The bottom line: The modern secular press just doesn't understand the Church--they view everything through their own self-modern secular "democratic" set of "ethics."
Further, I hate to keep sounding "age-ist" but estimate the age of the reporter, sisters, and theologians being interviewed (under the influence of the "spirit of Vatican II"). Why didn't he interview some younger, more orthodox and more tradition minded, priests and younger habited sisters such as the Nashville Dominicans?
Actually, Joseph, I prefer the "egalitarian ethics" to democratic. Democracy,as it was originally understood, implies a majoritarian democracy, whether in a republic or in some truly direct democracy (a rare bird). What we now have is government sponsored egalitarianism, where it has become the business of government to attempt to guarantee outcomes and to aggressively promote and protect minorities, special interest groups, and dissenters and outlaws of every kind. The press is the propaganda arm of "progressivist" government just as surely as Pravda was of the USSR. The Church is an enemy of egalitarianism and progressivist, egalitarian ideas...period. Current sensitivities and protections may not allow for physical persecution and suppression of Catholic belief and practice, but every means will be used to discredit, ridicule, marginalize, and repress the Church.
The secular press tells us that Vatican II instituted "reforms" to bring the church "up to date". I can understand that. The problem is, that's what the "theologians" who are dispensing "Catholic Education" to college students are saying as well. It must work, because the average Joe in the pews thinks the same thing.
I know this is cruel, but why is it that every single nun the media finds to interview is a habit-less butch-looking middle-aged liberal?
There are so many things wrong with this report and the responses of the religious sisters. Yes, they took Vatican II seriously but more seriously than everyone else? No, but they took the reform within the hermeneutic of rupture more seriously than anyone else and have nearly liberalized themselves out of existence, but they are still in denial about that and continue to falsely call this "renewal." They wish to take this reform from the hermeneutic of rupture to the entire Church and those bad old meany men in the Vatican who really aren't Church, and do for the Universal Church what they've done for their Orders. I say, no thanks! But if we follow the role model of the Dominican Sisters of Nashville, then by all means let's follow their understanding of Vatican II and reform within continuity! That is the answer. Let's actually follow Vatican II and not some false spirit of rupture. That spirit of rupture if read into the documents of Vatican II is not infallible and should be rejected outright.
This piece is typical. 4 to 1 liberal in interview time. Please, liberal nuns and theologians, quote the documents just once, when you refer to Vatican II.
This segment implies that women were singled out for visitation. This is false. Men's religious orders had visitations in the past decade because of the sex abuse crisis. If I remember correctly, I beleive the Vatican decided to visit the women's orders to see if some of the irregularities found in the men's orders also exist in the women's orders.
How about this: someone from a local parish pay a visit to CBS, talk the the reporters, get to be good friends with them and take some pictures of the offices.
Then the people in the parish start having rally's in solidarity with the junior interns, exposing the work conditions, salary and probable sexual exploitation. They could talk about the work hours of the older staff, the caste system of the star reporters versus the regular staff. And every time the new evening news anchor is announced they could ask why, oh why, is it never a person of colour?
Pin, I agree, "egalitarian ethics" is a better actual term. You will notice, however, that I did put "democratic" in quotation marks (a poor attempt at a little sarcasm on my part!). Anyway, we all know that the Roman Catholic Church is not a democracy and that is one of the major areas where the press just doesn't "get" it.
They proceed on the assumption that truth is arrived at by the popular opinion of the majority (which they work ceaselessly in trying to shape). This is how the typo "self" was left in my last post. I had started to say that the media is the self-appointed shaper and arbiter of public opinion. They don't wait for the public to make its collective mind up and then report it--no, they work for years to change and shape it to suit their goals for their vision of the ideal "progressive" society(and it's not just news media, it's entertainment media like MTV and reality shows etc.).
Personally, I think the reality fashion designer shows (which my daughters sometimes watch and laugh at)with gay guys like Tim Gunn are an effort to desensitize people to gay behavior and to make them more accepting of their political demands (such as gay "marriage"). They have already won over a lot of the younger (late teens and twenties) generation who are not strongly identified with their religion (if they ever had one).
10 comments:
The bottom line: The modern secular press just doesn't understand the Church--they view everything through their own self-modern secular "democratic" set of "ethics."
