Hey, the touchy-feely, sloppy thinking, non-thinking, feeling-its-way to truth and goodness is on painful display at a holy gathering of holy bishops of the once-claiming-to-be the one true church but now trying to change how some young people think and solidify others in their already touchy-feely sloppy thinking etc.
What a show, which you can watch right here but shouldn’t if you have nervous stomachs: Leading Pro-Life Campaigner: Synod political mess of leftist talking points
The case against Pope Francis: National Review
The British monk-blogger cites U.S. bishops as a collective blot on the ecclesiastical landscape for their see-no-evil record in regards to McCarrick et al. but feels obliged to add:
After all, in England we had a similar case, that of Bishop [Kieran] Conry and his long-standing relationship with a mistress.
It was very well known in ecclesiastical circles, even from his days in Rome apparently. Yet he was promoted anyway.
Did any bishop protest at the time? The Conry case has one essential difference: his sin was with a woman, so a collective sigh of relief that it was not a minor encouraged silence.
Nor with a seminarian or other adult male, right? And in both cases ignored by the Vatican, and even some popes.
And unmentioned by the monk blogger. Bishop C.’s liaison was with a married woman and came after another six years earlier.
As Mehitabel the alley cat moaned repeatedly to his friend the cockroach, “Wotthehell, wotthehell, Archy?”
Hey, hey, ho, ho, electoral democracy has to go.
Home-grown Maoists. What next?
Manage without federal money and you can admit students as you wish. Harvard? Not so much. Hillsdale? No problem.
To put this in perspective, Hillsdale today has about 1,500 students, charges roughly $27,000 tuition for a first-rate liberal-arts education, and has a modest endowment of near $600 million. Harvard’s endowment clocks in at $39 billion.
If little Hillsdale can give up taxpayer dollars to remain true to its principles, surely big, wealthy Harvard can.
Harvard wants to have its policy and federal money too.
By the bye, Hillsdale’s history in the matter?
Back in the 1970s the federal government demanded the Michigan-based college begin counting its students by race and sex as a condition of the federal loans some of its students received.
For an institution whose founding charter made it the first college in the nation to declare itself open to all students “irrespective of nation, color, or sex,” and which boasted a long and noble history of color-blind admissions, this was insulting.
In 1956, for example, its undefeated football team refused an invitation to the Tangerine Bowl rather than comply with official demands that the college not field its black players.
So they made their “tough” decision and never looked back.
via WSJ
Some of us more than others, some hardly at all.
As Americans are learning as the costs of genetic testing fall, nearly all of us have multiple ethnic and racial backgrounds. Ms. Warren tried to make an identity politics virtue of a genetic banality.
Well, she wrote the book on banality.
via WSJ
When the aged and semi-blind Cardinal Ottaviani too the podium and had to take it on the chin.
During the first session of the Second Vatican Council, in the debate on the Liturgy Constitution, Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani asked: “Are these Fathers planning a revolution?” The Cardinal was old and partly blind. He spoke from the heart without a text about a subject which moved him deeply, and continued:
Are we seeking to stir up wonder, or perhaps scandal among the Christian people, by introducing changes in so venerable a rite, that has been approved for so many centuries and is now so familiar? The rite of Holy Mass should not be treated as if it were a piece of cloth to be refashioned according to the whim of each generation.
So concerned was he at the revolutionary potential of the Constitution, and having no prepared text, the elderly Cardinal exceeded the ten-minute time limit for speeches. At a signal from Cardinal Alfrink, who was presiding at the session, a technician switched off the microphone, and Cardinal Ottaviani stumbled back to his seat in humiliation.
The Council Fathers [assembled bishops] clapped with glee, and the journalists to whose dictatorship Father Louis Bouyer claimed the Council had surrendered itself, were even more gleeful when they wrote their reports that night and when they wrote their books at the end of the session. When we laugh, we do not think, and, had they not been laughing, at least some of the bishops might have wondered whether, perhaps, Cardinal Ottaviani had a point.
He did indeed!
Such was the “progressive” atmosphere. It’s a designation dripping with irony, in that in the matter of liturgical “reform,” a key argument was to regress to the liturgical simplicity of the early church.
Please get off it, Francis. It’s a tired theme (meme?), old at least since yesterday.
In what sense radical?
For starters, because he was a Jew who upset Judaism while relying on it entirely as foundation of his new religion.
See Galatians, last and this week’s readings source, where the essential Paul drives it home verse by verse: Jewish and Gentile converts were not to rely on The Law (Torah) and its observance for “justification,” that is, salvation. Another Jew who broke the traces and died for his trouble.
As for His vicar on earth in His year 2018, just what does he mean by this aimless, generic radical talk? Buying into the New Dispensation or embracing the (passing) radicalism of the day? He is maddeningly non-specific about this.
Except that he loves that “radical.” But we knew that.
via Pope Francis at canonization of new saints Paul VI, Oscar Romero: ‘Jesus is radical’
So much for #MeToo, more like #NotMe
Or who, me?
via Hillary: Bill Clinton affair with Lewinsky not an abuse of power, “absolutely not” reason to resign
Blithe Spirit 