Is it just me, or are Catholics on the East Coast just really good at playing the victim?
Patrick Kennedy made some absolutely heinous public statements about the Catholic Faith.
His bishop publicly invites him to "come to Jesus" and have a private meeting.
Kennedy responds by saying more stupid things aloud to the press, including:
(a) Kennedy is a political victim of the bishop,
(b) why are we shooting one of our own?
(c) shouldn't this debate be undertaken privately?
The bishop responds to Kennedy's public whining in the press with his own public statement.
Kennedy goes into a pout about how this private dispute has suddenly become public and hides behind the media's skirts, refusing to discuss anything at all.
The Catholic press make fun of him.
Compare Pat Kennedy's situation to that of Chris West.
Christopher West made some absolutely heinous public statements about the Catholic Faith.
His instructors at John Paul II institute call him out on it, as do a veritable Who's Who of Catholic intelligentsia.
West goes into hiding while his supporters complain:
(a) West is a victim,
(b) why are we shooting one of our own?
(c) shouldn't this debate be undertaken privately, in journals that no one actually reads?
Numerous commentators ignore these questions and point out West is still a theological basket case.
West goes into a pout about how this private dispute has suddenly become public and hides behinds a cardinal's skirts, refusing to discuss any of the issues that have been raised at all.
Instead, his public reply is a compilation of MORE theologically stupid things.
Some of the Catholic press make fun of him.
Others start humming loudly and hope the whole thing goes away.
Chutzpah: Original Recipe
The definition of chutzpah is killing both of your parents and then throwing yourself on the mercy of the court because you're an orphan.
If the court doesn't know how you became an orphan, you'll be fine.
Catholic Chutzpah: Extra Crispy
In the Catholic version, it's publicly and repeatedly insisting on stupid, heretical things, then throwing yourself on the mercy of public opinion because people call you a heretic.
If the public doesn't know enough about the Faith to identify the errors, you'll be fine.
It worked for Teddy.
Will it work for Pat and Chris?
The Burning Question (tm): Are Chris West and Pat Kennedy cousins?
Has anyone checked the geneology here?
I'm just askin'...
3 comments:
Once again Steve you got your facts wrong. It was actually one of the Catholic "intelligencia" you speak of which asked Christopher to take it to the journal. He's not hiding behind anyone. I've heard him recently on Catholic Answers and he's been open, frank and completely willing to discuss the issues.
Get a clue! And get off your West tirade. It's boring.
From Janet Smith's first response to Dr. Schindler:
"What is puzzling is that an influential scholar chose this moment to issue a sweeping, negative critique of West in such a public forum...I wish, however, he had found another occasion to express his reservations about West’s work."
From Michael Waldstein's first response to Dr. Schindler:
"Since he is a careful scholar, Schindler should offer an analysis of West's position as documented in his most recent published works in an appropriate journal, rather than using this media firestorm to go in for a quick kill."
From Matthew Pinto's first response to Dr. Schindler:
"Yet some of our fellow Catholics have felt it important to spend their energies publicly lancing one of their own."
Peter, no one asked Chris West to "take it to the journals." The Westians all told Dr. Schindler to shut up and take it to the journals.
Chris has not addressed a single issue Dr. Schindler has raised. He hasn't addressed any issue of any substance at all, apart from a pathetic attempt to justify his idea that we can be free of concupiscence in this life. His supporters have done exactly the same thing.
And Pete, if you find it boring, don't read it.
The fact that you responded demonstrates that you don't find it boring, rather, you find it interesting enough to respond to. :)
Oh, and I almost forgot. In re Chris hiding behind the Cardinal's skirts...
From Chris West's own response:
"Now that Cardinal Justin Rigali and Bishop Kevin Rhoades have issued a statement, it seems appropriate for me to offer some reflections as well."
He wasn't man enough to even offer his pathetic pretense at addressing his own doctrinal problems until he could find a bishop and a cardinal willing to give him yet another pre-emptive "imprimatur."
Of course, this imprimatur is worth as much as the one Chaput put on the first edition of Good News, which is to say, not much.
Within two weeks of the good bishop's cloak-covering statement, West had already (a) publicly supported an anti-Catholic New Age mystic who falsely represented herself as a Carmelite abbess, and (b) had flagrantly mis-quoted Aquinas in an absurd attempt to support his own mis-guided theology.
I'm sure the bishops were happy about both of those antics...
Post a Comment