»

Reactionaries Definitely Past Sell By Date

Pope Blasts Reactionary Jerks for Jesus who Busted up Kristallnacht Commemoration in Buenos Aires

The pope knows perfectly well that when you scratch a Reactionary, you find a Jew-hating nutjob like the fanatics shouting “Hail Mary” in the same tone (and with the same intent) as their fathers and mothers shouted “Sieg Heil!’ after an evening reminiscing about the Good Old Days over drinks with immigrant doctor Josef Mengele.  You also find a narcissistic, self-pitying bully who fundamentally hates the Church’s evangelistic enterprise and instinctively does whatever repulsive thing he can–such as cheer for genocide–in order to drive as many people as possible away from the Church.  The people who do this stuff are enemies of the gospel, of the love of God, and of the human race.  They are in grave spiritual danger.

Pope Francis, reacting to the disruption of a recent interfaith Kristallnacht  memorial, told Latin American religious leaders visiting the Vatican that “aggression cannot be an act of faith.”

“Preaching intolerance is a form of militancy that must be overcome,” Francis  told the delegation on Tuesday.

“Overcome” not “met with apologies or accomodation” is the key word there.  More antics like that one and the Pharisees in the Reactionary Bunker may find that they will finally witness that Hammer of Excommunication they so long to inflict on others coming down in the  last place they expect.

  • Rachel

    Well said!!

  • kirthigdon

    Needless to say, the Pope did not use any over-the-top rhetoric about “reactionary jerks” or “enemies of the Gospel, of the love of God, and of the human race”,the latter reminiscent of the Stalinist phrase “enemies of the people”. I suspect Pope Francis will continue to overcome with love and not with the hammer of excommunication. I’ve long argued that public excommunications are at best pointless and at worst counter-productive. Excommunicating, for example, Joe Biden or Nancy Pelosi would simply drive more people out of the Church and we should be trying to bring more people in. So public excommunication should probably be reserved for technical cases like ordaining bishops without Papal agreement. In retrospect, Pope Benedict probably made a mistake in lifting the excommunication of the SSPX bishops, but I can’t fault him for erring on the side of charity even if his attempt at reconciliation was rejected. As far as automatic excommunications are concerned, such as for assisting or having an abortion, these are in practice simply lifted in the confessional along with giving absolution, so what is the point?

    Kirt Higdon

    • Illinidiva

      No.. Pope Francis has an even better phrase for these types – “self-absorbed promethean neo-pelagians.” This is the greatest putdown of all time. I wouldn’t like to get on Papa’s bad side; he has a bit of a bite and snark to him. The SSPX Argentina didn’t act up like this when Bergoglio was around because they seem scared of him. If they’d have shown up in Buenos Aires Cathedral to disrupt the memorial service when Bergoglio was presiding, the former bouncer would have thrown them out in a jiffy.
      I don’t think that the entire group should be excommunicated, but I do think that the bishops and some of the superiors of SSPX should be.

      • capaxdei

        I admit that I still haven’t figured out what is promethean in the mindset the Pope is criticizing — or maybe I just haven’t figured out the mindset.

        Me, I’d go with “self-absorbed, neo-pelagian cargo cultists,” since their religious practices are taken from the Church’s treasury.

        • Illinidiva

          By “promethean” I think that Francis is suggesting that they are suggesting that they think their way is better than the way of God as revealed through the Church. Francis is a Vatican II priest and is more favorable to the Council than either of his last two predecessors. He has said it is the “beautiful work of the Holy Spirit.” By defying the Council, the SSPX types are defying God’s work.

          • capaxdei

            “they think their way is better than the way of God as revealed through the Church” — Makes sense, though to me that seems only an incremental refinement to “neo-pelagian.”

            “more favorable to the Council than either of his last two predecessors” — What favorability metric are you using? His last two predecessors were of course both at the Council, which may give them a certain liberty of perspective that he hasn’t claimed for himself. But I think of his letter praising Archbishop Marchetto as providing “the best hermeneutics of the Second Vatican Council,” and though I have no idea who Archbishop Marchettois or what his hremeneutics of the Second Vatican Council are, I’ve read that it’s very much in line with Pope Benedict’s take.

