3 Responses to Save the Snowflakes!

Future National Catholic Register Post: The Pope on Satan: Nine Things to Know and Share

Sunday, February 21, AD 2016

satan_the_devil_painting_by_Michael_Pacher

 

 

November 15, 2016

 

A furor has arisen regarding the Pope’s comment in an interview in his flight back to Rome that “Satan got a raw deal from God.”  Here are nine things to know and share:

  1. It is possible that a mistranslation occurred.  The colloquial Italian phrase that the Pope used for raw deal can also be understood to mean “distasteful deal”.
  2. The Holy Father may have been speaking humorously.  When Father Lombardi, Vatican spokesman was asked about this, he merely smiled, shrugged his shoulders and walked away.
  3. If the Pope was speaking seriously, perhaps he was intending to convey how Satan was looking at the situation.  Do not most sinners think they get a raw deal? Viewed from that vantage point, the Pope’s statement was correct, albeit incomplete.
  4. We must recall that this is the Year of Mercy and perhaps the Holy Father was attempting to say that God’s mercy extends even to Satan.
  5. The Vatican has denied that this statement constituted an all is forgiven message from the Pope to the Prince of Darkness
  6. This is not a reversal of the traditional teaching of the Church regarding Satan.  At most it is a minor development that the Pope may, or may not, expand upon.
  7. This statement was not made ex cathedra, but it must be treated with respect as Catholics must treat all statements of the Pope with respect.
  8. Islamic jihadists who are now calling Catholics devil worshipers are completely misinterpreting what the Pope said.
  9. I am not paid enough for doing this.

 

 

Continue reading...

17 Responses to Future National Catholic Register Post: The Pope on Satan: Nine Things to Know and Share

  • I dunno Don…you might have a bright future with NCR. You and the likes of Mr. Shea, a progressive new age quasi Catholic perspective! Go get the big bucks Donald! 🙂

  • Nine Things to Know and Share? With this pontificate it’s more like Nine Things to Grin and Bear!

  • The air crew on the pontifical flights should check the cabin pressure as it seems the Pope is not getting enough oxygen. If it is okay, then I humbly suggest a hefty dose of dramamine so that PF can sleep his way back to Vatican City.

  • And, as I am sure you know, Don, everyone in jail is innocent. 😉

  • They’re in jail because their damned lawyers screwed them over.

  • “They’re in jail because their damned lawyers screwed them over.”

    True. If their attorney wins the case, it was no great feat because they were innocent. If he loses the case it can only be because he was incompetent, corrupt, etc. Just ask any prisoner!

  • . Speaking of which, check Reuters tonight on the Pope calling for a worldwide ban on the death penalty. Here is one morsel: ” “The commandment “You shall not kill,” has absolute value and applies to both the innocent and the guilty,”
    Apparently his Bible doesn’t have the rest of the Pentateuch in which there are over 33 death penalties to the Jews from the same God who gave the fifth commandment….nor does his Bible have Gen.9:5-6 or Romans 13:4 which apply to gentiles and Jews at the governmental level. I like his heart…his mind is in chaos in certain areas of reality. He just left non death penalty Mexico whose murder rate is twenty times that of largely death penalty East Asia by UN figures.

  • Meanwhile, his frequent comments about the devil being real and being our enemy are one of the few areas where Pope Francis sometimes sounds more traditional than Pope Benedict.

    That said, there was a call on Fr Z’s blog for a nine hour novena to be prayed whenever Pope Francis gets on a plane with reporters. 😉

  • Bill, The Pope’s Bible seemingly is missing the part of Genesis wherein God commands that he who sheds man’s blood by man shall his blood be shed. Because man is made in God’s image.

  • T. Shaw,
    Yes…that’s Gen.9:5-6 which I mentioned and which a Cardinal quoted in the catechism in ccc #2260 in what I suspect was an effort to counter ccc #2267 by perhaps another Cardinal which says prisons suffice for protection now….a delusion refuted by Mexico, the second largest Catholic population.

  • It understandable why the Pope is devil friendly; they work together.

  • Fantastic.
    Nine things to share reminded me Jimmy Akin. He is trying his best these days.

  • This is not satire-this is dialogue with the devil: Cardinal Ravasi calls for Dialogue with Freemasonry . . .Cari Fratelli Massoni. Thier patron, the Light Bearer, Lucifer

  • November 15, 2016, why is this dated as printed?

  • It’s a future National Catholic Register Post.

  • “And there was given to him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given to him to do two and forty months.” That would put it at September, 2016. Maybe we will have another pope by November.

Bear Growls: Dear Reinhard

Saturday, August 8, AD 2015

Dear Reinhard

As I have often said of some of my offspring, my bruin friend at Saint Corbinian’s Bear is “scary smart” and this piece of all too true satire will leave a mark on Reinhard Cardinal Marx:

 

 

Dear Reinhard: Is Sex With a Prostitute Adultery?

Once again, we look over the shoulder of Germany’s favorite advice columnist, Reinhard Marx, as he opens up his mailbag…

Dear Reinhard,

My wife and I have been married for eighteen years and have a six year old daughter. I love my wife, but for three years I have been seeing a sex worker in a Munich brothel, Magdalena. She is the only working girl I ever visit, and I  have fallen in love with her. Although I realize this may be less than ideal, I love both my wife and Magdalena.

