Friday, June 05, 2015

Random thoughts and how we got here

When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control.
----Theodore Dalrymple





When my mother was girl, you had to go find the freak show. Sometimes that meant going into the tent that said "adults only"  at the carnival or  getting in to your truck and going in secret three counties over to a shack in the woods . When I was a girl it meant going to red light district downtown. By the time I was in college you could comfortably go to the back room of the video store and find the freak show. Now, it's on our computers and in the check out line at the grocery store. Not only can you not avoid it but since the freaks are feted, petted and adored you will lose your job, your business or your "friends" if you say in the mildest terms that you don't want to stand and cheer. 




I have two problems with the Benedict Option and "podding". First, is a practical consideration. If you are all in one place it makes it easy for the bad guys. Second, the whole thing seems like it could turn cultish in a second. 



I was listening to a good, solid, bread and butter priest who mentioned in passing that he sees a lot of disrespect these days. He wasn't talking about heretics, or C&E Catholics, He meant people who consider themselves good Catholics. Are you the parish busybody? Are you an inadvertent stalker? You may mean well but following your priest around the Internet is a bit much....  Are you on the liturgy committee (get off now!) and have no problem instructing the priest how you want him to celebrate Mass?  Have you started acting like your "ministry" is the most important thing in the parish?  Do you corner the priest after Mass and spend 20 minutes lecturing him while everybody stands around waiting for you to leave? Have you ever tried to start a parish group without the priest's permission or even though he said "no"? A lot of people were burned by bad priests. That does not give you the right to make every priest miserable. 

8 comments:

R J said...

Perhaps it is worth raising here a subject which, though not perhaps immediately related to the concerns rightly raised in Mrs. Dymphna's original post, is still broadly germane to those concerns (and to the wider problem of Catholic hypocrites). Amazingly enough, OnePeterFive - yes, the same outfit which not long ago tried making excuse after excuse for the wretched Bishop Finn - has in recent times partly redeemed itself.

It has done so by having bawled out those who call themselves "Catholics" but who have internalized every possible aspect of Protestant / Ayn Rand economic diabolism. Quite an eye-opening article it is, altogether, especially when the author in the comments section smacks down one "Jude":

http://www.onepeterfive.com/catholic-social-teaching-is-for-catholics-too/

If this becomes typical of OnePeterFive's work, I shall be more pleased than I had earlier thought possible.

Mary Ann Kreitzer said...

Dymphna, your random thoughts are always enlightening and I find myself affirming you with two thumbs up and an, "I wish I had said that." Thank you for your sound common sense -- particularly about the freak show. I find myself at the grocery store covering up the offensive magazines with Family Circle (when I'm not putting them under the dog food bags on the pet aisle).

newguy40 said...

"Protestant / Ayn Rand economic diabolism"

Is that a thing?

R J said...

Er, yes, "newguy40", it is indeed a thing.

Such papal encyclicals as Rerum Novarum and Quadragesimo Anno - encyclicals which, as well as condemning communism, rake fore and aft diabolically unrestrained capitalism - are, quite as much as the Church's sexual teachings, binding on every single Catholic's conscience under pain of sin.

But most Catholics these days have never heard of these encyclicals. How they can imagine they know their faith when they are so ignorant of them, it is not for me to inquire.

newguy40 said...

RJ -- Thanks for the clarification. I had never heard your pejorative before now.

R J said...

These things happen, newguy40. Not your fault. Not my fault. Not Mrs. Dymphna's fault or any other lay individual's fault.

It's the fault of the fact that almost no Catholic under 50 in the Western world now has the slightest knowledge of the Church's history, let alone of Her teachings as were once conveyed by proper catechetics. And for half a century this ignorance of the Faith has been precisely what the vast majority of bishops have wanted. Five decades of episcopal treason.

Hans Georg Lundahl said...

"When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control."
----Theodore Dalrymple

That is exactly what psychiatry is very often trying to make their patients into.

Hans Georg Lundahl said...

"I have two problems with the Benedict Option and "podding". First, is a practical consideration. If you are all in one place it makes it easy for the bad guys."

A good argument against any schooling that is not homeschooling too.

Plus, if finally a village is mowed down for not bowing down to the Beast, in the meantime they will have had a life and perhaps some training in not bowing down to it.

They will not have turned into a society of emasculated liars.

"Second, the whole thing seems like it could turn cultish in a second."

Is it sensible or is it cultish, is it politically correct or is it cultish, is it a carreer move or is it cultish.

How about, is it true or false, is it good or bad?

And how cultish are you, when you link to a priest hiding behind anonymity (I think I recognised Z, whom I know you otherwise are not too fond of) lambasting a book series by a Catholic author, who remained in good standing with the Church apart from his dissent from Novus Ordo (while he at least accepted it as "Ordinary Form" in a way), who published major parts of his novels while the Index congregation was still in work and was not put on a Roman Catholic edition of Index Librorum Prohibitorum, but whose work was instead put "on index" by Communist librarians, while at same time not linking to the man whose work the priest immediately had attacked, since Joseph Pearce had in fact responded to the priest. And of course, the blogger of Rorate suddenly (though a layman himself and certainly criticising priests he does not approve of) introduces an extra rule that only priests may respond to the priest on his blog, and of course they must show respect of a FELLOW man of the cloth, even if he had written a machwerk which deserves no or very little respect. Even if he had blundered into an area where he was clearly less instructed than some laymen (including the theological part!)