            • Illinidiva

              Francis’ take on the Second Vatican Council is much different from Benedict’s. There are huge differences in how Francis views his role and how Benedict viewed his role. There have been many studies of the huge differences in optics between the two and how the two approach the liturgy. Both Benedict and JPII were part of the Council; however, both had a very narrow interpretation of it. Benedict especially was constantly railing against the excesses of Vatican II. This is different from Francis who told the Dutch bishops that about half of the work of the Council hasn’t been finished. I think that Francis envisions a more decentralized Church with more power to regional and national bishops’ conferences. This is in contrast with the increasing centralization and oversight from Rome over the past 30 years.

              As for the Marchetto letter, I’ve never heard of him either, but only Father Z seems to be trumpeting it. He is also trumpeting some ridiculous flowery form letter about the Council of Trent that probably wasn’t written by Francis as proof that Francis dislikes Vatican II. Father Z is a bully who essentially trades on his clerical collar and has no official assignment. He mooches off his blog readers (and gets a quite handsome salary from it.) Saying that Francis and Benedict have different visions of the Church would lead to donations drying up.

              • WesleyD

                Illinidiva, you claim that “Benedict especially was constantly railing against the excesses of Vatican II.”

                How frequently is “constantly”? A dozen times? A hundred times?

                Let’s make it easy. I challenge you to name just one time that Benedict “railed against the excesses of Vatican II.”

                • Illinidiva

                  The whole reform of the reform.. aka his entire papacy.

                  • WesleyD

                    What do you think the word “railing” means? I think we must have very different definitions. And what do you mean by “excesses”?

                    • Illinidiva

                      I think that Benedict disliked then regular Mass and wanted to return to a pre-Vatican II or at least a hybrid which was heavy on Latin, chant, sparkly vestments, and the “peasants” bowing and scraping to their betters in the priesthood. I also don’t think he was for the idea of providing the bishops conferences or the laity with a real say in the Church. I’ve heard people argue this wasn’t the case and cite some obscure case, but his actions spoke otherwise. He did have a pre-Vatican II vision of the papacy and he appointed really odious characters as bishops.. Two words – Raymond Burke.

                    • margaret1910

                      In other words, “I got nothin”. Except for what “I think” and “I don’t think”. I join with Wesley D..if you have evidence that Benedict XVI “was always railing against VII”, do please provide it. Just so that you know..Raymond Burke was appointed by JPII as Bishop..not Benedict XVI. Do try to keep up.

                    • Illinidiva

                      JPII appointed some real stinkers as well. However, Benedict was the one who appointed Burke to his current position and also allowed him to slime his way into a position to appoint all his traditionalist friends into different dioceses in the U.S. Benedict’s U.S. appointments are long on bishops who like playing sparkly dress up and short on those who care about the poor. I highly doubt that Burke and the BurkeClones spend a lot of talking with the homeless and buying them food like the Pope and Krajewski like to.

                    • margaret1910

                      oh..moving the goalposts now? I suspect that the eeeevil PBXVI had some ulterior motive for raising Sean O’Malley and Luis Tagle to the level of Cardinal? Honestly, once again, “you doubt”..”sparkly dress up”..and now it is all about the US? Once again, Sean Cardinal O’Malley? You are a fool..please just stop. As if you know what Burke does for the homeless..just stop unless you have evidence.

                    • Illinidiva

                      Cardinal Sean was appointed AB of Boston under JPII. His predecessor resigned in disgrace for covering up child abuse. Being AB of Boston means that one receives a red hat. As for Tagle, I don’t live in the Philippines and therefore the appointment for AB of Manila doesn’t concern me. Please name one pastoral bishop appointed in the U.S. under Benedict. It seems that they are all traditionalists and culture warrior types.

