Catholic Men
A scathing op-ed from my friend Rod Dreher:
With Pope John Paul II ailing, Catholics are starting to think about the next pope. My choice? Marine Corps Lt. Gen. James Mattis, the crusty leatherneck now in trouble for saying that in war, it's fun to shoot bad guys.Stuart Buck
The Marine general told his audience: "You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them."
Whoa! That's a real man talking. OK, OK, I'm not serious about wanting the Marine Corps' Dirty Harry serving as the Vicar of Christ. Still, my church needs a leader who takes visceral satisfaction in delivering justice to bullies. If John Paul had pitilessly shot down the careers of molester-shuffling American bishops early on, the church would be a better place today.
* * *
Why aren't the men who run the Catholic church raging against the cruelty of priests who prey on kids? Why do so many good priests and Catholic laymen remain as docile as eunuchs despite it all? Do we think we're not going to have to answer to God for our moral cowardice?
posted by Stuart Buck at
9:07 AM
7 Comments:
We Catholics have been cowardly to be sure, but the church is two thousand years old, it will have its rough times
Why doesn't the Catholic church outright condemn a war based on lies? Now, I know the pope pondered if Dubya was the antichrist, but that was just his personal suspicions and not any offical line, obviously.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0MKY/is_9_27/ai_108881880
But mistakes or not, these are truly scary times and notice NOT a word from any church/religion that dares to speak out against any of it.
Muslims are being treated like scum by extreme, easily led Christians and Jews alike, just like the nazis were persuaded to the same mindset (against Jews) during WW2.
It happens bit by bit. Its not like Hitler went from leading anti-semitic rallies one day, to the next day gassing millions of innocents. People would have done something to stop him. These things are like the farmers corn; one day it's growing over his head, and he didn't even see it growing.
This is what is happening today. And the church says NOTHING. Just like in WW2.
Hmm. Mr. Dreher's editorial may be scathing, but it's none-too-brilliant: "[M]y church needs a leader who takes visceral satisfaction in delivering justice to bullies." Is the Catholic Church's theology based upon Judge Dredd comic books or the Bible? Where did St. Paul take "visceral satisfaction in delivering justice to bullies"? (Christ got pissed at some money changers, yes, but it because of their presence in the Temple -- a theological distinction that I fear is lost on Mr. Dreher.)
Don't get me wrong -- some of his complaints are valid. But his rhetoric is overblown, and his arguments make me wince with embarrassment for him. (And I'm not even Catholic -- rather, a slowly de-lapsing Protestant.)
You call Mr. Dreher a friend and, having read your blog for some time, I find it hard to think that you'd be friends with the raving idiot that comes through in this column. Which suggests to me that Mr. Dreher is probably very intelligent, but may have simply mis-fired in this column. Not to be too presumptuous, but perhaps, as a friend, you could suggest to him that MAXIMUM SHOCK VALUE is not always the highest form of advocacy.
von of Obsidian Wings
Von --
(1) What do you mean by referring to the "theological distinction" that the moneychangers disciplined by Jesus were in the "Temple"? The whole point of Rod's column was that church leaders should express the same attitude towards child-molesting priests, rather than defiling the Christian equivalent of the Temple (i.e., the Church) by protecting and coddling them.
(2) Do you have children? What emotions would arise if it turned out that they were sexually molested by a religious leader? What if the religious leader's superior (a) did nothing about it; and/or (b) pretended to have no knowledge even after you notified him; and/or (c) lied about having told the police; and/or (d) moved the molester into another position within the church; and/or (e) told the molester to flee to another country to escape prosecution? All of that, and more, has been done by certain Catholic bishops. Rod is sick of that behavior. I don't blame him one bit.
Stuart --
At the risk of conceding that I have read hastily and made an error -- neither of which, of course, I've ever ever done -- I think that I may have been rage-blinded by the "visceral satisfaction" line.
I continue to have problems with Rod's tone and and implications of some of his rhetoric, but the comparison* that you make is an apt one. Since I've now calmed down enough to see that's also what Rod's ultimately driving at, well, mea culpa.
von of Obsidian Wings
*That said, I can't for the life of me figure out why you've put scare quotes around the word "Temple." (It seems, incidentally, that we read the story the same way.)
Those aren't scare quotes! Those are actual quotes. I was quoting you.
I was thinking, when the church finally addressed the issue, listening to the drawn-out ecclesiastical vowels, that we (meaning men who have children) don't want to hear about "healing" and "forgiveness" and "wholeness".
We want five minutes alone with the son of a bitch.
And it wasn't my kid. I'm just a basic, ordinary father.
If it had been my kid....
The church does not need to have the same visceral reaction--few of them have children--but they ought to be aware that it exists and it wouldn't exist if their people hadn't done one of the most horrid things imaginable. And kept on doing it. And facilitated it. And hid it. And pressured the victims and their families.
If they do not understand what any father feels, they're going to continue to try to get by on the cheap. Which means business as usual and that includes more of this as soon as the furor dies down.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home