How very ‘definitive’!
It’s always nice to be noticed…sort of caters to that desire for recognition for work done. Well, Vox Nova got noticed this week by someone named David Hartline, the administrator of The Catholic Report. Though I have never heard of him or his project, he describes The Catholic Report as the “definitive source” for all things Catholic. I better put down my Catechism!
Within the context of his brief mention of Vox Nova, Hartline exemplifies the sort of confusion that befalls Catholics when they conceptually conflate the doctrine of the Catholic Church with independent, idiosyncratic ideologies. Often, this exercise in undiscernment results in the inability to differentiate between essential Catholic principles and contingent, circumstantial political preferences. Whether this ailment infects one who fancies oneself politically conservative or liberal, its most troubling symptom is the ostentatious mocking of Catholics who, whatever may be the face of their political leanings, seek to uncompromisingly inform their socio-political outlook by the revealed principles of the Catholic faith and the self-evident foundations of natural law.
Such was the display at the Catholic Report earlier this week. Commenting on a letter to Pope Benedict XVI signed by over 1200 Catholics and non-Catholics, which Michael Iafrate posted here at Vox Nova, Hartline launches his misguided salvo:
A who’s who of Church dissidents and radicals. Sadly, they have become so blind in their political activism that fail to see the obvious. The one who started the genocide was Saddam Hussein, but they don’t even mention him. You would think from these radicals that it was Christianity who caused all of the turmoil in Iraq. What a tale of two worlds, the early Christians (including some Apostles) came into Iraq as peaceful messengers of the Good News, a far cry from those came some seven centuries later. Thank you for all who sent this to me and to Gerald over at the Cafeteria is Closed for reminding us that the gentleman who posted this for the liberal Vox Nova blog dubbs himself the “Catholic Anarchist.” This band of dissidents regularly denounces the US and Catholics in general who have any roll in giving spiritual assiatance to the armed forces. Reading the writings of some of these folks you might think it is a parody skit right out of Saturday Night Live or South Park. Nope, they really are that far out. Politically some of the stuff you hear from them is right out of a Berkeley rally circa 1968, a Jefferson Airplane concert circa 1969, or for our younger readers something one might hear on a Rage Against the Machine album. Yet we are talking about the Church. I am sure most of these folks started out with the best of intentions but look where their rebellious path has taken them. Father Corapi has been heard to say that give him a wayward or rebellious parish and he can turn it around in a year or two by simply obeying the teachings of the Church. We can see evidence of that in the growing crop of orthodox-minded new priests, seminarians and women religious. The reverse might be said for these folks on the petition. Their religious orders are dwindling and no one is following their path to the seminary or convent. Their fate will soon end up like that of the Shakers. These folks need our prayers.
What reveals Hartline’s political and doctrinal dilettantism is his line about the “who’s who of Church dissidents.” Claiming that any person is a dissident is to level a serious charge, suggesting that this person is clearly and evidently rejecting or distorting the Catholic faith. Well, Hartline makes that charge about all 1200+ signers! Does Hartline outline any of the clear and evident dissent from any one of them? Of course not. That would require honest and arduous work with a dash of intellectual motivation. It is much easier to elevate one’s own orthodoxy and exaggerate one’s own familiarity with the history and teaching of the Catholic Church (“The definitive source for all things Catholic”) rather than to seek to understand the faith and the manner in which its contents spill over into action, political or otherwise. Such is the classic move of a Catholic who writes and talks more than he reads and meditates.
Not only does Hartline flippantly dismiss the faith and intentions of many individuals whose advice and example he sorely needs, he glibly groups them together as 1960′s liberals who fail to notice that the sun of militant radical protest set long ago. Such is the classic move of a self-proclaimed conservative who fears what he does not know and prefers to construct caricatures rather than engage in responsible, rational and generous discourse.