                      Burke was appointed to his Curia position under Benedict. As AB of St. Louis, he would have been elevated to cardinal. If Beeditc wanted to show himself to be more liberal and pastoral than his reputation, why not remove Burke from being AB of St Louis and put him to work on a major time detailing the history of the Cappa Magna and sparkly vestments rather than giving him major appointment.

                    • margaret1910

                      Wait..first you said that Benedict XVI appointed Raymond Burke as a Bishop..booo..eeeevil BXVI. When I pointed out that, actually, JPII appointed Raymond Burke as a Bishop, then you said..BXVI made him a Cardinal. Then, I pointed out two Cardinals who were given the red hat by BXVI who could not, by any stretch of the imagination be considered to be “traditionalists” or “guys who like to wear sparkly vestments”. Then..it becomes a curial appointment that you don’t like. And Cardinal Tagle doesn’t matter because he is not in the US. hmmm. You are gonna hurt yourself if you keep playing twister. Alert! Alert! many Catholic Bishops are not, in fact, in the US. And, still, they are considered to be “Catholic Bishops” who sorta kinda matter to the Church. Please consider that St John, St Andrew, St Thomas and Archbishop Romero etc..were also NOT US citizens. I am glad to know that we can safely ignore them, because of this.

                      I am so very sorry that Benedict XVI did not consider your ideas of how he could show himself to be liberal and pastoral. I am guessing that Francis also may not be considering your (no doubt, veeeery important) opinions before he does what he does.

                    • Illinidiva

                      Again please tell me what pastoral bishops that Benedict appointed in the U.S.? I don’t care about Tagle because I live in Chicago, not Manila. I was deeply concerned by some of the appointments in America because Cardinal George is retiring soon. I was concerned some culture warrior jerk like Chaput or a BurkeClone who likes playing sparkly dress up would be appointed.

                      And I know my opinions don’t matter but I pray that Papa appoints an O’Malley rather than a Burke in Chicago.

                    • margaret1910

                      please define “pastoral bishop”.

                    • Illinidiva

                      Cardinal Bergoglio

                    • Dan

                      “Sparkly dress up.” How penetrating. What a broad, ugly assumption, to suggest that clerics who favor liturgical dignity don’t spend time or effort on the poor. The church was doing good work for the poor long before the felt banners and guitars showed up in the churches.

                    • Illinidiva

                      Cardinal Bergoglio spent his nights in Buenos Aires serving the homeless. He would go out after dark and give them food. Apparently, Papa is still doing this. I highly doubt that Burke or any of the other Curia types are running around Rome with Papa and Don Corrado. It might dirty Buke magna cappa.
                      I’m sorry. I keep hearing about how traditionalist bishops do care for the poor, but I have yet to hear about how they are doing so. Cardinal Bergoglio’s actions in Buenos Aires are my new gold standard. I highly doubt that Burke was walking around St. Louis incognito after dark and I doubt that he is doing so in Rome. Burke was the farthest thing from pastoral. He excommunicated an entire parish in St. Louis and bullied victims of clerical sexual abuse. And I don’t see him expressing a willingness in his new role to help people undergoing painful divorces, including abuse victims. In fact, he probably would advise women being slapped around that it is their fault and they should do a better job making sammiches for their husbands and have more babies. Burke epitomizes what is wrong with the Church.
                      And many of the BurkeClones in the U.S. follow his example. Paprocki, Chaput, Cordileone, Sample, etc. are all about freaking about gay marriage and abortion and not about caring for poor people. I don’t think any of them sneak out after dark and talk with the homeless.

                    • margaret1910

                      once again..”I think..I don’t think”. Forgive me, but why in the name of all that is good and Holy would anyone care what you think? Ah, yes, eeevil Cardinal Chaput who declared that if we do not care for the poor, we are going to Hell. And, please, Cardinal Tagle does not count, but Cardinal Bergoglio does? Get over it..does Archbishop Romero count?

