11

Andrew Sullivan's Rage

andrew-sullivan

Seems as if last weeks lecture by Cardinal Stafford at CUA where he referenced President-elect Obama’s presidential campaign as “apocalyptic” has gotten Church dissenter and gay activitist Andrew Sullivan all hot and bothered:

“The Vatican hierarchy has become radicalized under Benedict and John Paul II– so much so that they see the West since the 1960s as entirely a creature of resistance to Humanae Vitae, the papal declaration that all non-procreative sex is a moral evil.  But the notion that the recent election of Obama is a sign of the Apocalypse has, until now, been restricted to Protestant loonies. Until now…”

The misguided and ill-informed Andrew Sullivan continues to show his disdain towards his own journalistic profession.  By failing to do real research about Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae as well as basic documents like say, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Mr. Sullivan has given himself license (among other things) to pronounce bigoted judgements on all things Catholic.  The Church clearly says that sex must be “unitive” and “procreative” and are “offensive” if not served towards those purposes.  Not “moral(ly) evil” as Mr. Sullivan states. 

His diatribe towards Cardinal Stafford continues to cement his reputation for hate-filled journalism.  Let us keep Mr. Sullivan in our prayers for his conversion of heart. 

Ora pro Andrew Sullivan!

(Biretta Tip to Fr. Zuhlsdorf and Thomas Peters)

Share With Friends
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Tito Edwards

Living a Catholic Life

11 Comments

  1. How can the West since the 1960s be entirely a creature of resistance to Humanae Vitae? I doubt most those who comprise the West have read or even heard of the papal encyclical.

  2. Mark- it is necessary. Kyle- cause and effect. One does not care about the other. Only that they exist individually. Andy- man lost his daggone mind. The Pelvic Issues again, as our friend Richard has noted. A mind truly is a terrible thing to waste. I pray for his reversion.

  3. Kyle, I think that’s Sulivan’s point – he is trying to describe Benedict as a radical ‘christianist’ who is hopelessly out of touch. Sullivan’s intellectual vices are legion at this point but one of them is to personalize policy disagreements, and shrilly demonize those who disagree with him. His shrill, fevered denunciations of Sarah Palin (still ongoing) are just plain bizarre. With respect to Pope Benedict, he confines himself to ill-informed and uncharitable heckling.

  4. I’ve only heard of Andrew Sullivan after he began criticizing the Vatican on 9/11 and declared Fr. Mychal Judge a “secular gay saint”, which he is not and was never gay. Yet even the mainstream media still to this day call him “gay” (NY Times et al).

    Anyways, from that moment on I realized that Mr. Sullivan had many issues that he purposely plays out in his writing with no truth to them.

  5. Tito,
    Actually, the evidence that Fr. Mychal Judge self-identified as gay, though celibate, is irrefutable, and includes Judge’s own handwritten journal entries, recently published in Daly’s biography.

    For a complete factual discussion of this, go to
    http://SaintMychalJudge.blogspot.com
    and click “a Gay Saint in fact” near the top.

    The claim that Fr. Judge was not gay was long ago abandoned by Dennis Lynch who first made the claim, and the Franciscans have publicly acknowledged that he was.

Comments are closed.