Hartline need not agree with the letter. In fact, I disagree heartily with its suggestion that Pope Benedict XVI snub President Bush. Hartline’s problem is that he lacked discernment when he read that letter, confusing his political persuasion with the true Catholic faith. What, pray tell, is fundamentally wrong with a large number of Catholics taking up a position against the Iraq War (after all, the U.S. bishops, Iraq bishops, and two popes did so)? What is the problem with writing to the Pope expressing concern over that same war and requesting that, minimally, he speak with the president about the topic? Where is the dissent? The only dissent I see is that which Hartline anxiously fabricates when he equates dissent from conservative political positions with both anti-Americanism and heresy. Sad thing is, Hartline is but only one of many, many Catholics in the United States who make the same tragic, modernist mistake. Whatever “The Catholic Report” may think and boast itself to be, it most certainly is not definitively Catholic.
I welcome Hartline’s response, hoping he may accept some responsibility for his reckless words. At least some sort of clarification would be nice and appreciated.
Comments are closed.
Policraticus,
A disordered mind is its own punishment. I doubt it has the capacity yet to take such responsiblity.
Let him remain in his parents’ basement, watch more videotaped EWTN reruns, and fantasize of achieving ‘full orthodoxy’ by somehow himself donning one of the growing crop’s black cassocks.
Give an untrained mind a Bible, a Catechism, and a cause and it will confound the Truth more often than not. A person so disposed will eventually say and do anything.
Armed with a “cut and paste” piety — a piety which morphs into hypermoralism and then spews its venom into society — has no kinship whatsoever with Catholicism. It fragments and corrupts truth and can only bring Fear Alienation into the world. Such smug religiosity has no redemptive value at all — absolutely none. In fact, it’s just another form of narcissism.
Here here!
Mark D – You’ve missed the point of the post and gratuitously smeared EWTN to boot. David Hartline and Gerald A. are quick to criticize Church teaching when it contradicts some pet ideology of theirs. This is certainly not true of EWTN.
Despite the fuss they make about themselves being faithful advocates of Church teaching, it doesn’t take many readings of their sites to notice that, in fact, they are not whenever Church teaching is at variance with a Mark Steyn column.
NEH,
What?
I woudl ask Hartline: who is the dissident here, the person who opposes the evil Iraq war otr the person who makes excuses for it, as he seems to do with his flippant “Saddam Hussein started the genocide” comment. I would ask him why he calls those who agree with two popes dissidents, while he himself diverges from the teaching of the universal church on this issue.
Aside from the enormous arrogance of claiming to be the “definitive source of all things Catholic”, Hartline’s main error is to equate theological orthodoxy with adherance to secuar nationalism. I’m seeing a lot of that lately.
I’m seeing a lot of that lately.
On this very blog, in fact. Within the last hour or so.
Why don’t you all complete the circle?
Rename the blog: “EX CATHEDRA!!!!!!!”
More exclamation marks may be appriopriate.
Rev. “I Hate Whitey” is much more entertaining when he says all that you say. And, he does it in 50 words or less.
What do you people call the planet on which you reside? Utopiopeia??
I know. My main error is I sinfully don’t believe your distortions, exaggerations, omissions, or out-right lies.
T. Shaw,
How about renaming it “Vatican III: The Spirit of Vatican II Strikes Back!”
I need a good laugh every once and awhile and coming over to Vox Nova helps relieve some tension. These guys have dug their own grave.
Yikes people! Calm down…you guys are more upset about politics than the faith, so please, put it in context. May God be with all of you.
Conoscenzo
Perhaps you would explain to me how someone has become the definitive source of all things Catholic — and they are not even an ecclesial authority? How has someone the authority to dismiss people– without even demonstrating any indication they have given those people any listening to, to know where they stand and who they are? When people have a bigger-than-life view of themselves, and think they are capable of defining orthodoxy or its lack, in people they don’t even listen to — something is wrong. Pointing this error out — is necessary; schism begins when people act like this.
So, here is my suggestion. Read through the blog, and read some of the posts, not just by one person, but by each of the bloggers. Learn to see how they think, what they say. Then you will see how terrible the misrepresentation of VN actualy is.