I hear some people saying that this may be “adultery,” and, further, that it could be a mortal sin and maybe I shouldn’t take communion! I am a good Catholic and want to do the right thing. Surely God recognizes the stable and loving relationship I enjoy alongside my marriage? What should I do?

Signed,
Muddled in Munich

Reinhard replies…

Dear Muddled:

Don’t be so hard on yourself. As the editors of the traditions gathered together under the name “Jeremiah” wrote: “The heart is perverse above all things, and unsearchable, who can know it?” Pascal, though only a Frenchman, expressed a similar sentiment when he said, “The heart has its reasons that reason knows not.” What these authors, separated by centuries, agree upon is this: you cannot control whom you love.

The important thing is that we find a way for you to feel welcome in the Church in your clandestine extramarital relationship with Magdalena. Is it right to call a committed, though unorthodox, loving relationship adultery? I think not. So enjoy the blessings of love (and love!) and do not let small-hearted naysayers keep you from communion!

I am sending you an autographed copy of Pope Francis’ friend and collaborator Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez’s “Heal Me With Your Mouth: the Art of Kissing.” (Sounds like you could use it!)

God bless you!
Reinhard

Continue reading...

18 Responses to Bear Growls: Dear Reinhard

  • Cupich disgraces his office and is an insult to any conception of morality.

  • Cupich disgraces his office and is an insult to any conception of morality.”

    Yes, but the larger question is why he was appointed since we knew previously of his modernist moral stances?

  • Of course God recognizes Muddled’s relationship.

    He’s seen this all before.

    As what, well, we can be sure Muddled really doesn’t want to know.

  • Imagined additional to Marx’s imaginary response: “PS: Hookers are children of God.”

  • Perhaps this relationship is not adultery but it most certainly is betrayal, a violation of one’s vows in the Sacrament of Matrimony. The individual becomes a liar, and an unfaithful spouse. Approaching Jesus, he might be struck dead.

  • “Indeed, tax collectors ad prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God before you”.

    A line bishops especially should remember.

  • The Bear is gratified you enjoyed “Dear Reinhard.” You may be happy to know that “Dear Reinhard” is a series, so you can look forward to more sage advice from Germany’s favorite sob sister, His Eminence Reinhard Marx.

  • The $64,000 question is how did +Cupich and +Marx become ordained clergy to begin with?

    The Catholic Church in Germany is in freefall. The Roman Pontiff has surrounded himself with people who would have been accused of heresy in the 1950s. PP butchers babies and a so-called Catholic US Supreme Court judge deems gay marriage a right and the USCCB is as silent as a portable analog TV in the closet of your grandmother’s house.

    I can offer no other explanation than we are in a period of chastisement.

  • Cupich’s sickening remarks qualify him now to be an active participant in the synod. You can see the storm clouds forming.

    Penguins Fan—the USCCB peace and justice group is a secular socialist propaganda arm of the democratic party. I use to check in occasionally on their legislative lobbying but now find it to be a near occasion of sin for me. Face it, the USCCB is home to many bishops who are democrats and socialists first, shepherds sometimes but never in adversity to their cherished partisan ideology. It’s ostentasiously located in DC and staffed with nothing but leftist advocates. I’d like to know its funding sources in addition to federal money. How do we pay for this from the pews?

  • Don–Thanks for syndicating The Bear at his most whimsical and hope you will continue to keep us current on his future ‘Dear Reinhard’ musings.

  • Cupich saddens me too. A theology perhaps better fitting to a dorm room discussion than building upon the Deposit of Faith.

    Nonetheless, every time I see this sort of thinking on display, I will say a prayer for the soul of his predecessor, Cardinal George. At least, I can accomplish something beyond merely getting angry. Whatever else you do, please do likewise for the soul of this wise and holy man. I do miss him here in Chicago.

  • Who are you to judge Muddled? or Magdalena? or Reinhard? Guy McClung, San Antonio, Texas

  • “At least, I can accomplish something beyond merely getting angry. Whatever else you do, please do likewise for the soul of this wise and holy man. I do miss him here in Chicago.”

    Anger is okay – a just anger. We are ensouled bodies so we do have emotions. Anger can be unjust if filled with hatred or just when it addresses an injustice in charity. Cupich’s comments are unjust so we are right to be angry with them. Pray for his predecessor and pray for Cupich. But remain justly angry and speak out also.

  • To Phillip. – no disagreement. That is why I said “beyond…angry” rather than “instead of…angry”.

    Personally, I often fall short when I let my anger distort me, so on a “human” level my prayer for them helped me as well. I realized I needed to do this today at Mass, so I am assuming this was perhaps some “guidance” to help me (as well as hopefully Cardinal George!)

    Many thanks for your thoughts, Phillip.

