics gets you?  Bozo time, and just the kind of thing that makes critics of Christianity and Religion in general drool over what appears to be a clear inconsistency in standards and belief. 

As the liberal revolution grows in power

Expect those who would resist to start eating each other.  Case in point.  A CNN article written to remind us that we are fools if we think liberalism will stop at the doors of church, synagogue, temple or mosque.  A Church of Christ congregation asks a woman to leave because the woman defies church teaching by openly advocating The Issue on behalf of her lesbian daughter.  Now would I have handled it that way?  Assuming the story is even correct?  Probably not.  But I sympathize with their plight.  They are a skirmish in the future battle to finally eradicate the right to not be liberal from America, if not the world.

Mark dutifully jumps on CNN's side (it isn't FOX after all), and declares his contempt and horror at these shameful disgraces to the Christian name, explaining it's their example that validates the hatred for Christians that Jesus spoke of all those years ago.  Several jump on the thread to express their own contempt and hatred for such bigoted scum who blaspheme The Issue.  Some try to resist, most maybe, but the resistance is half-hearted.  Those spewing Jack Chick style loathing upon the congregation in question have absolute morality on their side, while those trying to balance the issue and look at all sides are steamrolled.

Expect more of the same. There are three ways one can deal with the rise perhaps the greatest threat to Orthodox Christianity since Arianism: we can resist, we can change our faith and accept it, or we can do this - throw each other to the wolves in the hope that we'll be the ones the New Order thinks is swell and awesome enough to leave alone.

"And listen, Gandalf, my old friend and helper!" he said, coming near and speaking new in a softer voice.  "I said we, for we it may be, if you will join with me.  A new Power is rising.  Against it the old allies and policies will not avail us at all.  There is no hope left in elves or dying Numenor.  This then is the one choice before you, before us.  We may join with that Power.  It would be wise, Gandalf.  There is hope that way.  Its victory is at hand, and there will be rich reward for those that aided it."

The Fellowship of the Ring

We can assume Christians are the guilty ones

According to new convert Leah Libresco.  Picked up on Mark Shea's blog, it doesn't take long for Christians to take their places in the circular firing squad.  Could the hacking be from Christian groups? Yeah.  The Secular Student Alliance would seem to be targeted by religious types.  It could be true.  And I don't know the designs of the alliance.  If it's a place for secularists to hang out, no problem.  If, like other atheist groups, it's all about how to crush the right to be religious in our post-modern age, then my sympathies aren't there. 

The fact is, it's a group we know little about hacked by someone we can't identify.  Leah, God love her, sings the praises of atheists who came to the rescue when Christians were so treated.  Though I know from experience some of the sites mentioned in the links have about one part 'gee, maybe it's sometimes not good to vandalize churches', and about three to four parts 'stupid religious fanatic scum, it's what they get.'  But notice the ease and speed with which Christians jump forth to help a group they know little to nothing about, all the while rushing forward with the assumption that, as is always the case in our post-modern narrative, Christians do not deserve a trial, by nature they are guilty as charged.  It's just when Christians do it, we assume that applied to all [not me] Christians.