Commenters do tend to dislike my mentioning the Catholic sex scandals, and I understand that. Normally people who talk about that are doing it to attack Catholics.
My mind doesn’t work that way.
In fact the thinking this got me off on reminded me I used to get my ammunition reloaded at the Columbia Bible College.
If you are in serious intelligence work, and not a CIA bureaucrat, Bible Belt missionaries are good people to know. If you were in the African bush or a part of Bolivia where goat is a delicacy, the nearest white man is likely to be missionary.
But can you imagine someone in the Ivy-League-run CIA bureaucracy lowering himself to go to a local Bible College to get information and basics from the only people who go into those areas on their own?
I needed information and I went to where it was.
The New York Times had a black reporter who was making up his stories. Like the black woman on the Washington Post who was making up her feature stories, nothing was done until, being black, they were inevitably offered a major award, in her case the Pulitzer.
In each case, when a major award was being offered and a giant scandal threatened, the editors suddenly declared the black was lying. The probability that they didn’t know it before is zero.
In fact, the story at the New York Times actually quoted memos over several months about this black star reporter who made up his stuff and what to do about it.
But the fiction was maintained that nobody knew about it then.
I can’t help it if the same leftists who scream about the Catholic sex scandal have this case of total Double Think where liberal newspapers are concerned. I do not believe that a newspaper, whose whole job is finding out facts, can be unaware that some of its major reporters are making it up.
By exactly the same estimate, I do not believe that any Catholic bishop could be unaware that other bishops were shifting deviates around.
But another basic fact about this whole thing has been ignored, one which liberals are as anxious to avoid as any conservative is. The Church has repeatedly stated that it did allow the deviates to run wild, and it stated flatly that the reason it did that was that it was following the expert line, the Mommy Professor line, that the deviate should be treated and not rejected.
The Church has pointed out, REPEATEDLY, that it was following the Social Expert Line of the last generation, the Liberal Line that let rapists go out repeatedly, that said that Society was responsible for the “so-called criminals.”
That is exactly what DID happen. That is what the Church SAID happened.
But I have yet to hear one single person who gets upset at me for getting angered about the whole thing even MENTION this aspect of it.
On boy molestation, the Church keeps pointing out that it did exactly what Mommy Professor said it should do. All I get is people bitching about MY saying that the Church did EXACTLY what the Church SAID it did.
If one gets out of this respectable conservative defensive mode, seeing what actually happened, what the bishops and the Pope SAY happened, is the best denunciation of giving over one’s morality to Mommy Professor that anyone could imagine.
But, damn it, this is the kind of thinking that respectable conservatives get PAID to avoid.
Be it the New York Times or the Vatican, my approach is, within the bounds of being human, as consistent as I can make it.
And only because I am so consistent I see the REAL lesson here, which some of our best commenters missed badly.
For the POPE to say that he was led into something hideous because he gave up his morality to Mommy Professor, and for BUGS commenters to say we should not touch this is, let’s say, a bit disappointing to me.
But then again, it shows me once again that, no matter how good you are getting, sometimes you still need the Old Man to point to the crux of the matter.
#1 by Epiphany on 06/15/2011 - 6:09 am
Well, Mommy Professor assumes that Civilization is only around as old as the Christian Fundamentalists claim that the Earth itself is!
#2 by Dave on 06/15/2011 - 10:24 am
Let us not even consider the injustice that has transpired. The Catholic Church will survive while the Catholic laity is forced to clarify matters of personal loyalty. The rest is loud voices, lawsuits, and people claiming victimhood.
You fall into the trap of Political Correctness when you make demands of policy and law. The Catholic Church is in reality resistant to these types of demands, but posturing goes on and all manner of misbehavior goes on. That anything has been altered is just a mirage, but that has nothing to do with individuals and their loyalty, which either to something worthy or not.
People fervently give their loyalty to unworthy endeavors all the time. This is exactly what gives Morlocks (predators of all stripes) their opening. Morlocks couldn’t even exist if this were not true.
That SOB lying dead over there on the caisson with his shoes stolen is there for a reason. It has to do with real moral order of the world.
And that is the tailwind that is behind our kind here at BUGS. And it is why the Mantra is what matters.
#3 by Genseric on 06/15/2011 - 10:45 am
These fictitious and abstract references are starting to perplex the likes of myself. Not that it takes much.
#4 by Genseric on 06/15/2011 - 10:28 am
The church didn’t ‘shuffle the deck’ because they wanted to ‘treat the pee-pee touching priests’ NOR did they reject them (obviously-as Bob has stated). They tried to COVER IT UP completely. Something only an ego-maniacal, tyrant would try with a crime so widespread and-subsequently-risky.
He and They did it for The Money. Their plan blew up in their faces once the scandals became more widespread (once the deck was shuffled) and the media gave it The Coverage it Deserved.
They lost in the end anyway. The Catholic Church lost some of the best, brightest, and most talented white people the World has ever seen. They lost a large portion of the inherently pro-white community.
They lost them to us. Time to build up our communities again.
#5 by shari on 06/15/2011 - 10:50 am
I think it’s another example of how NOTHING the left does WORKS. Another whitakerism. I once saw a book title. I never read the book, but I liked the title. It was The Professional Oppression of America. Everything “Professional” does it for the money. You can’t get your morals from the professionals.