  • If the adulterer loves them both then we must be merciful because #lovewins and who are we to judge?
    Saw the remarks about Cupich so checked out what he said. Astounding that an Archbishop would use relativism to soften the blow against those bloodthirsty demons at PP. The illogic of his thinking is his only clear point. You other commenters may know that yours truly is a lonely opponent of capital punishment here but it has not a thing to do with murdering innocent children in the womb. We are in chastisement thanks to goofy Pope Francis and his parade of clowns. (They got rid of Fr. Barron, didn’t they; did you see how soft Fr. Barron went right before his appointment?)

  • Dear Cthemfly25-Don’t know if you noticed, but AB Bern. Cupich has been appointed as a voting member to the Synod this Fall. Remember FDR S Ct court packing attempt? As to what will happen this Fall, note analogy with Dem President doing things by Exec Order rather than legislation accd to the rules, check out my SYNODS ARE NOT COUNCILS at Catholic Lane site and you will see what is being put out: Synods ARE Councils, “Synod of Vatican II” commanded respect and assent of all the faithful, and “synod” and “council” are “interchangeable.” Get ready for Bergoglio to “accept” the synod report, which is the voice “of all the bishops of the world;” and then proclaim infallibly: 1. Jesus got it wrong re adulterous marriages; 2. we now, enlightened by those who have protected pederasts and pedophiles, welcome into the church adulterers who have some of the “fullness” of marriage; and 3. welcome those engaging in anal sex regularly as also having part of the “fullness” of a loving marriage. Remember Al Jolson’s THE JAZZ SINGER? Folks, you aint heard nuthin’ yet. Guy McClung, San Antonio, Texas

  • Thanks Guy for your post. I was aware of Cupich’s selection for the synod, and I had already read your fine article about synods vs councils.

The Perfect Gift for Christmas

Tuesday, December 18, AD 2012

People shouldn’t go broke at Christmas, so I am doing my part to help you all out by providing the perfect gift. For a mere $2.99 you can download the surefire hit novel of the season: Dirty LaundryDirty Laundry is a bit of media satire written by yours truly. From the not wholly adequate product description:

CF Stone is a columnist for a well-regarded but not well-read Washington DC newspaper. After having written a column that has all but guaranteed him a Pulitzer he runs into blogger and all-around gadfly Darius Gilbert, who lets him onto a story that will guarantee them a place in history next to Woodward and Bernstein. Stone goes undercover in order to expose a right-wing plot to bring down the American government. Stone dreams of the accolades that he will receive after publishing his expose of the ultimate manifestation of political extremism in the United States – that is if they don’t find out who he is first.

You’ll especially love the antics of Gilbert, the gay, Irish blogger who has an unhealthy obsession with a former candidate for high office.

Even if you don’t own a Kindle, the Kindle app is available on just about any device that you use to read this very blog.

A slight content warning: the book isn’t quite G-rated, but it’s a solid PG. Some salty language is employed, but it’s not Pulp Fiction.

I’m doing this all on my own, so please spread the word around if you can. I’ll also be launching a webpage – paulzummo.com – to help promote the book and also to serve as a platform on other random musings.

Thanks.

Continue reading...

7 Responses to The Perfect Gift for Christmas

The Fine Line Between Snark and Humor

Tuesday, December 11, AD 2012

Last night I posted a link to this brilliant bit of satire about internet snark. Here’s a taste:

Hey, 2005? Your meme is calling. Get into the weeds. Shorter generic liberal blogger: I’m angry and don’t understand syntax. Teh gay, it burns!… The stupid, it burns. There, fixed. Awesome sauce, the Villagers have held their grand powwow and declared that all the Very Serious People must use Abundant Capital Letters to convey irony. Line of dialogue from The Simpsons during the Clinton era.

That gerund-employing, chain-of-modifiers-involving, consumer-items-invoking, would-be rant directed at middle-class liberals? Meh. Just breathtakingly meh. Worst. Recycled. Gimmick. Ever.

Further useful phrases. Stay classy, concern troll! A smart take on entitlements “reform.” That whole coherence thing? Whatever. Smackdown. Beatdown. At a time when [minor incident involving identity politics] and [another minor incident involving identity politics] and [another minor incident involving identity politics], why behave “reasonably ” regarding [another minor incident involving identity politics that is in no way the responsibility of the person being addressed]?

It is easy to rely on snark as a means of dismissing other viewpoints, I might be guilt of occasionally employing snark as a rhetorical weapon. Yet it can be overused, and writers who use snark as a rhetorical crutch can choke on their own nastiness to the point that it becomes a bore to read them.

As if to demonstrate this point comes this piece from Think Progress titled “We Could End Homelessness With The Money Americans Spend On Christmas Decorations.” The post itself is not intensively snarkish, although substantively its premise is absurd, as aptly demonstrated by Stacy McCain. The comments to the Think Progress piece, on the other hand, are a virtual wasteland of snark. A sampling:

how dare TP open a front in the war on christmas by using christmas as a way to do christian things instead of engaging in celebration!

Hahaha… how dare they indeed. Who do they think they are Fox News!

I wonder which one Jesus would really like for his birthday?

the real Jesus or supply side Jesus?

If those of us who love and admired Jesus just lived and loved Jesus this would be a moot discussion.

