They're responding to Mr. Kmiec's
It's kinda long, and not really brilliant analysis. Just more or less what you'd expect from applying common sense and having...oh yeah...The Faith. Personally, I don't quite know what everyone's getting all hoity-toity about. It's just the same old Stockholm Syndrome blather from the left. And it's not like Kmiec hasn't distinguished himself in this vein before.
The ocean is wet.
The sky is big.
Leftist Catholic academics are in league with Stan and are working to destroy Western Civilisation, home baking, motherhood, and All Good Things.
But of course, the 'bloggers are all uproary about it (as if it's a slow news week). It's almost as if some people object to being called "rightwing". Weird. Next you'll hear them whining about being called "racists" by British parliamentarians.
Yes. I'm sure that most of the people who hang out with me here are sick of hearing about it ('More funny duck videos!' I can hear you saying), but in case we've picked up anyone new lately, here's Hilary's Theory of Leftist Political Pseudo-Proliferism in 5000 words or more.
And, be sure to see my in-depth analysis below:
+This is a response to Pepperdine Professor Douglas Kmiec’s "A Tangled Web: the Election & the Blogosphere," which appears in the January 16 issue of Commonweal. We begin with a few general observations, followed by some exploration of them:
§ Mr. Kmiec is openly and unabashedly mesmerized by Barack Obama.
§ Mr. Kmiec’s understanding of his obligations regarding his Catholic faith has been completely distorted by and subjugated to his hero-worship of Obama.
§ A double standard is employed throughout this article. Mr. Kmiec repeatedly deplores what he apparently considers to be savage, personal attacks against him, yet as he deplores this, uses pejorative language which is equally inflammatory.
§ One of Mr. Kmiec’s two themes is that “right-wing bloggers” (see: pejorative language) have politicized his support of Obama, using the abortion issue to “drive a wedge” between the Vatican and the new administration. Yet it is Mr. Kmiec himself who attempts to politicize the issue.
§ The second of Mr. Kmiec’s themes is that he is a victim of “right-wing bloggers.”
§ Mr. Kmiec has also politicized the Eucharist.
I. Hero Worship
II. A Double Standard and the Victim Mentality
This piece may be accurately characterized as one long howl of indignation and hurt at being challenged, questioned and called names, as if Kmiec’s purity of character and motives are above reproach. The writer’s choice of terms to describe his critics’ behavior is revealing: “animosity,” “unrelenting personal attacks,” “lack of civility,” “highly concentrated rhetorical venom,” “tormentors,” “personal contempt,” “vilification,” “scurrilous remarks,” “demonizing me,” “blog calumnies,” and of course, the ever-popular “right-wing bloggers.”
The criticism of Mr. Kmiec stems from one thing and only one thing: his public and insistent infidelity to his faith. There is nothing “political” about this infidelity, yet Mr. Kmiec attempts to make it political. So who is politicizing the issue?
IV. The Sacred Deposit of Personal Waivers
Mr. Kmiec admits that “FOCA runs contrary to the pursuit of the common good,” yet this fails to diminish his fervor for Obama, as if Obama’s repeated promises regarding this demonic legislation were a minor exception to an otherwise commendable platform. He further glosses over the barbaric horror of FOCA by dismissing Obama’s commitment as a “one-time pledge of support.” Kmiec has also stated, elsewhere, that he believes Obama wants to reduce the number of abortions.
Reduce the number of abortions? How is that reflected in this statement, which went up on the White House website as soon as Obama was sworn in?
Note also that although Mr. Kmiec admits that FOCA “runs contrary to the common good,” he fails to acknowledge that it is anathema to Catholic teaching, which just happens to be the foundation of the common good. Not only fails to acknowledge it, but then has the temerity to state that he voted for Obama because of his Catholic faith! What Catholic faith is it, Mr. Kmiec, that can so casually ignore the very core of Obama’s professional life: his affirmation of the culture of death? And what Catholic faith is overridden by an “alluring gift of inspiration”?
Kmiec cites Archbishop Burke’s description of the Democratic Party as “the party of death” for its embrace of abortion, but instead of taking this to heart, Kmiec finds it “hurtful” to his father and to “millions of...lifelong Democrats.” In other words, the affirmation of Catholic teaching, and His Excellency’s solicitousness for souls, is now “hurtful” and a source of resentment! This is the selfsame attitude of the homosexual radicals, who find Catholic teaching about their disorder to be offensive, hateful, and discriminatory.
V. The Eucharist as a Weapon?
Mr. Kmiec’s response to every corrective action and teaching of the Church directed at him is to take it as a severe blow to his ego and reputation, and an offense to his feelings (again, a reaction identical to that of the homosexual radicals). Thus it is predictable, though tragic, that he should describe the denial of the Eucharist as a “weapon” to punish him.
Furthermore, being denied the Eucharist is not an invitation to “discussion,” it is an invitation to Confession and penance. But rather than face this, the Professor suddenly drags those of other faiths into the picture, who “do not see themselves as bound by the Magisterium.” Why this non sequitur? When did this become a matter involving other faiths? The answer is that it never did: this is just another evasive maneuver produced by pride.
anyone got a good illegal link to the latest episode of BSG?