It is sad, and most troubling indeed, that Vox Nova “catholics” would rather agitate for their pseudo-liberal agenda of distorted hierarchy of values and their morally corrupt loyalty to the party of death agents, Obama and Clinton, than to proclaim the Gospel of Life which supercedes the issues of the morality of just war, death penalty, and greed of capitalism. How easily these misguided, befuddled airheads dismiss Pope Benedict’s definitive instruction that Catholics may not support or vote for pro-abortion murder politicians, and that no issue can be more important than that of the right to life for God’s innocent unborn children. David Hartline is correct when he labels Vox Nova as a blog for a bunch of old, pathetic and unhappy liberals out of 60s and 70s. PS: Father McBrien, as your theologian, has theological opinions of Catholicism which are more in line with those of the condemned liberation theology. Vox Nova, you’ve been had!
deficient understanding of the revealed principles of Catholic Faith and natural law, than proclaiming to the world, their uncompromising fidelity to theand commitment to
It is the most troubling symptom that those who define themselves as Catholics would inform their socio-political outlook by indeed that its most troubling symptom is the ostentatious mocking of Catholics who, whatever may be the face of their political leanings, seek to uncompromisingly inform their socio-political outlook by the revealed principles of the Catholic faith and the self-evident foundations of natural law.
TwoCentsWorth
The Gospel of Life INCLUDES the morality of just war and the death penalty. It doesn’t “supercede.” This is indicative that you need to actually read EV. What is troubling is that people continue to misrepresent the discussions on here as a way to feel superior and smug in their political decisions. They have turned politics into an idol.
TwoCentsWorth,
Here here!
Mr. Karlson, you seem to be inflated with a sense of your own infallibility in understanding and interpreting the definitive teachings of our Holy Father Benedict. Rather, as it is glaringly obvious, (excuse me, while I have a bellyaching laugh) you are in the pseudo-liberal mode of misrepresenting, misinterpreting, misreading our beloved Papa Benedict’s (Cardinal Ratzinger, 2004) definitive letter to the US bishops, “Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion.” It is diametrically opposed to what you misrepresent that the Gospel of Life, on the issue of abortion does not supercede all other issues. Read and learn the definitive hierarchy of values of orthodox Catholic teaching: “3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, BUT NOT HOWEVER WITH REGARD TO ABORTION AND EUTHANASIA.[emphasis mine] . Mr Karlson, I suggest that you deflate your assumed infallibility and take the bitter pill of humility and obedience to orthodox Catholicism, you will much better for it.
TwoCents
You are dealing with different topics. You said the Gospel of Life. That is actually a text by Pope John Paul II. To say “the Gospel of Life supercedes the morality of the death penalty” (to paraphrase what you said), is to indicate you have not actually read the document because it doesn’t “supercede” it; it includes this concern. Now the issue of the hierarchy of values and how one is to deal with those values is a different question. But as long as you ignore the whole Gospel of Life, and don’t understand that it is a representation of the dignity of life at all stages and not just some, in countries we like, you have found yourself in a position which is contrary to Catholicism. Now, it is interesting you take one letter and think that makes you the interpreter and able to define me as “liberal” etc. Who is the one making infallible declarations here — and on what level of background? Hermeneutics is not your strong suit, but you might be better at it than consistency.
Henry,
I was only commenting on the article, not the website. The rest of your comment I agree with your premise and will try to do as you suggest.
you guys are more upset about politics than the faith, so please, put it in context.
This made me laugh. Compare Hartline’s two pieces on Vox Nova to my post here and you’ll see who is more “upset.” It amazes me how willing some people are to defend poor reasoning and bad theology (e..g, The Catholic Report) as long as it lines up with their pre-established political outlook.