Further, I hate to keep sounding "age-ist" but estimate the age of the reporter, sisters, and theologians being interviewed (under the influence of the "spirit of Vatican II"). Why didn't he interview some younger, more orthodox and more tradition minded, priests and younger habited sisters such as the Nashville Dominicans?
Actually, Joseph, I prefer the "egalitarian ethics" to democratic. Democracy,as it was originally understood, implies a majoritarian democracy, whether in a republic or in some truly direct democracy (a rare bird). What we now have is government sponsored egalitarianism, where it has become the business of government to attempt to guarantee outcomes and to aggressively promote and protect minorities, special interest groups, and dissenters and outlaws of every kind. The press is the propaganda arm of "progressivist" government just as surely as Pravda was of the USSR.
The Church is an enemy of egalitarianism and progressivist, egalitarian ideas...period. Current sensitivities and protections may not allow for physical persecution and suppression of Catholic belief and practice, but every means will be used to discredit, ridicule, marginalize, and repress the Church.
The secular press tells us that Vatican II instituted "reforms" to bring the church "up to date". I can understand that. The problem is, that's what the "theologians" who are dispensing "Catholic Education" to college students are saying as well. It must work, because the average Joe in the pews thinks the same thing.
I know this is cruel, but why is it that every single nun the media finds to interview is a habit-less butch-looking middle-aged liberal?
There are so many things wrong with this report and the responses of the religious sisters. Yes, they took Vatican II seriously but more seriously than everyone else? No, but they took the reform within the hermeneutic of rupture more seriously than anyone else and have nearly liberalized themselves out of existence, but they are still in denial about that and continue to falsely call this "renewal." They wish to take this reform from the hermeneutic of rupture to the entire Church and those bad old meany men in the Vatican who really aren't Church, and do for the Universal Church what they've done for their Orders. I say, no thanks! But if we follow the role model of the Dominican Sisters of Nashville, then by all means let's follow their understanding of Vatican II and reform within continuity! That is the answer. Let's actually follow Vatican II and not some false spirit of rupture. That spirit of rupture if read into the documents of Vatican II is not infallible and should be rejected outright.
Criticize their words and actions if you must, but not their appearance. I saw beauty and radiance in their faces.
Cheap shot to criticize their appearance. I liked their appearance and their demeanor.
This piece is typical. 4 to 1 liberal in interview time. Please, liberal nuns and theologians, quote the documents just once, when you refer to Vatican II.
This segment implies that women were singled out for visitation. This is false. Men's religious orders had visitations in the past decade because of the sex abuse crisis. If I remember correctly, I beleive the Vatican decided to visit the women's orders to see if some of the irregularities found in the men's orders also exist in the women's orders.
How about this: someone from a local parish pay a visit to CBS, talk the the reporters, get to be good friends with them and take some pictures of the offices.
Then the people in the parish start having rally's in solidarity with the junior interns, exposing the work conditions, salary and probable sexual exploitation. They could talk about the work hours of the older staff, the caste system of the star reporters versus the regular staff. And every time the new evening news anchor is announced they could ask why, oh why, is it never a person of colour?
Should be a good use of the old liberals.
rcg
Pin,
I agree, "egalitarian ethics" is a better actual term. You will notice, however, that I did put "democratic" in quotation marks (a poor attempt at a little sarcasm on my part!). Anyway, we all know that the Roman Catholic Church is not a democracy and that is one of the major areas where the press just doesn't "get" it.
They proceed on the assumption that truth is arrived at by the popular opinion of the majority (which they work ceaselessly in trying to shape). This is how the typo "self" was left in my last post. I had started to say that the media is the self-appointed shaper and arbiter of public opinion. They don't wait for the public to make its collective mind up and then report it--no, they work for years to change and shape it to suit their goals for their vision of the ideal "progressive" society(and it's not just news media, it's entertainment media like MTV and reality shows etc.).
Personally, I think the reality fashion designer shows (which my daughters sometimes watch and laugh at)with gay guys like Tim Gunn are an effort to desensitize people to gay behavior and to make them more accepting of their political demands (such as gay "marriage"). They have already won over a lot of the younger (late teens and twenties) generation who are not strongly identified with their religion (if they ever had one).
Post a Comment