To be fair, there are people who left meaningful and more insightful comments. Also, snarkiness is certainly not endemic solely to the left.  But look at how those responses basically dehumanize and debase people who might have different viewpoints. They display obvious disdain towards Christians and our supposed hypocrisy for hanging Christmas lights as though we are not also devoting time, talent and treasure to help the homeless. It’s an easy way to demonstrate one’s moral and intellectual superiority without actually addressing the issue.

On the other hand, while snark can be overused, there is a role for humor and light-heartedness in our communications. The flipside of the snarksters are those dour individuals who are under the impression that laughter is a mortal sin. Seriously – there are people who point out the lack of bible passages referring to Jesus laughing as positive proof that he never laughed, and as such neither should we. One wonders what other human activities not attributed to Jesus in the Scriptures these literalists also forgo, but we’ll leave that one to the imagination.

Sure, some topics merit nothing but serious discussion, but the perpetually straight-laced and humorless are frankly tedious. I know Rush Limbaugh is not everyone’s cup of tea, even for those on the right, but one of the primary reasons – if not the primary reason he has been as successful as he has is that he is able to treat political topics with humor. Contrary to popular belief he doesn’t just go on the air and scream into a microphone. And as his show has aged his satire has grown sharper. If Limbaugh just went on the air and day after day just ranted and raved unhumorously, he would not have 20 million listeners. Okay, he might have ten million listeners, but he still wouldn’t be as popular. Similarly, Mark Steyn is able to get away with publishing columns full of doom and gloom because he does so with a sharp wit that prompts the reader to laugh and cry at the same time. Glenn Beck is at his most enjoyable when he’s not going off about Agenda 21 but instead when he’s simply satirizing some bit of liberal sillyness. I think one of the reasons MSNBC is so unwatchable – other than its decided left-wing slant – is that most of the on-air talent lacks that element of light-heartedness and humor.

It’s hard to distinguish between snark and humor, and at times they are in fact indistinguishable concepts. In the end, one can be satirical without necessarily being nasty, a concept obviously foreign to some of the followers of “Think” Progress.

Continue reading...

One Response to The Fine Line Between Snark and Humor

  • On the surface it may be hard to tell snark and genuine humor apart, but I believe the difference boils down to this: in order to truly see the humor in any person or thing, you have to first take it seriously and have a basic respect/love for it. That’s why, I believe, ethnic and religious humor only “works” when presented by persons who belong to the ethnic or religious group that is being joked about, or why it’s OK for your own siblings, spouse, etc., to tease you but not OK for people outside the family to do it.

    What we now call “snark” was once referred to as “flippancy” and was expertly described in one of C.S. Lewis’ Screwtape Letters describing the causes of human laughter, and explaining why flippancy was particularly favorable as a means of luring souls to damnation:

    “Flippancy is the best of all. In the first place it is very economical. Only a clever human can make a real Joke about virtue, or indeed about anything else; any of them can be trained to talk as if virtue were funny. Among flippant people the Joke is always assumed to have been made. No one actually makes it; but every serious subject is discussed in a manner which implies that they have already found a ridiculous side to it. If prolonged, the habit of Flippancy builds up around a man the finest armor plating against the Enemy that I know, and it is quite free from the dangers inherent in the other sources of laughter. It is a thousand miles away from joy; it deadens, instead of sharpening, the intellect; and it excites no affection between those who practice it.”

Catholics and Professional Football

Thursday, September 2, AD 2010

As a person who has voted for a Republican, I am a fascist. As you may know, fascists want to control every aspect of people’s lives (and I don’t want to hear any fancy political science definitions to the contrary). With the college football season starting tonight and professional football starting a week from now, it is the perfect time to consider the ethical approach Catholics must take towards professional football. I have attempted this once before, but like Cassandra, no one really listened to my wise teachings. Therefore, I must witness once again by examining afresh all the professional football teams in light of Catholic teaching in order to determine whether Catholics may root for them while avoiding the fires of hell.

Continue reading...

37 Responses to Catholics and Professional Football

  • Hilarious Michael! My one point of concern is that I despise football, indeed all professional sports. Can I remain a fascist in good standing with that stain on my record, in spite of my voting record? I suspect that Dan McLockinload would say no.

    http://thecatholicfascist.wordpress.com/2010/08/11/how-many-ecumenical-councils-are-there/#comments

  • That was very good. Well done, Michael.

  • Gnosticism and the Cleveland Browns? Good call, but you have only scratched the surface. I believe it goes far deeper than that, Michael, I suspect ancient secret ties between that organization and the bestselling author of anti-Catholic potboilers. I swear I saw an albino water boy hanging about the sidelines last time I watched a Browns game. Saints, beware!

  • Your comments regarding the Cowboys are Calvinist gibberish. 🙂

  • Don:

    All that is necessary to be a fascist is to condemn. Remember, we have no positive ideas of our own and are merely there to stop joy in the lives or others. Therefore, as long as you are condemning those around you, you are fine.

    Big Tex:

    Aha! You have revealed your own Calvinist leanings! For I did not mention Calvin, and the fact that you did shows your dualism and your secret adherence to his teachings!

    Donna V:

    I suspect that all of these organizations are secretly in collusion with each other as well as Islam to overthrow the Church.

  • I don’t see the point in supporting a sport that doesn’t involve Paul The Octopus.