I am saddened to see so many of my fellow Catholics spending their Holy Week posting pointless attacks against each other. (Even this debate itself is starting to become repetitious.) This seems contrary to Christ’s prayer in the garden that “all may be one.” The Catholic Report post quoted on the Vox Nova site was mostly directed at the signers of the anti-war letter. (Some of the signers’ writings and actions are dubious at best.) What Vox Nova seems to be upset about is the charge that they are a “liberal blog.” This is a matter of opinion. Web pages, like works of art, can be interpreted freely by the viewer, to the chagrin of many artists. This statement obviously stung (regardless of if it did so because “the truth hurts” or if it was a false interpretation of their intent), given that the response was to post its own attack against the Catholic Report. (You hurt us, so we will hurt you back…) The responses posted have ranged from intellectual and childish. What I have not seen from anyone is a desire to “turn the other cheek” or to follow our Lord’s instructions on the appropriate way to help a brother or sister who has fallen into error. I think that it is time to stop posting and to start praying. Agree to disagree, give other’s the right to their opinion, and move on. We have more important things to deal with. We all want peace. We all cherish freedom. May we find our unity on our knees before the Most Holy Eucharist!
SubUrbun
There is truth in what you say. There should not be the bickering. But we must remember where there is lack of charity: someone who constantly condemns without understanding, who constantly belittles without even listening, someone who accuses but gets the claims all wrong.
I think we would all love any debates to end. People who make claims about Vox Nova which shows no connection to the reality of the blog itself can easily take the time to read what is said and see how in no ways do the false representations meet what happens here.
On The Catholic Report, Friday, March 21, 2008 at 11:17 am, TwoCentsWorth writes:
Father Edward T. Oakes’ delightful introduction to his essay, refers to a novel in which it describes a debate between an atheist and a Methodist minister. After the minister published an essay on the existence of God in the secular paper, the atheist sent in an explosive reply to the believers. The expected avalance of outraged responses came pouring in. Father Oakes then says, “Of course, if this had happened on the internet,…the debate would have gone on into cyber-eternity.” And, that is what happened on Dave’s March 19th post which ignited a veritable megaton blast of fiery responses between Vox Nova pseudo-liberals and the able Defenders of The Catholic Report. Dave cut off the knock-down, take-no-prisoners verbal battle before it went into “cyber-eternity.” My point is no one “won” the debate, everyone remained firmly entrenched in his/her own position and, I came away with the the conviction that it was an exercise in futility. However, I did learn lessons about the disciples of Vox Nova, “catholics” who bear the major responsibility for the murder of 50,000,000+ innocent unborn children by enabling pro-abortion “catholic” politicians and those “catholics” who vote for them. The pseudo-liberal “catholics” of the VN intellegentia elite, e.g., Morning minion, aptly named for satan’s minions, Henry Karlson, Policraticus, who pride themselves in distorting, corrupting, perverting the infallible teachings of the Church, in order to rationalize their murderous intent to vote for the terrorists of child murder demon-c-rats, Obama and Clinton. However, the greater scandal in the terrorism of abortion is the silence and “prudential judgement” (code, for cowardice in the face of evil) of the gutless bishops of major diocese, who will neither raise their voice, nor lift a finger in protest against the slaughter of the least of God’s children. God does not change, He is immutable. Just as God punished the Hebrews of the Exodus when they sinned against Him, and just as God obliterated Sodom and Gomorrah for their homosexual perversion, exterminated the Incas, Mayans, Aztecs for sacrificing their children to demons, so will He chastise America for its murder of innocent unborn children. It will not happen if the bishops are united in condemning abortion and imposing excommunication on the impenitent and admonishing the Catholic laity not to vote for those who reject the infallible teachings of the Church by their support of abortion infanticide.
I find it sadly ironic that we find TwoCents engaging in dishonesty as a way to judge people on Holy Friday.
Telling us that people who post on Vox Nova “pride themselves in distorting, corrupting, perverting the infallible teachings of the Church” is enough evidence of this. TwoCents, when you are willing to read, listen and stop lying, dialogue is possible. When your response is to do this, you only fool yourself.
ok ok, so i take that back. the faith is a sham and so am i. is it not hard to believe that a gay man of his 40th should be subject to the same psychobabble the “bible” has been stuffing down our throats for 2008 years? you keep your faith… i’ll just keep hoping someone puts me out of my misery before i do any more harm to myself and others.