Tuesday, October 09, 2012

Nuns Off The Wagon

I knew something was up when I saw an article by E.J. Dionne touting a message from "Nuns On the Bus".
One of my favorite pressure groups, Nuns on the Bus, will be launching a five-day tour on Wednesday through the red, blue and purple parts of Ohio.
I grew up Catholic.  I've never heard of "Nuns on the Bus." But if E.J. is touting them, there's a good bet they're out of favor with the Catholic Church (especially if they're backing Democrats this particular election cycle).

They are.

It's a group of Cafeteria Catholics who really don't appear to like much of the food in the food line, but they like the cred that particular cafeteria gives them.   You might say they want to have their cake and nothing else.
Who better than a group of women who have consecrated their lives to the Almighty to remind us that our decisions in November have ethical consequences? 
Ah, you mean like the entire hierarchy of the Catholic Church?

But my favorite part came near the end when Dionne tartly stated:
Nuns on the Bus will no doubt be criticized from the right for intervening in a political campaign, something that doesn't bother conservatives when religious figures engage on their side.
There's that ubiquitous projection again.  Those on the left have scathing criticism for the mere act of religious figures or organizations (especially if they are Christian ones) merely state their positions -- even the official positions of the Church ... in the context of a political campaign.   Unless, of course, it backs up the Leftist message.

Those on the right, such as myself, may criticize the Nuns on the Bus -- but it would be on the substance of their positions, not on the mere fact that they have some sort of religious cred and dare to speak.

They're either right about things, or wrong about things.

But it's the left that constantly runs to tout credentials over substance -- because they don't want to have the argument.  They just want to point at the "expert" that agrees with them and say "the debate is over".

The "Nuns" did say that they spoke at the Democratic Convention on condition that they could say they're Pro-Life, and I applaud them for sticking up for that, at least.

But E.J. thinks we should listen to the parts of their message he agrees with and buy into it because, hey, they're Nuns -- while allowing him to ignore the parts he doesn't like.

The Nuns say they want "Social Justice", which is little more than a Marxist buzzword that sounds good.  I mean, who doesn't want social justice, right?   But Marxists mean something very specific when they use that term, while the rest of us tend to think of it in general terms.

And they are general terms that are for us to decide, not followers of the Church of St. Karl of Marx.   Each of us, individually and in voluntarily formed groups is responsible for helping our fellow man in the ways we see fit.   Because you can't have religious freedom when one man's social justice is providing or subsidizing a service with public funds that another group finds morally abhorrent and the State is in charge of administering it.

They don't want separation of Church and State.  They want to build the State into the Church.

This basically means Tutto nello Stato, niente al di fuori dello Stato, nulla contro lo Stato . And they call us  Fascists.

Projection.  Again.


Whitehawk said...

I suppose the "Nuns on the bus" are an attempt to make it look like Christianity and the Admin are buds. They are the exception.

Evangelicals have rallied with Catholics to oppose the current administration's "transformative" attempts. I cannot remember which evangelical leader started it, but shortly after the mandate on contraception came out the buzz phrase in our ranks was, "We are all Catholic now."

Of course they had no "cred" as you say. I was exposed to another evangelical type this weekend that was a breath of fresh air. He is the Allen West of the pulpit. Worth a look.


I honestly don't know how Romney could have been behind in the poles running up to the debate. Obama has alienated so many groups and those in the "independent" seats can surely see the treatment the right has gotten will soon be turned on them. The Evangelicals certainly understood the writing on the wall.

Anonymous said...

When a normal person hears "social justice" they think it simply means "a just society". Well, who could be against that? In vain does one point out that, in practice, "social justice" tends to destroy both society and justice... because why would you call it that? I mean, it's like calling the North Koreans "communists" when they're clearly a Democratic People's Republic, just like in their country's name!!!

In a similar fashion, hearing the word "Catholic" appended to something means, to them, the actual church, and not just the old males who are called priests - and who are specifically the part of that Church who are entrusted with teaching sound morals and doctrine, and ministering to the whole body of the faithful.

Besides projecting their own clerisy onto the rest of us, they discount the very thing that might cure them of both errors. And they manage to convince themselves utterly of that which is precisely, 100% false. It's not even that they're close but regrettably off - there is nearly nothing you can point to in their position that makes even a lick of sense.