  • Roger Stauchbach was the embodiment of Catholicism in the NFL. His most famous pass is named the “Hail Mary” because of his answer to a post-game question about what he was thinking when he threw the ball up in the air:

    “I got knocked down on the play. … I closed my eyes and said a Hail Mary.”

    And all subsequent last-second heaves toward the endzone have been likewise named after the most famous and widely used prayer to Our Lady.

    If the staunchly Catholic Staubach could spend his entire career with the Dallas Cowboys, and remain one of their biggest fans, then you can get over yourself and your hang-ups over God’s Team (borne purely out of jealousy over a long winning tradition vs. the Aints’ likely one-and-done history of “success”).

  • Pingback: Catholics and Professional Football « Chelsea's Stuff
  • you can get over yourself and your hang-ups over God’s Team (borne purely out of jealousy over a long winning tradition vs. the Aints’ likely one-and-done history of “success”).

    I’m not jealous. I guarantee you that the joy myself and other New Orleanians had over this one Superbowl was more than the joy of Cowboys fans for all the Cowboy’s titles put together. Also, I am not jealous of any team that has Romo as QB, for we have Brees and he is amazing, both on and off the field. So you can keep your owner who charges people to watch TV outside the stadium; give me the Who Dat Nation anyday!

  • And you still need to brush up on your history (I still haven’t forgotten that you completely bolluxed the history of “Cavaliers” and the part they played in the war against the evil Calvinists under Cromwell).

    For example, you’re right that “Vikings are celebrated pagans who pillaged innocent towns, committing unspeakable atrocities while doing so.”

    But, while you cite things that are clearly contrary to Catholic teaching, you completely MISSED that what made the Vikings truly deplorable from a Catholic perspective was that they specifically sought out Catholic monasteries for plunder and defacement and took great pleasure in desecrating Our Lord in the Eucharist.

    Countless number of monks died before the altar in attempts to defend the Body and Blood of Our Lord from the Viking hordes. That makes the Vikings the MOST unCatholic team in the NFL – shame on a Catholic boy like Brett Favre for choosing to play for them.

  • Jay:

    That’s very true, and all the more reason to not cheer for them. Unfortunately, it would have been too long if I listed all the ways in which the various teams violated Catholic principles. Indeed, I would have spent the whole day writing on the Cowboys if I had done that, not to mention would have had to spend a week writing on the glories of the Saints.

    And I haven’t forgotten my college football post, either. I will deal with your UVA Cavaliers soon enough.

  • Lions eat Christians. That’s what they did in Rome, and that’s what they do to Catholics unwary enough to slip into their trap.

    But the Detroit Lions haven’t hurt anyone in years. OK, they beat the Browns and Redskins last year, but that’s not saying much. Kinda like shooting zombies in the head, really.

    Oh, and being a Lions fan is an excellent primer in Purgatorial suffering, so I think they’re ideal for Catholics–the Last Things, and all that.

  • Before my good friend Mr. Denton gets around to “deal[ing] with [my] UVA Cavaliers”, please allow me to enlighten the readers as to the genesis of this friendly discussion. Here is a link to the post in question, in which Michael gets taken to school on English Civil War history after he first referred to “Cavaliers” as “pirates”, and then subsequently edited his post to say something that was even less coherent in regard to the name “Cavaliers”:

    http://forthegreaterglory.blogspot.com/2008/08/catholics-and-college-football-part-i.html

    Michael, my friend, whatever you have to say in your future dealings with my UVA Cavaliers, I hope that it is, unlike your previous tripe, at least grounded in reason and actual historical knowledge.

    😉

  • Dale:

    You may be interested to know that my alternate entry for the Lions was:

    “The Lions haven’t fielded a team in years, or maybe ever, so this point is moot.”

  • Good lord, Jay. That post was two years ago. I guess UVA fans don’t have anything other than grudges to fill their memories.

    I don’t even remember what I said about them being pirates. Their dress is remarkably similar to that of pirates, which is probably where the association came from. Presumably in my haste to not spend as much time on a football team that isn’t any good, I misspoke. However, once you pointed out my error I amended the post to include some research. Having found that “cavalier” was a derogatory term for those who were Catholic, I argued that it is not permissible for Catholic that support a team whose name began in order to mock Catholics for their alleged vanity and lack of manliness and virtue. Just because a name is applied to Catholics does not mean Catholics ought to embrace it.

  • Somebody take American Papist out of the blogroll.

  • Somebody take American Papist out of the blogroll.

    Wow, Jay. Why do you hate Peters so much? Are…are you one of the bloggers at Catholic Fascist?

    headline: Jay Anderson hates American Papist; Pro Ecclesia to begin major blog war with Catholic Vote Action. 😉

    In seriousness, Papist refers to what protestants believes was undue reverence to the Pope. Catholics can rightfully celebrate being associated with the pope, but not celebrate being associated with being vain girly-men, which was the connotation of cavalier.

  • Wrong, again.

    “Cavalier” refers to what Calvinist Roundheads believed was undue Catholic influence within the Stuart monarchy and its supporters. Catholics can rightfully celebrate those who proudly accepted the name “Cavalier” for themselves and fought against the heretical, genocidal Roundhead usurpers.

