Saturday, April 12, 2008

The Limitless Errors of Liberalism

An anonymous liberal has apparently been pretty upset about my previous two posts - what with me claiming that the Church fathers and martyrs weren't misogynist anti-Semitic scum.

What's worse is that I think that this liberal is a Catholic (not really sure but he/she seems to have a dog in the fight). I've met Catholics like this before or heard of them. I have it on good authority that there are several of them teaching lay ministry and other programs at the Charlotte diocese.

They think they can proof-text Augustine and Aquinas to prove that they were misogynist or quote Chrysostom to show he was anti-Semitic. Now maybe they were, but that would depend heavily on our definitions of each word. If misogyny means saying anything about women that Rosie O'Donnell wouldn't say... then I suppose our anonymous friend has a point and I suppose that all of the anti-Catholic liberals are well within reason by saying such things. And if by "Antisemitism" we mean "any sort of discrimination or differentiation regarding the Jews" then I suppose they would be right as well.

If I were of the opinion of these liberals though, it would be extremely discomforting to know that these Jew hating misogynists were far more holy and full of the Holy Spirit than I could ever hope to aspire to.. After all, we are talking about not merely the greatest minds but also some of the greatest heroes and greatest champions of living exactly how a Christian ought to live. At which point if I were so against what seemed to be a glaring error in their praxis (not living up to our high Rosie O'Donnell standards) then I'd probably start re-evaluating what it really meant to be a "good Christian" or whether being a "Christian" was even a good thing at all. If our highest level of aspiration as a Christian is sainthood and those that have achieved it (like Augustine, Aquinas and Chrysostom) fall objectively short of pure goodness (Rosie O'Donnell) then maybe the Church actually got this whole thing wrong anyway. Or perhaps still I am wrong (which is the thought that has never crossed any liberal's mind which is why they remain liberals).

At any rate, I'm sure my new friend is rather upset at me for deleting his comments (if he ever comes back to see it). If you've read my blog for any length of time you'll notice that I don't often do that. In fact, his was probably the third or fourth comment I've ever deleted in the nearly 2 years I've been blogging and at least two of them were spam.

I don't pretend not to have anything to learn from him but it's pretty hard to extract meaningful conversation from in between ad hominem attacks and (what seems to be) typical liberal sarcasm. Now, I know I'm not the least sarcastic person in the world and I am prone to use it a bit too much on occasion - but there is a certain fine line I will not cross and when someone else does cross that same line - I tend to discontinue the conversation. Still, I am willing to dialogue publicly about this so if anyone disagrees with me, have at it - just leave the attitude at the door and refrain from personal attacks is all I ask. Oh yea, one more thing - please take the time to understand and respond to my argument instead of merely reading the title of the post and replying with something on topic but not directly related.

1 comment:

Thos said...

Pride in being "enlightened" is a form of self-righteousness. Our righteousness is found elsewhere.

Peace,
Thos.