An unpalatable Dish indeed
Blogger and journalist Andrew Sullivan is an openly homosexual Catholic of amazing perversity when it comes to 1) the obligation of a Catholic or an other Christian to conform not only his or her personal life but his or her political judgments to the substance of the Faith; and 2) the distinction between the Church insisting that believers believe the content of the Faith on one hand, and the Church seeking political power on the other.
His latest tirade on the subject labels the American Catholic hierarchy as something they most assuredly are not- Rovian conservatives- while somehow equating the confession of what the Christian faith has taught for two thousand years about the nature of marriage with the will to power. This to be contrasted with moral authority- defined as a failure on the part of the Church to condemn what the Faith has always taught was immoral, namely homosexual behavior and the pretense of arraingements other than those between one man and one woman to the legal and social status of marriage.
Got that?
Sullivan, whose invention of the concept "Christianism" to describe the quaint notion that one does not cease to be a Christian when one enters the voting booth can only be sustained by the most elaborate of intellectual contortions, shows himself to be something of an intellectual rubber man when he proclaims his confidence the power of something he calls "the Gospel" and which is not only distinct from, but apparently contradictory to, the teachings of the apostles and the Christian tradition, to overcome the craven power-hunger of those conniving old men who tell those committed to their spiritual care that they really ought to believe the substance of the religion they profess- as Sullivan himself, of course, does not.
Presumably because the Christian faith contradicts the Gospel.
And all this time I thought ELCA theologians and pastors were the only ones who went in for turning "Gospel" into a buzzword with which to authorize their own rejection of the content of the Faith in favor of their personal preferences and prejudices. Silly me. The practice seems to have spread to gay Catholic bloggers, too.
His latest tirade on the subject labels the American Catholic hierarchy as something they most assuredly are not- Rovian conservatives- while somehow equating the confession of what the Christian faith has taught for two thousand years about the nature of marriage with the will to power. This to be contrasted with moral authority- defined as a failure on the part of the Church to condemn what the Faith has always taught was immoral, namely homosexual behavior and the pretense of arraingements other than those between one man and one woman to the legal and social status of marriage.
Got that?
Sullivan, whose invention of the concept "Christianism" to describe the quaint notion that one does not cease to be a Christian when one enters the voting booth can only be sustained by the most elaborate of intellectual contortions, shows himself to be something of an intellectual rubber man when he proclaims his confidence the power of something he calls "the Gospel" and which is not only distinct from, but apparently contradictory to, the teachings of the apostles and the Christian tradition, to overcome the craven power-hunger of those conniving old men who tell those committed to their spiritual care that they really ought to believe the substance of the religion they profess- as Sullivan himself, of course, does not.
Presumably because the Christian faith contradicts the Gospel.
And all this time I thought ELCA theologians and pastors were the only ones who went in for turning "Gospel" into a buzzword with which to authorize their own rejection of the content of the Faith in favor of their personal preferences and prejudices. Silly me. The practice seems to have spread to gay Catholic bloggers, too.



Comments