Pat Archbold wonders…

Who I am Talking About? He’s responding to this.

A vigorous conversation ensues, and I reply as follows:

Pat:

If what I wrote does not apply to you, then I rejoice. However, if you are wondering whether it doesn’t apply to anybody on the Right, then I can only suggest that you read my comboxes (or several of the comments right here). The examples I gave came from my own readers. So, for instance, A Proud Conservative reads all criticism of any conservative figure like this: “I must admit after reading one of Mark’s articles on conservatives I almost decided we must not be of the same religion. I have often felt a person couldn’t possibly be a liberal and a Catholic at the same time. How can one condone abortion, take God out of everything, feel a just war is worse than the killing of millions of unborn babies, etc.”

That is simply astounding to me. Criticize some Ohio GOP candidate for belonging to a group that hails the Waffen SS as brave idealists, get told that you are not a Catholic and that you are a liberal who supports abortion and wants to take God out of everything.

Seriously, if anybody wishes to understand what I’m responding to, all they need to do is read the comments on my blogs. I’m basically a conservative myself, so my intention is not to tar the entire Right. But the fact remains that the Right has certain pathologies that need to be addressed rather than denied. So I wrote about it.

The hopeful thing is that many folks in this combox, themselves quite obviously conservative, are seeing the problem and making noise about it. As I said, I want the conservative to win, because I think the Left is a disaster. But by “win” I don’t mean merely “win the election”. I mean I want a healthy conservatism that conserves, not a radicalized “conservatism” that is remaking itself in the image and likeness of it ideological enemy. The only hope the Right has is that it remains in union with Christ. But the consequentialist mindset that has become rampant on the Right does not bode well for that. So I do as conscience bids me and make noise about that fact.

If, in your case, the shoe does not fit, then don’t wear it. But a quick glance at my comboxes makes it clear that it does fit elsewhere.

One last point. I’ve been told repeatedly that I used a broad brush. I confess I don’t understand that. If I had simply written “Why I am so Hard on Conservative American Catholics” that would have been a broad brush. But, in fact, I narrowed the focus to a very specific sort of Conservative American Catholic in my first line: “…who put their conservative Americanism before their Catholic faith?”

If that’s not you, then that’s not you. But, as I just mentioned, in my comboxes, that’s plenty of people. I’ve had people in my comboxes declare that when the Pope states unequivocally that the prohibition against torture “may never be contravened”, well that’s just his prudential judgment and we can just ignore him. I’ve had people declare that America is the closest thing we have to Augustine’s City of God. I’ve had people declare that Glenn Beck is a prophet. I’ve had readers declare that the guidance of the Magisterium is worthless. And on and on. Conservatives who keep their heads on straight (and they obviously do exist because some of them are responding right here) were not who (or is it whom? :)) I am addressing. So I have to deny the “broad brush” charge. I had in mind a particular sort of conservative who tries to reduce the faith to an ideology and who excludes people from the faith merely because they violate a tribal shibboleth by speaking critically of a conservative candidate. Not infrequently, I have seen that quickly devolve (as above) into a declaration that the *real* reason Candidate Jones is being criticized is because of a secret love of abortion, atheism, and gay marriage. It’s an absurd thing to say, and only demonstrates my point about the danger of reducing the faith to identification with a political ideology.

If you want to weigh in on the conversattion, come on over!