One of the most stupid – or hypocritical – defences of the Unholy Father put forward from the complicit crowd of tambourine players is that both Jesus and Francis are criticised for spending time with sinners. The implication here is, clearly, that the critics of the Unholy Father are classical Pharisees.
Probably some of those who make such an argument are too slow to understand that in Jesus the company with sinners was one with the call to repentance. Jesus was solicitous about their salvation, he was certainly not “inclusive” of their sins. The contrast with Francis is striking: a man who is Pope and refuse to correct any sinner, but continuously rebukes those guilty of what to him must be one of the worst sins of all: Catholicism.
Some people, I was saying, are too slow to get these simple facts. But I bet Francis' humble black shoes that most of those who go around in fora and blog spreading this dung perfectly well know what it is.
The reason why they do it is, in my eyes, to be sought in the immortal question: cui prodest?
Who would undermine Church teaching among the people, if not those who have something to gain from it? Who, if not the adulterers, the fornicators, the perverts, and those who want to protect their agenda because of, say, family ties and a fully perverted sense of “love”?
I bet most people who read the too pious by half comments of such crowd do not question their Catholic credentials. An innocent Catholic will tend to believe that those who write on Catholic fora or blogs are themselves Catholics in good faith, and without any hidden agenda.
Big, big mistake.
My year-long experience on the comment box of homo smoke showed me many times that those people who commented in a way contrary to Catholic teaching had an hidden agenda and various “qualities” about which they told their readers absolutely nothing. Their hidden agenda was then subtly promoted under the cloak of piety that was supposed to be Catholic. Only repeated challenges from your truly let emerge the real picture, and the picture wasn't pretty: Anglicans, homosexual Anglicans, Atheists, homosexual Atheists, and adulterers. They ended up “outing” themselves (and not after insisted questioning; it must be very hard to deny for long what they think is “what they are”).
Therefore, the too pious by half commenter about, say, Francis going among sinners “like Jesus” can easily be an Anglican, an Atheist, an homosexual, or a divorced adulterer;,but he will not tell you so.
When someone starts by saying “I am a practicing Catholic, but…(follows attack to the Church, often very passive-aggressive)” you must immediately conclude that he is either lying to your face, or sitting in the pews to kill the time. When he writes words like “the gay people”, or “hate”, or “homophobia” you can be fairly certain he is either a fag herself, or a dyke himself, or a person with a heavy emotional investment in such perversion (say: because brother or son is such).
It is very easy to give oneself a varnish of “good heart” on the Internet. In fact, nothing more is necessary than some piece of passive-aggressive bollocks as the one mentioned at the beginning of this post. These people count on the natural innocence of pious Catholics, who will tend to take their comments at face value without questioning their motives.
We must train ourselves to pose ourselves the cui prodest? question everytime we read an “off” comment, because more likely than not, the comment has been written exactly with the intent of subtly deceiving the readers, under the cloak of piety.
Beware of comments on the Internet.
When you write a blog, you learn a thing or two about human nature.
I should not need to say that I am very much (at least in this) like Darcy in Pride and Prejudice: my good opinion, once lost, is lost forever.
The basic thinking behind this is that adults rarely change, and they never change because I would want them to. Besides, life’s too short to waste time with idiots. Therefore, if I decide that Caius or Titius is an idiot, I will not revisit my assessment in three weeks’, or three months’ time.
Surprisingly, people continue to write posts (long ones at times) that land in my garbage can without even being seen by me. I must miss many of them, because I very rarely look in my garbage can; but whenever I do, I see people who have written recently (the garbage can not only has an automatic catch, but also a self-cleaning function) for reasons it is impossible for me to fathom. Perhaps they want to attract the attention of my garbage can, thinking it smart to be read by it; in other cases I suppose alcohol plays a role. Then there are those who write messages asking to be “readmitted”, which is plain stupid, or spitting the worst insults, which is mildly amusing as it gives me double joy to can it.
It is as if they liked to exist in my garbage can. It takes all sorts, I suppose…
Therefore, two words of advice: if I have already kicked you out, I will not allow you to get back in, and if you write a comment on my blog, chances are I will never even know you have written it, as my garbage disposal service works far more frequently than my visits into the forum can. If after reading this you still want to waste your time, be my guest…
Of course, every now and then it may happen that something goes wrong, and the one or other perfectly innocent message has been captured by my “spam and idiot protection service” by mistake. Alas, being rather forgetful I might not remember to check the spam folder, and therefore your message might get lost forever.
Please don’t be offended if this is the case; I am sure everyone of you can easily realise whether his message was intentionally canned or not.
Whilst I value intelligent conversation on this blog, this blog is like the reception room of my house: if anyone behaves in a way I don’t like, he’ll be kicked out without compliments, and not be readmitted back. The life of a Catholic blogger – particularly of an emotional guy as I am – provides one with more than enough adrenaline as it is, and I personally have no inclination whatever to have further anger with the wrong kind of people commenting on this blog.
I write this also because the amount of messages has increased in the last months, and with them the number of messages my esteemed readers never get to see. Therefore, I will in future have to make more extensive use of the spam function, with an increased danger of good messages being “caught in”.
With all this said, i think the quality of the message I publish is on average very high. I take it as a great compliment made to my insignificant, but passionate, blog, and thank you for contributing to make of this little effort, as I hope, a good use of your time.