  • And, by the way, I DO hate Tom Peters (admittedly out of jealousy for his success).

    😉

  • I agree; I hate everyone who gets paid to blog and tweet out of pure jealousy.

    As for you assertions about cavalier, do you have a source? I have a feeling we’re on different planes here.

    Additionally, for turning a discussion about football into the English Civil War, I hate you also. 😉

  • Weren’t tigers also used on the Christians? Just asking.

  • Dale,

    but that’s not saying much. Kinda like shooting zombies in the head, really.

    Niiice.

    I remember the day Sanders retired.

    I was doing a shift meeting with my colleague, a Lions fan, at a Wal-Mart Warehouse in front of the shift-workers and in the middle of announcements my colleague asked everyone to bow their heads in sorrow for Sanders retirement from football.

    Michael Denton,

    Your post is nothing short of Freemason gibberish with a dash of Illuminati seasoning.

    Anyone who lives south of I-10 knows full well that the best professional football is played in the SEC and not the NFL.

  • go pats!!!!!!!!! yes, i’m an addict 🙁

  • Your post is nothing short of Freemason gibberish with a dash of Illuminati seasoning.

    It’s not Illuminati; it’s more Opus Dei/Knights Templar. We New Orleanians know the best spices to season our gumbos.

    Anyone who lives south of I-10 knows full well that the best professional football is played in the SEC and not the NFL.

    It is difficult to be in Louisiana to choose between the World Champion Saints and the greatest conference in college football. Thankfully, they play on different days so that we may enjoy them both.

  • …this embrace of Gnosticism will lead many Cleveland fans to the depths of hell-where the devil will either show them “The Decision” or Cleveland Browns games on an eternal loop.

    Don’t forget “the Drive” which will be meticulously narrated by a demon with over-sized teeth and a #7.

  • Michael: Yeah, that would have worked, too. We Lions fans are eagerly awaiting the return of professional football to Detroit.

    Tito: Thanks! I mean, the Skins will wear the shame of breaking “The Streak” forever, which makes me happy as a Patriots fan.

    Pauli: There will also be slow-mo, frame-by-frame replays of “The Fumble,” narrated by a demon who impersonates John Madden’s voice.

  • You know, Jay, Roger Stauchbach was also a supporter of Catholic education. His daughter attended Ursuline Academy in Dallas in the early ’90s.

  • The Chargers were not named after an electrical device or even a charging horse–it’s worse than either. Former owner Gene Klein wrote about it in his book First Down and a Billion. The Chargers original majority owner, Barron Hilton, was starting a new credit card company in 1960 called “Carte Blanche”. The team was named for what we do with credit cards: We charge.

  • Robert K.,

    Are you serious about the “charge card” thing?

    I did some Google research and they were named “Chargers” because Mr. Hilton liked how Dodger and USC fans would yell “Charge!” during home games.

  • Pingback: Catholics and Professional Football – Funniest blog post ever! | Catholic Tide
  • Lol I couldn’t stop reading this, I was amazed that anyone could actually be this stupid.
    The saints are dirty cheap players.
    And Brees-GAG! …. I wish the vikings would break his legs.

  • Lol I couldn’t stop reading this, I was amazed that anyone could actually be this stupid.

    You don’t get sarcasm, do you.

    The saints are dirty cheap players.

    Actually the Saints have shower technology and are well paid, making them neither dirty nor cheap.

    And Brees-GAG! …. I wish the vikings would break his legs.

    How you can hate a guy like Brees is beyond me. I hope you’re a Viking fan, enjoying Brees walking around victorious tonight on his two perfectly healthy legs.

  • Pingback: TAC Pro Football Top 10 « The American Catholic
  • Pingback: CatholicVote & Endorsements « The American Catholic

Why Satirical Catholic Blogs Fail

Wednesday, August 18, AD 2010

I finally returned to internet connectivity this week, which has meant catching up on news & blogs I have neglected. Part of this “reconnecting” included denying a facebook friend request from someone I never heard of-only to find out that this someone was a fake online persona created in the Catholic Fascist’s attempt at satire. Having looked over all of the posts there, I was struck by how eerily similar the site was to another parody group blog-The Spirit of Vatican II.

Both blogs employed a host of satirical characters with enough resemblance to real life to make laugh (I think whoever thought of danmclockinload deserves a guest post on TAC) at first, both got roaring laughter from their own partisans-and neither blog was funny after a few days.

Continue reading...

16 Responses to Why Satirical Catholic Blogs Fail

  • Two other problems with Satire:
    1. Unless it’s obvious, it really confuses those of us with autistic-spectrum personalities. I’ve seen the “Spirit of Vatican II” blog before, and I thought it was sincere.

    2. Satire and parody are only good when a) they have some level of respect for their targets and b) they don’t take themselves too seriously.

  • The amazing thing about the CF blog for me is the sheer output. There are more posts there than there have been at AC since it started, *and* whoever is doing it is writing most of the comments.

  • I agree the output is impressive. It may be that others are assisting Mr. Iafrate. Certainly one of his erstwhile co-bloggers has penned excellent satire on occasion.

  • I think it functions rather like primal scream therapy for the Catholic Anarchist, which means it might have one useful function.

