Tuesday, September 06, 2005

Conservatives Repudiate Pope... Again

In light of the announcement (broken here) of the vote of confidence of the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI for Uncle Ted, today is McCarrick Appreciation Day here.

It seems I'm the only one celebrating. If you make it into an acronym, you'll get the reaction of the self-anointed "orthodox": M.A.D.

The anger has already manifested itself in several ways.... Diogenes is entertaining thoughts of suicide:
Uncle Di's valet is removing all sharp objects from his desk. Probably a good move.
A CWNews commentor brings us the "I Know What's Catholic Better Than the Pope" school of screaming:

The Church would be better off with a sede vacante in DC than to have a cardinal who lies to and about the Church, the successor to Saint Peter, and the Church's Teaching.

Well, at least this guy's being honest in his obstinate rejection of the judgment of the successor of St. Peter.

And Dom Bettinelli's exemplifying the "Blame Somebody -- But Who? I Don't Know, Just Blame Somebody Who's Not the Pope..." tack:
Help is not on the way. Who exactly is informing Pope Benedict about the internal affairs of the Church in the US? Whoever it is needs to be replaced.
Bettinelli's also entering denial that this came from Rome, as if the nuncio's some kind of whirling dervish.

OK, so if we're to infer anything from all this amplified rage, accompanied by the always precious self-delusion, it's either one of two things:

1. That the very same Pope who was seen by these same angry critics in their more loving moments as the great champion of orthodoxy and the best hope of the church is:
1. untrustworthy
2. obtuse
3. incompetent
4. heterodox, and
5. not as Catholic as Lawler & Co. -- because they say so

or 2. (And this is the more realistic choice): That, as with the Levada appointment, the people who "love" B16, really love calling for McCarrick's head and turned his succession into a political campaign and a Christmas wish list for their own agenda will only accept and trust the judgment of the Pope:
1. when he accedes to their expressed demands
2. when he accedes to their expressed demands, and
3. when he accedes to their expressed demands, because we all know a bunch of
self-righteous conservative Americans know what's better for the church than the bishop of
Rome who was elected to do the job.

Call me confused, but that's the way I see it -- they're right on a par with their separated SSPX brethren right now.... Remember what Ratzinger has said about the dangers of worshipping the golden calf of ourselves? In this case, it's the golden calf of their agenda trumping their faith.

I just want to know what ever happened to "You're XVI, You're Beautiful, and You're Mine."



Blogger patrick said...

I'm convinced that many of these people will quit the Catholic Church at some point and will join either an SSPX like body or evangelical/fundamentalism. On the other hand, fury at the Pope and/or Curia is not new among Catholics. Father Fortescue and Msgr. Duchesne are good examples of that!

It's also incredible to me that McCarrick is bashed on the abortion/communion issue when these same folks didn't say a word about his predecessor's policy which wasn't any stricter. Oh well.

6/9/05 17:33  
Blogger duarted said...

What would you do with us who sincerely believe that McCarrick misled us regarding then Cardinal Ratzinger's letter? I must admit that this "non-action" is a bit perplexing, but I trust that the Holy Father knows what he is doing.

6/9/05 17:37  
Blogger Fr. John said...

"I will be obedient and respectful to the bishop as long as he does what I want him to do and as long as he agrees with me." Someday, one of the detractors will have the courage to say this.

6/9/05 18:01  
Blogger Jeff said...

I DO think one should be obedient and respectful to bishops, I DO trust the Pope, and I DON'T dislike Cardinal McCarrick (my next-diocese-neighbor and the one who provides my indult Mass!). I think of him as my "second" bishop. I don't agree with those moaning about this continuation in office.

But I don't think it's somehow new or schismatical to question the judgment of a Pope, even one you don't like. They called Pope Pius IX "Ultramontane" didn't they?

And our kind host calls bishops like Vasa names when he doesn't like what they do. They were appointed by the Pope, too! Not to be encouraged from anyone in a public forum; but, gee, guys, you've never been puzzled or frustrated when people you admire and support do things that you find strange or that you heartily disagree with?

A tempest in a teapot; obviously a Catholic who questions the judgment of a Pope is not a schismatic, that's a silly comparison. All Popes make mistakes of judgment sometimes. We have to obey them anyway.

Diogenes says, "Oh my God, how could the Pope have done THAT? Sigh...but I'll have to obey him anyway." Fellay says, "Oh my God, how could the Pope have done THAT? Non serviam! I refuse to obey; I'll do my own thing til he comes to his senses." Huge difference...

6/9/05 18:21  
Blogger Dymphna said...

I don't get it. I belong to the DC diocese and I don't see what's so terrible about McCarrick. Compared to some other dioceses we're not in the worst shape. I hightailed it out of my old parish in the Arlington diocese because I couldn't take the funky masses at my old church and found sanity in DC.

6/9/05 22:01  
Blogger Jimmy Mac said...

When in wonder,

When in doubt .....

Run in circles,

Scream and shout!

7/9/05 00:56  

Post a Comment

<< Home