Check out the animated show Bat out of Hell on YouTube!

Speaking of Hypocrisy…

A few posts down, I throw down the gauntlet (politely yet firmly) on challenging the double standard to which the Catholic Church is (I believe) unfairly being held – unfair, at least, if you consider the comparative stats on the issue of abuse.

(In fact, while I don’t have hard data – considering the latest Ick Factor to come out of academia, I wouldn’t be surprised if the rate of abuse among school teachers is signficantly higher than other segments of the population – but no matter…)

For now I shift the angle of my attack away from a defense of the priesthood – and in the spirit of giving which the coming season – a mere two days away – calls for, I wish to give back to liberals as good as we get from them by reminding them of their own two-faced ways (which is also appropriate for this time of year – considering New Year’s is a week away).

If the Catholic priesthood is most famous in modern society for being a group of celebate men who preach sexual abstinence while diddling boys – then surely liberals are best known for caring “deeply” about our tired, our poor, our huddled sodomite masses even as all the while (to paraphrase the current Oval Office Occupier) they desperately cling to their investment portfolios, their pet causes and, apparently, even their own daughters.

Indeed, these same compassionate liberals have created a veritable anthology of such humdingers as “reaching out with outreach,” “ministering with not to,” “comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable,” and other such wonderful PSA jingles.

And yet… and yet…. and yet.

Hint: Christmas is coming – what do you have to give the liberal on your list?


  1. cubeland mystic says


    You're channeling Ginsberg here. . .

    "our tired, our poor, our huddled sodomite masses"

  2. …through Emma Lazarus, of course.


  3. notrelatedtoted says

    I'm not sure this is an issue I'd like to be crying foul over. To whom much is given, much is expected and all that. And for many, the issue isn't that it happened….it's the alleged systematic cover-up that ensued.

    My son is a boy scout, and it's funny how the context of the issue is practically the same: anti-homosexuality policies, combined with a history of abuse and years of sweeping it under the rug.

    I hate to say it, but the Church has earned the derision that has been heaped upon us. Double-standard? Perhaps, but we should be holding ourselves to a higher standard. It's gut-check time – our focus needs to be on rectifying the situation, not on the PR battles that surround it.

  4. Notrelated:

    C'mon, we all know the Catholic Church has always been a "Both/And" Church, right?

    Penitent AND Militant.

    Or do you think the most prudent course is to keep our heads low and hope that the coming Apocalypse will take care of things?

    Lick your wounds if you want, but as long as there's breath in these lungs, I'll be defending my mother.

    I for one am interested in showing that this so-called Catholic issue is really rather a cultural issue – the sodomites in the Church are merely canaries in the cultural coalmine.

    It would be negligent, would it not, to ignore the sodomization of the public schools?


  5. notrelatedtoted says

    Defend how? By saying this goes on elsewhere? As true as that is, it's not much of a defense. And again, it's not so much that it happened, it's that it was covered up.

    I'm not suggesting it be ignored anywhere. To the contrary, I'm arguing that it be aggressively exposed and destroyed – most particularly in our own Church, just like any other brand of corruption or heresy. I think we're in agreement on that point.

    It's unfortunate that it took the secular media and those outside the Church to force us to finally acknowledge and address this problem. It's more than unfortunate – it's a tragedy of the highest order. And while changes have been made, and policies implemented, etc., much of this is still in its infancy.

    Defend the Church? Absolutely. I just don't think the hypocrisy argument has much traction right now.

  6. Jonathan Webb says

    But, JOB, they're authentic and we're a bunch of hypocrites.

  7. I think to be be penitent IS to be militant. We contend with powers and principalities, after all.

    What's wrong with the world? I am.

  8. Notrelated,

    I'm not sure I'm as concerned as you are about whether justice gets its pound of flesh from the cover ups, etc.

    I think if there's anyone left standing among the churchmen who thinks that such behavior will be tolerated has got to be about as out of touch with what's going on as that Loony in North Korea.

    That said, the Libs are in charge of culture right now – and if for no other reason, I will when and where I can be relentless in my attack on their hypocrisy. I suppose in a sense its a separate issue from the sex abuse scandal in the Church.

    If I can show that the presbyteral penchant for little boys came from somewhere other than the Bride of Christ – somewhere philosophically speaking – between Voltaire's salons and Satan's salons, I feel I will have done my bit to make the world a little safer for Catholicism…


  9. celibate.

    If you're going to use the word, for Pete's sake, spell it correctly. Otherwise, whatever you say loses traction.

  10. Jonathan Webb says

    Thanks Shannon. Come back sometime.

  11. It's not persuasive.

    4% of priests abuse and yet up to one fifth of us are abused and therefore priests aren't so bad.

  12. Matthew Lickona says

    Well, I think JOB is saying that most priests aren't bad at all, at least not in this way, and so the priesthood doesn't deserve its general black eye – that the problem isn't in any way essential or endemic to the institution. That the Catholic issue is really a cultural issue. That's not to discount Not-Ted, with whom I am sympathetic on this point, but tbe statistics do, I think, weaken the argument that celibacy and Catholic doctrine are the problems here.

  13. Southern Expat says

    Yeah, I agree. I'm all for defending all of the good and holy priests we have been given, and for celebrating the institution – particularly since we wish to cultivate new vocations to the priesthood.

    I guess this just feels a bit preemptive, this saying "look, it's not just our guys!" And, keeping in mind we are talking about the violation of children here, I don't think that's right.

  14. notrelatedtoted says

    I'm looking at this strictly from a policy/PR standpoint. I'm not arguing that celibacy and/or doctrine caused the problem, and I agree that there are plenty of stats that indicate the contrary to be the case.

    My point is this: it's only hypocritical to take issue with how the abuses were handled if you are simultaneously covering up your own abuses. And even if they are, should we expect more from our Church than we do from our secular institutions? The secularists have disclaimed any moral foundation, so we shouldn't be surprised when they are tone-deaf to these problems. Nor would it be hypocritical of them to point out that those up-tight Catholics can't even follow their own rules. Not to give the a free pass, of course….I'm just saying that no one is holding them to the same standard that we have given ourselves.

    Having the moral high ground makes you an easy target. It comes with the territory.

  15. nrt:

    I agree wholeheartedly with your comment about the moral high ground – in fact, that is the spirit which fills my post so flatuently – the Libs have the higher ground on the poor these days, no? So… being as uptight as they are about the poor, shouldn't they should be held to a higher standard?

    Surely the Church can't do better – not with the State having the GNP by the balls with a pair of rusty pliers.

    So why can't liberals give to the poor more than they do?

    Could it be that liberalism is corrupt by principle (as opposed to the Church – as Matthew notes – which is corrupt only at times in its practice)?

    If people start connecting the dots, they'll find that perhaps liberalism has more in common with pederasty than Catholicism does.


Speak Your Mind