  • Maybe its a manic phase. Lithium anyone?

  • This was not meant to be a thread bashing Catholic Fascist and/or Vox Nova and/or Catholic Anarchist. If anything, the post was meant to discourage such bashing.

  • It’s projection and status posturing by a clever but tormented fellow.

    Much political satire is like that, but I think you need at least a few drops of real disdain and even hatred to do it in a religious context on a sustained basis.

  • Michael Denton,

    I appreciate your heroic efforts to be super charitable to one of the most nasty, unreasonable, uncharitable fellows these blogs have ever known.

    I do question how many times you are to turn your cheek before you finally dust off your feet per Mark 6:11.

    Frankly, if this is the “bashing” Iafrate gets for his behavior, he will have gotten less than a tap on the cheek. I don’t think you need to worry about it. He is putting himself out there to be criticized, ridiculed, and bashed – and he secretly loves it, because he does fancy himself a prophet. If people aren’t bashing him, then he doesn’t feel as if he’s doing his job anyway.

    I might say nothing about him at all for that reason, but false prophets should be denounced.

  • I personally don’t mind satire or even strong opinions strongly argued. To argue strongly back does not bother me either as one can walk away and have that Abita (which I had for the first time this weekend) with you opponent. That’s the hard part.

    Unfortunately, sometimes there are real problems with others. Pointing them out is also not off-limits either, even if jokingly, as long as one recognizes that also. Part of running with the big dogs.

    I think the author of Catholic Fascist is truly having some problems. Though I would be happy to be wrong.

  • Good satirical blogs (Iowahawk, Scrappleface) take aim at everything. The former in particular is still going strong because there’s a wide variety of topics to skewer. Plus I don’t think he writes more than a post a day. A satirical blog that takes aim at either just one blog or one type of subject matter isn’t going to last – partly for the reasons Michael mentions, but mainly because it just gets old that much faster,

  • The Spirit of Vatican II is satirical? You must be thinking of a different blog. Or a different meaning of satirical.
    It is very much a woman’s blog. Satirical perhaps in the sense that women think men are pretty dense.

  • In one of my first encounters with Michael, I found my self quoting Matthew 18:

    If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

    I think it’s very difficult to make a quiet approach on the internet; maybe through email if the person’s address is known to you. Anyway, by this point, I don’t feel any obligation to respond to Michael’s postings, although I’d gladly help him change a flat tire. It’s not my job to rebuke him.

  • I should also note that his tantrum won’t be seen by more than a half-dozen people whom he hasn’t already alienated elsewhere. He may equal other sites in output, but he’s never going to get 1% of their hits. So he isn’t really scandalizing the faithful.

  • I don’t know. Certainly big boys can take the heat. For example a slam of TAC here:

    http://vox-nova.com/2010/08/18/somewhat-funny-somewhat-confusing/#comments

    This combined with comments at the Western Confucian that find that TAC as a greater threat to the common good than Vox Nova. Not that its clear that one ever found Vox Nova to be a threat to the common good here. The bizarre thought ironically comes from two people who claim they don’t read TAC.

    But again, being big boys, most here can take such comments.

  • Mark Shea is, apparently, not much of a fan of TAC, either:

    “I agree with you that the bellicose messianic Americanism at TAC is far more dangerous and deadly than the nose-pulling of CF. However, as I virtually never read TAC and as CF (being the New Hotness) was more prominent on my monitor, I wasn’t attempting a full review of TAC.”

    http://orientem.blogspot.com/2010/08/catholic-fascist-revisited.html#7946745129191366168

    Good thing Shea “virtually never read[s] TAC” or he might have to actually form an opinion based in fact rather than pulling things completely out of his ass like he usually does.

  • “The bizarre thought ironically comes from two people who claim they don’t read TAC.”

    Judging from Mark popping in on my Victory Over Japan post, I’d say he sneaks a peak every now and then. However, considering the way Mark has of scanning articles, based upon some of his posts, rather than reading articles to actually understand them, perhaps his statement is at least partially correct. 🙂

Miguel H. Diaz Is A Latino, Yeah!

Thursday, May 28, AD 2009

Miguel H. Diaz has been chosen by President Obama, peace be upon him, as the new ambassador to the Holy See.  The Miguel H. Diazsecular media and Catholic Left has been hailing Mr. Diaz as a Rahner scholar and “pro-life” Democrat.  Jesuit Father James Martin of America magazine, who recently claimed that Obama is not pro-abortion, has praised Mr. Diaz for being a Latino, in addition to being a “faithful” Catholic and for receiving a degree from the University of Notre Dame.

Abbot John Klassen of St. John’s Abbey had this to say about Mr. Diaz’s Latino and theological credentials [emphasis mine]:

“He is a strong proponent of the necessity of the Church to become deeply and broadly multi-cultural [I guess we need priestesses to be more multi-cultural], to recognize and appreciate the role that culture plays in a living faith [sounds too much like a living, breathing constitution]. Born in Havana, Cuba [Being born in Havana, Cuba is a good start in creating his Latino credentials.], he is a leading Hispanic theologian in United States.”

Continue reading...

