The Fr. Martin, S.J. defense vs. the Catholic cyber-militia.

They're going after Fr. Z and Church Militant.

Fr. Z proclaims his innocence - he did not instruct readers to voice complaints - he just called out Fr. martin as a homosexualist.  (I didn't see him issue an 'action alert' on this, so I agree he didn't call up the troops to protest.)  But he is definitely being blamed.  I think his status is being questioned, since the LaCroix article identifies him as an "American priest known as “Fr Z” who, strangely enough, is incardinated (that is, belongs to) an Italian diocese, but lives in the United States."

This sort of vitriol is profoundly changing the communion of the Catholic Church. And not just in its ethos, but also in the way it functions. It signals a new kind of censorship that uses verbal violence to intimidate individual Catholics, as well as institutions within the Church – institutions that exist (also) to protect the rights of Catholics. 

The small groups that are behind the campaign that persuaded a prestigious Catholic seminary in the US capital to rescind its invitation to Fr Martin have grown over the last few years. They make up a Catholic cyber-militia that include “news” organizations like the Detroit-based “Church Militant” and bloggers such as Fr John Zuhlsdorf, an American priest known as “Fr Z” who, strangely enough, is incardinated (that is, belongs to) an Italian diocese, but lives in the United States. - LaCroix

Fr. Z is not scared.  I'm sure complaints about him pile up in Rome, but he appears to be safe under Bishop Morlino.  I think the most offensive thing Fr. Z ever does is call out people using labels which often denigrate their authority or identify them with liberal ideologies.  Sometimes he calls for 'action alerts' - and some time ago he used to ask for donors to donate to him instead of donating to NCR.

"I think a good way to show what you think of the NCR would be, first, to talk someone out of a subscription and, then, a spiffy donation to WDTPRS using the donation button below. If every reader here would pitch in $5, that would make a statement, given the number of readers we have." - WDTPRS

 One can't forget his feud with Phyllis Zagano and The NCR which he dubbed the 'fishwrap' and later National Sodomite Reporter a few years back.  Google Zagano and Fr. Z and you get: "I am told that Phyllis Zagano, who works for the National Catholic Reporter, is still calling around in order to make trouble for me and harm my reputation."  Therefore, I think it safe to say, one may assume that kind of thing is most likely happening right now in the wake of the Fr. Martin 'dust-up'.

So as we pray for Fr. Martin, let's keep praying for Fr. Z as well.

The Catholic blogosphere seems to be turning into the vestibule of hell.

Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate

Looks like Fr. James Martin, S.J. got Catholic Vote shut down ...

Saint Dominic dispute with Albigensian heretics 

subjecting their books to a trial by fire.

Pedro Berruguete 

Actually CV has only been suspended.

For 12 hours.  Is that a big deal?  Not really - unless 12 hours off Twitter means loss of income?  Loss of what else?  I don't know.  Don't care.  I'm not on Twitter and I don't read Catholic Vote.

Did Fr. Martin feel threatened by a tweet suggesting a Dominican beat him up?  Maybe.  But maybe he just got tired of the attacks against him and chose this 'threat of violence' as one threat he could take to the censors?  The Dominican versus Jesuit thing was obviously an academic/scholastic type of jib-jab, nothing to really feel threatened by.  Yet in our PC climate - even kids in kindergarten can be suspended for terroristic threats if they say something mean or 'homophobic'.

The thing about this story is it demonstrates the mean spirited climate online and in our discourse in daily life, and how everyone seems to be waiting to be offended and all too ready to lash back.  Everyone seems to be ready for a fight.  Everyone is ready to retaliate.  Everyone is blaming others.  Everyone is on the defensive.  I've done that.  It has no reward.  In my case, I just ended up looking like a nut, or a disgruntled employee.

In the James Martin battle, everyone involved is looking pretty desperate.  Fr. Martin's defense seems reasonable to me when he is constantly under attack and labelled - pro-gay, homosexualist, heretic, perfidious, out-of-the-closet, and so on.  His critics who rage are actually helping him to sell his book.  In fact, they are probably the best ads he and his publishers could hope for.  In some cases they actually demonstrate the need for a book like Fr. Martin's.

On the other hand, Fr. Martin's complaints and reports to the censors, strikes me as protesting too much.  He's too close to the fire and it's only to be expected he's going to get burned.  He writes one thing, but seems to say another - and good people worry that he's contradicting Catholic teaching or suggesting a change in Catholic teaching.  Although Catholic doctrine can't change, if that is what he is trying to do, his efforts compromises the faith.  Faithful Catholics need the truth.  Like it or not, Fr. Martin needs to respond to his critics, and not try to silence them.

