It can’t be true…

Comments

1. Matthew Lickona says

   December 23, 2010 at 7:58 am

   Nah, it's that only Catholic priests tell other people to rein in their sexual desires.

   Reply
2. JOB says

   December 23, 2010 at 2:50 pm

   Indeed, hypocrisy is the worst sin you can commit in this day and age – of course, unless you happen to be a Columbia University Prof./Huffpo blogger – to wit: David Epstein – who, despite carrying on a long-time dalliance with his daughter, accuses social conservatives of "taking hypocrisy in their personal lives to new levels of self-indulgent weirdness."

   Perhaps Mr. Epstein didn't quite call for a "reining in" of sexual desires – but he was willing to go on record making a truth claim about others' personal lives. To suggest that libs don't have an ethos every bit as stringent as Catholicism is to miss the Prius for the Priapi…

   (Regarding academia's Judah-cum-Tamar in all its sordid woe, John Zmirak has the complete (G rated) details here: http://www.insidecatholic.com/feature/i-dont-make-the-natural-law-i-just-enforce-it.html)

   JOB

   Reply
3. Southern Expat says

   December 23, 2010 at 5:01 pm

   I guess I'd line up on the conservative end of the spectrum, but I'm not comfortable using the term "liberals" to paint with such a broad brush here.

   Oh, Lord, I just referred to my feelings as basis for political opinion. Guess I am a liberal.

   Reply
4. JOB says

   December 23, 2010 at 5:53 pm

   Perhaps I refer more to the philosophical liberal (compared to which today's political liberal is a mere piker). As with the term "Protestant," a glance at the history of the term "Liberal" shows it orginated as the definitive reactionary stance against the Catholic Church during the Enlightenment. The liberal seeks to "liberate" himself from Church teaching, just as the Protestant "protests" those same teachings.

   And language is a funny thing, of course: the self-described radicals are really reactionaries – at least if we consider the incarnate proposal of the Catholic Church to be the truly radical idea – one which sundered the world into BC and AD 2000+ years ago.

   And yet today's society considers the Catholic Church reactionary and those who oppose it radicals.

   Hm. Well, perhaps it was not for nothing that Saul Alinsky referred to Satan as the "first radical."

   Also, I'm not sure what the "broad brush" is I'm using – do you take offense with the fact that I'm stating that all Liberals have a stringent ethos?

   (OK, OK, I'll give you Teddy Kennedy, Keith Olbermann and Al Franken.)

   JOB

   Reply
5. Jonathan Webb says

   December 23, 2010 at 10:21 pm

   Good post.

   Reply
6. Shannon says

   December 24, 2010 at 7:01 am

   The Protestants originally got that name from protesting the financial support of the state church (which depended on the religion of your local duke or other potentate).

   Reply
7. JOB says

   January 2, 2011 at 7:01 am

   Shannon,

   Go back to basics. There was no such thing as a "state church" until the Prots invented it (vide: Peasant's Revolt, etc.).

   The Catholic confessional state was a completely different animal – neither theocracy nor Caesaropapism – it died a sudden and tragic death (inter alia) through the indigestion caused by the Diet of Worms.

   JOB

   Reply