                      Sorry, I see what you want, and you are not getting it from Pope Francis. You do NOT have any idea what these men are, or are not doing..you just assume they are not. Because, as far as I can tell..you do not like them, therefore they must be bad, bad men. Sorry, I think you need to get over yourself.

                    • Illinidiva

                      “once again..”I think..I don’t think”. Forgive me, but why in the name of all that is good and Holy would anyone care what you think? Ah, yes, eeevil Cardinal Chaput who declared that if we do not care for the poor, we are going to Hell.”

                      Chaput spends most of his time screeching about social issues and has changed his tune because he really wants a red hat. And I highly doubt that he is actually going to soup kitchens at night or talking to the homeless on the street. The first words out of the man’s mouth when John Allen interviewed him in July was to whine about his accommodations in Rio.

                      ” And, please, Cardinal Tagle does not count, but Cardinal Bergoglio does?”
                      I was giving you a quick example of what I thought a pastoral bishop was like. Yes, Tagle is a very pastoral bishop, but he is in the Philippines. The game was to provide an American bishop who was both appointed by Benedict and is pastoral. Here is another example – Cardinal O’Malley, who was appointed by JPII.

                      ” Get over it..does Archbishop Romero count?”
                      Archbishop Romero is a martyr of the Catholic Church. He was assasinated in El Salvador in 1980. This makes him neither an American or someone appointed by Benedict.

                      “Sorry, I see what you want, and you are not getting it from Pope Francis.”
                      I’d like a bishop like O’Malley or Bergoglio himself in Chicago once Cardinal George retires. What is so wrong with hoping that the Pope appoints bishops like himself to posts?

                      ” You do NOT have any idea what these men are, or are not doing..you just assume they are not. Because, as far as I can tell..you do not like them, therefore they must be bad, bad men.”

                      I’m sorry. When have any of Benedict’s U.S. appointments acted anything like Bergoglio or O’Malley? They are slimy bomb throwers who have never shown an iota of care to the people of their dioceses. Seriously, what has Burke actually done of value? All he has done is play sparkly dress up and pick needless fights with politicians. Francis should really take away his frequent flier miles and close his account at Gammarelli’s and tell him to do his actual job reviewing annulment requests.

                    • Dan

                      There is a bile in your comments that is beyond the pale. You “highly doubt” and you “don’t think” and you attribute ugly attributes to people based on your presumptions rather than evidence. “n fact, he probably would advise women being slapped around that it is
                      their fault and they should do a better job making sammiches for their
                      husbands and have more babies.” This statement is breathtaking in its ugliness. You are not the compassionate face of the church that you believe yourself to be.

                    • Illinidiva

                      Please tell me one thing that Burke has ever done that was merciful or compassionate to anyone. He couldn’t even be merciful or compassionate to the victims of clerical sexual abuse. He was apparently rude, dismissve and obnoxious to them during his time in Wisconsin and St Louis. And that is how he and traditionalist see women – as lesser than men and at their service.

                      And I don’t consider myself the “compassionate face” of the Church. That would be Pope Francis. I am someone who was deeply hurt by conservative Catholics like Burke for quite a long time and sees alot of hope that these sorts will be sent in exile for a period of prayer, penance, and work with poor in order to pay for the damage that they’ve caused many people in the Church.

                    • Dan

                      I am a traditionalist and think no such thing about women. nor do the people around me at Mass. I can’t address the depth of Cdl. Burke’s mercy or compassion because I don’t know him and wouldn’t presume to judge him as you appear to be so eager to do. Perhaps he adheres to this advice: “But when you give to the poor, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving will be in secret; and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you.”

                    • Dan

                      I would only add, before bowing out of this conversation, that the legally sanctioned slaughter of children in the womb and the redefinition of marriage by judicial fiat are things worth freaking out over.

                    • Illinidiva

                      “I am a traditionalist and think no such thing about women. nor do the people around me at Mass.”
                      You do believe that the husband is the head of the household and should be making all the family decisions, correct? I cannot even begin to tell you the amount of lectures I got in Catholic school growing up about the glories of being a stay-at-home mommy. There is a soft paternalism associated with tradtionalist Catholics views toward women.