#6 by BGLass on 06/15/2011 - 12:13 pm
“….another basic fact about this whole thing has been ignored, one which liberals are as anxious to avoid as any conservative is. The Church has repeatedly stated that it did allow the deviates to run wild, and it stated flatly that the reason it did that was that it was following the expert line, the Mommy Professor line, that the deviate should be treated and not rejected….”
always skip my posts if you like and never read, as the writing just helps me think about it, and see if i “get it,’ in some way—
there was an old essay by freud found on a shelf somewhere, can’t remember name, but it was about 80 pages and about how the new ‘social science’ of psychiatry should be treated institutionally— meaning whether it should be viewed as medical or not.
This is still the theme–in if “client” is seen as “client” or “patient,” how some “therapists” have no license but others are med docs. Is it an “industry” or academic “discipline?” On the surface, it looks like institutional warfare— a fighting for terms of what things belong to. Call a mommy prof “therapists” work part of an “industry” and they have a identity meltdown.
Mommy professor rules over priests, ministers, whatever, all have shrink degrees to “counsel” people. Orthodox jews also. A vid came out this week –Rite– where mental illness v demon theme is done; for years, this Exorcist shrink-v-god plot has been as hackneyed as lone gun nut white genius serial killer.
People even see priest-shrink-treatment-degrees as a selling point in churches. But if a genuinely God-based mentality (a mental world selecting around god terms and not PC terminology) tried to get “help” from some priest they would become ‘psychotic,” obviously, as they would encounter an alter reality— it would be a forced conversion, essentially.
The preist is secular, what is “wrong” with a person from mommy prof land, and they do not even know it. Godly “Goodness” is non-distinguishable from secular deeds, (while, in reality, everybody knows even serial killers can bake brownies, so such good deeds can mean anything, really). Nobody talks theology in a church.
If you ask catholics or orthodox what they believe about issues (s/a theodicy) they are as ‘all over the map’ as any protestant, who are the only ones they believe are ‘all over the map.’ (this is a main critique of theirs)
But people do not know the havoc when you mix the terminology, (it mixes methodology) and it is institutional warfare. In school, they used to teach don’t mix metaphors, but Mommy prof has it that mixing metaphors is “how new ideas are born.” They teach this, the complete opposite of ‘don’t mix metaphors.’
Mixing is good is their main mantra, whether races or words.
Imo, this was the help of protestantism (at best)— the institutional end so out of whack that returning to the bare basics could return one to a god-centered form of consciousness, with emphasis on processing experiential reality (daily life) around god-terms (testimony, journaling, which was to marry the theory to practice). Also–why the sense of “confusion” as demonic, god as truth beyond confusion, god as knowing can become useful for those interested in new spiritual paradigms, (this is genuinely heretical in rc religious sense).
Still, by mixing terms, in only about 20 years, (from what I can tell, since I wasn’t around for everything) homosexuality went from demonic to diagnosable, curable illness to mental health norm with churches leading the way.
For churches now, problem isn’t homosexuality any longer, but “scandal” of child victims/ coverup. That priests, themselves, are homosexuals, is never an issue. An exorcist praying over them about some fag demon would get arrested.
It remains to be seen how RC responds, or where blames for the lapse of god thinking. Some say Vat II was necessary b/c pope was losing people, if not in name but in spirit, to the protestant heresy in u.s. (it being a prod country, and it is being punished for being so, as is a heresy), and pope made a mistake in pandering to this.
(In this conception, pre-vat II was great, and protestantism is directly analogous to “the enlightenment” and “liberalism” in the communist sense). God as truth is seen as connected to gnostic heresies and science and bound up with protestantism (again analogous to the “enlightenment” when in fact protestants have always existed under many names). Anyway, this enlightenment=liberal communism= protestantism is a lot of man-on-the-street thinking, when I talk to people, and this is how they construe it.
(–and this, despite catholics having created liberation theology, which is very anti-white, and involving other groups in Vat II who did not seek ecumenical councils. So, who is “liberalizing” who, anyway?–)
Bottom line— is PC beat churches so far, largely b/c it ostensibly offers, through its psychiatry-arm, a lingo for the spirit, healing, etc. This is as true in all the forms of churches. The orthodox, due to recent communist persecution, are probably the most sensitive to all this, but they are not large numbers in u.s., virtually unknown to average people.
Churches are turned on their heads, ruled by atheists. They do not exist anymore. but clerics will want territory back at some point. If congregants are paying atheists they don’t mind.
#7 by James C on 06/16/2011 - 9:35 am
I remember recently hearing the results of the Catholic Church’s “investigation” into the molestation issue.
They concluded that celibacy was not a cause, homosexuality was not a cause, and pedophilia was not a cause. Apparently nothing caused the numerous priests to molest even more numerous young boys.
This is of course nonsense, but when seen through a political lens, it was the only possible conclusion.
Celibacy is one of the Church’s doctrines, so it’s not going to be blamed . What’s funny is the logical gymnastics they had to do to exonerate homosexuality and pedophilia for crimes of homosexual pedophilia.
Perversion is of course a doctrine of Political Correctness, and all “respectable” Churches absolutely HAVE to abide by the tenets of the One True Faith – Political Correctness.
To say that tolerance for perversion is tolerance for perversion would be Blasphemy.
The Catholic Church was practicing what Mommy Professor preached. The moral of the story – Never play by your enemy’s rules.