Having said that, the entire affair tells me that behind the scenes, people are working to take down others; making calls, writing letters, calling people out, trying to get people fired, or taken offline.  You can be sure Fr. Martin's superiors and the Vatican is getting letters on him.  I'm sure Fr. Z has enemies writing letters about him.  People are watching and reporting.  The problem for the 'watchmen' is this, their lives are disrupted and preoccupied, and even obsessed with this stuff.  Egos are involved.  Status and prestige and reputation is involved.  It goes beyond righteousness, it goes beyond who is right, who is wrong.  There is a danger of corruption, of dishonesty involved in these battles.  Not that it is any of my business, but they all seem to be worried about 'saving souls' with their tactics, or worried about leading others to perdition.  I wonder about that.

Finally, there is the danger of scandal.  Scandalizing the faithful.

Lately I've been more scandalized by Fr. Martin's opponents than by him.

Song for this post here.

Monsignor Pope and the missing post.

I "pray that the parade would continue to be a source of unity for all of us.” - Cardinal Dolan

Censored.

His blog post, an editorial on the NYC St. Patrick's Day Parade (read here) was indeed removed.  A comment left by Monsignor appears to confirm that:

Bless you all for your prayers and encouragement. I hope you will understand if I cannot continue to post your comments on the parade article here. I will read them but cannot post them, I will send you an e-mail gratitude. I ask your charity and understanding for the Archdiocese of Washington which has always generously sponsored this blog and been supportive of our conversations. I also hope you will understand if I cannot explain why it was removed. I am a loyal son of the Church and I love my Archdiocese. - ADW

Monsignor Pope is the best Catholic priest-blogger online.  Keep him in your prayers.

I'm disappointed on many levels.  Catholic autocrats have to wake up and recognize it's an exercise in futility to attempt to erase anything online once it is published.  Be it an errant remark by a Cardinal Archbishop or an affirmation of Roman Catholic teaching by a faithful priest - it's out there.



Keep the faith!

Oh sure!  We've always 

supported homosexual 

participation in the parade.

UPDATE:
Monsignor graciously commented on the missing post here.

Have you ever had a comment rejected? I did today - at First Things.

Elizabeth Scalia posted a good story titled, "Is There Room For Sarah?"

Reflecting upon the 'new openness' of Pope Francis, and Cardinal Dolan's accolade, “He’s a great relief to all of us.”  Elizabeth tells the touching story of an online friend she maintained contact with, who happened to be a transgender -  a post-operative, transgendered woman, named Sarah.

Sarah wasn't Catholic, primarily because she was convinced the Church would not accept her.  It's a beautiful, poignant story of faith.  Take a moment to read it here.

Elizabeth searched for an answer and her post is an extension of that search...

Must Sarah confess as a sin the surgery through which an identity had been formed that put a lifetime of suicidal thoughts to rest and brought a measure of peace? Must Sarah (whose baptismal name I never knew) do what was possible, within constraints of health and finances, to henceforth present as a man in order to come to church? - Elizabeth Scalia

Personally, I doubt the issue is as complicated as it may sound.  I suspect that Sarah could be welcomed into the Church just as she was - quietly, discreetly perhaps - or without any provision of anonymity.  Especially since she was post-operative.  I'm not sure why that would be a problem - after all gender identity dysphoria remains classified as a disorder.  Certainly any person with a disorder can become Catholic.

In my comment on First Things I noted that while he was Bishop of La Crosse, Wisconsin, Cardinal Burke permitted a transgendered woman to begin a religious community, or pious association of the faithful.  As Bishop, Burke said he did so in consultation with the Holy See.  A concerned lay woman, went over the Bishop's head and complained to the Vatican.  As a result, the community was disbanded.

In a letter, Bishop Burke responded to the complaint, writing:

"With regard to Sister Julie Green, F.S.J., the recognition of the association of the faithful which she and Sister Anne LeBlanc founded was granted only after consultation with the Holy See," he writes. "These are matters which are confidential and do not admit of any further comment.... I can assure you that Sister Julie Green in no way espouses a sex change operation as right or good. In fact, she holds it to be seriously disordered. Therefore, I caution you very much about the rash judgments which you made in your letter to the Apostolic Nuncio." - Source

My comment was meant to shed some light on the issue of transgender persons coming into the Church and one instance of pastoral accommodation.  Although the woman could not continue as a woman religious, she was obviously admitted-accepted in the Church, and I believe she remains a faithful Catholic.  First Things editor Joe Carter rejected the comment.  Pity.



Art: Origen.  He castrated himself.

What?