                      And Cardinal Burke dismisses those in the Church who care for the poor as “Communists.” (I wonder what he thinks about his new boss.)

                    • Dan

                      “You do believe that the husband is the head of the household and should be making all the family decisions, correct?”
                      No. My wife and I make decisions together. One of the decisions we agreed on was that she would stay home while our girls were young. Now that they are older, she has gone back to work part time.

                      Her decision to stay home is one she was happy with, as she considered it a great joy and privilege.

                      She would never be dismissive of “stay at home mommies” as she recognizes the importance and dignity of that role.

                      You really ought to quit making assumptions about other people’s motives.

                    • Illinidiva

                      I have no issues with a wife or husband who decides to stay home with the kid. I hope that all decisions are made solely based on who makes the most money/ whose career is most flexible and who is best with the kids rather than traditional gender roles. I also hate the fact that I was taught in Catholic school that my only role in life was to have babies and clean house for my husband and that I am somehow a “lesser person” under his guidance and protection.

                    • WesleyD

                      Illindiva, you have listed some things that Benedict held in his secret thoughts (such as his dislike for the regular Mass). So it appears you have withdrawn your original claim, that he “railed against Vatican II” (railing requiring a public statement, of course). I have no way of disproving your theory that Bendict privately disliked the new Mass.

                      What we do know for a fact is that in seven years as pope he never ONCE celebrated the Old Mass in public, or as far as we know in private. You may theorize he secretly celebrated it in private, and I can’t disprove that theory.

                      For the rest of your comments, it appears you are unfamiliar with the teachings of Vatican II’s Constitution on the Divine Liturgy, which encourages Gregorian chant (section 110), and mandates a Mass that contains a mixture of Latin and the vernacular (sections 36 and 54).

                    • Illinidiva

                      This is a narrow interpretation of Vatican II. Which is what I mentioned was Benedict’s interpretation. Benedict had a very Eurocentric view of the Church, especially in terms of the liturgy. This doesn’t honor the cultural backgrounds and heritages of other countries.

                    • WesleyD

                      Actually, I wasn’t interpreting Vatican II’s Sacrosanctum Concilium at all. I was just reading it. (Although I typed “section 110″ when I should have written “sections 116-117″).

                    • Illinidiva

                      And that is your emphasis on the importance of these matters. I think what is more important is the emphasis on allowing different cultures to express their own devotion to God through their own culture rather than demanding that everyone worship God through in a manner suitable to the High Middle Ages (and one that barred the “peasants” who were illiterate from understanding their faith.)

                    • Stu

                      Bovine scatalogy.

              • Ye Olde Statistician

                There have been many studies of the huge differences in optics between the two

                Well, as long as there have been “studies.” Even many of them. Perhaps with wee p-values.

              • S. Mirphy

                Actually, Fr Z’s audience includes quite a few people who see the differences between Pope Benedict & Pope Francis exactly as you do, but with the polarity reversed. He seems to be trying to make them see that Francis is not actually Tarpeia letting the Gauls in, by pointing out the continuity with his predecessors. Give him his due, even if you can’t see his point of view.

                • Illinidiva

                  I highly doubt that he is doing so out of the pureness of his heart. He has a financial motive to make sure that his audience thinks Benedict and Francis are in agreement. And the lengths to which he is straining are getting pretty desperate.. Francis signed a formal form letter that wasn’t even written by him for a celebration about the Council of Trent – He must totally agree with Benedict’s narrow interpretation of Vatican II.

                  It is also funny that the one area that you can actually “Read Francis through Benedict”, i.e. economics, that this comparison was no where to be found. I guess Father Z never read anything that Benedict ever wrote on economics and thought that he must be a member of the Tea Party because he agrees with Father Z’s fussy liturgical concerns.

        • Mariana Baca

          I looked up what promethean means as an idiom in Spanish. Basically it means trying to bring the divine, the mysterious, miraculous signs, and the holy about through merely human means. This is emphasized by pairing it with pelagian, which is trying to attain salvation through merely human means.

          • capaxdei

            Thanks. You can also check Evangelium Vitae and Caritas in Veritate for how the previous Popes used the term.

    • capaxdei

      “I suspect Pope Francis will continue to overcome with love and not with the hammer of excommunication.”

      Yes, “overcome” is neither “met with apologies or accommodation” nor “crushed under a merciless heel.”

      Excommunication is objectively a medicinal act. You don’t take medicine that will leave you sicker than before.

  • http://www.likelierthings.com/ Jon W

    It seems to me, Mark, that your classification system lacks nuance. I’ve noticed in the past that certain friends of mine might count as “Reactionaries” according to your use in that particular post. It would, however, be grossly libelous to suggest that they counted as “Reactionaries” in the sense you are using here.

    • Illinidiva

      The traditionalists in Argentina seem to represent a special kind of crazy. However, it does seem that traditionalists elsewhere should really watch out for these tendencies.

  • peggy

    Interrupting the event was not at all an acceptable way to address their concerns that a Catholic Church was used for Jewish worship.

    And here we have some “bad traditionalist” men in Argentina protecting the Cathedral from some very crazy and nasty pro-abortionist women. Just this last week or so. Graphic video.

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/feminist-mob-attacks-cathedral/

    • Illinidiva

      First, it wasn’t a Jewish worship service; it was an interfaith prayer service. Catholics, including the Archbishop of Buenos Aires were there as well. Secondly, the group in the abortion protest video was the same group that was involved with the Buenos Aires Cathedral incident. Google Pagina Catolica and Panorama Catolica; it seems that both are connected with SSPX Argentina. I warn you that both are pretty vile in their disgust toward Jews. One also has an entry called “El Apellido Bergoglio y el 666″, which suggests that Francis is the anti-Christ. I don’t see how someone can be Catholic and think that the leader of the Church is the anti-Christ. I think that it is important that Catholics understand that there are some allies we can do without. This is like partnering with Westboro Baptist Church on a pro-life crusade.

      • kirthigdon

        Illinidiva, maybe you could be more specific with your links. The only thing I could gather from the sites you mentioned is that both are reporting on the demonstrations and one posted youtube videos of both demonstrations. I’ll stipulate that both sites are sympathetic to what they report, but that doesn’t prove that the same people or organizations were involved in both incidents. Even if that is the case it just establishes that some people can do both good things and bad things. Kind of like the rest of us. Why not praise the good and gently but firmly criticize the bad? A lady who is a friend of mine once tried to strike up a friendly conversation with some Westboro Baptists at a pro-life demonstration. As it was obvious that she was Catholic, they treated her very rudely, but I commend her for making the attempt.
        Kirt Higdon

        • Illinidiva

          From what I gather, at least Pagina Catolica was involved in both instances. It seems like the pattern is that they call for a certain action and the post video after. I’m assuming that people were bussed in for both protests. All I know is that they seem to be claiming responsibility for both and I tend to believe them.

          And yes, conservatives and pro-lifers should be very careful about their allies. In fact, I hope that National Right to Life and others ensure that as best as they possibly can that fringy groups are kept away from protests. The reporters will always pick out the fring-y characters at a protest and it smears the entire movement if the crazy anti-Semite is spouting off Holocaust denial on camera at the March for Life.

  • Almario Javier

    Dear Mr. Shea,

    Labelling these nuts reactionary is an insult to actual reactionaries. A reactionary would remember that he is supposed to give due respect to his superiors, not to mention obedience to Holy Mother Church.

    • ivan_the_mad

      I shouldn’t think that the case at all. Simply put, the reactionary desires the restoration of a previous status quo. But too often, the reactionary makes an idol of the past, and this perverts his perception of the present.

      Worse still, in matters ecclesiastic, the reactionary risks a rift with the status quo of the Church. There’s a reason that the Lesser Doxology doesn’t stop with sicut erat.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X