22 Responses to Miguel H. Diaz Is A Latino, Yeah!

  • Michael I.,

    What part of “satire” don’t you understand?

    I asked the question if Mr. Diaz holds fidelity to the teachings of the Church not because he doesn’t, but because I want to know if he does. It was a question.

    Your comments will not be approved if you continue to insult people.

  • 1. Bad sign- he wears a t-shirt under his sport jacket. Sorta like the flipside of the aging dissident priest- badly mismatched sport jacket and tie. The Diaz Look- so 2003.

    2. “Born in Havana, Cuba-” on to Abbot Klassen’s glowing review. Only means that Mama and/or Papa had the good sense to raise their offspring outside of a Marxist dictatorship.

    3. “A leading Hispanic theologian-” the good Abbot sets both himself and Prof. Dr. Diaz as butts of jokes here so we will proceed further.

    4.”The need for the Church to become deeply and broadly multi-cultural…..” There’s a ringing endorsement. I would think Prof. Dr. Diaz would understand the need to preach Christ Crucified, in season and out, as both a personal and professional priority. Perhaps I am too insensitive.

    5. So is he pro-life? Or is he the best that Dear Leader can find in an increasingly limited pool of likely candidates- Dear Mother of God, he might have actually considered Caroline Kennedy? Hope Prof. Dr. Diaz- married? Ex-priest? Metrosexual?- doesn’t do the t-shirt and jacket number in official meetings. Might be a little too multi-cultural for the Vatican.

  • Let’s see he worked actively to have the most pro-abortion President in our nation’s history elected. He signs on to a letter supporting the fanatically pro–abortion Sebelius, the friend of Tiller the Killer, to be Secretary of HHS. With “pro-lifers” like Mr. Diaz, who needs pro-aborts?

  • TO be honest the least of our concenrs should be his Theology.

    Is he competent!! I am relieved that it is not Kmiec. Kmiec showed in his actions the last couple of monthys he had no business beingan Enoy to the Island Nation of Naru or the Artic for that matter with his temperment

    What sort of strikes me about this pick is that it is much much lower profile name than usual compared to Envoys that we have sent in the past.

    As

  • Question: why would it be that important to Obama for the Vatican ambassador to be a pro-choice or even pro-Obama person? Or a dissident Catholic?

    If he’s really a uniter, why can’t he just take his lumps on this particular position and install a practicing/ faithful Catholic to the job? Is it really that unacceptable?

  • Perhaps, contra some who think otherwise, it is to develop a liberal Catholic and Hispanic voting bloc for the Dems. for the forseeable future.

  • Exactly, Phillip.

    I’ll assume that the Hispanic vote was lacking in his first campaign–as a politician (and nothing more) he always looks to the future; his own.

  • If the Catholic left is hailing him, his ‘Catholicism’ is immediately questionable, and more likely than not, contrived.

  • Is it not somewhat racist to applaud the nomination of Mr. Diaz [as also that of Judge Sotomayor] because they are Hispanic?

  • Is it not somewhat racist to applaud the nomination of Mr. Diaz [as also that of Judge Sotomayor] because they are Hispanic?

    No, of course not. What an impoverished (or ideologically tainted) definition of “racism” you must have. Stop listening to Rush Limbaugh.

  • Stop listening to Rush Limbaugh.

    The hard left has found its new bogeyman in the post-Bush era.

  • No, they still use Bush. But even they know they need a new object for division.

  • Tito:

    “Miguel H. Diaz has been chosen by President Obama, peace be upon him…”

    You gettin’ all Mohammedan on us now?

    (On another note, why in heavens name do I yet remain a 2nd class citizen on this here blog?)

  • Be glad for that, I’m a third class. 🙂

  • I haven’t even been assigned a class; my wife says it’s because I have none…

  • Well, it seems even the Ever Infamous Iafrate, in spite of his seemingly horrid presence, retains a much higher standing than we few, we happy few, we Catholic band of brothers so grievously persecuted by The Guardians of this Realm simply because we are, at bottom, classless… oh well.

  • No e., the Catholic Anarchist is continually in moderation.

  • Is it not somewhat racist to applaud the nomination of Mr. Diaz [as also that of Judge Sotomayor] because they are Hispanic?

    No, of course not. What an impoverished (or ideologically tainted) definition of “racism” you must have.

    I thought we moved beyond race. Didn’t Martin Luther King say we should judge someone based on the content of their character and not of there skin? Oh, that only applies to conservatives, while liberals get to be racists.

    Mark DeFrancisis,

    Nonconstructive comments will not be approved.

  • I thought we moved beyond race.

    Who is “we”? How the heck do we “move beyond” race? “Colorblindness” is a false “solution” to racism. We should see and appreciate racial diversity, not “move beyond” it.

  • We should see and appreciate racial diversity, not “move beyond” it

    I’m glad you feel that way. Since Sotomayer believes that Latino’s are superior to everyone else, I hope you recognize my intellectual superiority to you and your race.

  • Michael I.,

    Personal insults will not be tolerated. Keep up your unChristian behavior.

  • Since Sotomayer believes that Latino’s are superior to everyone else…

    She did not say this.

One Response to Congress And The Inauguration

  • A while back, Tom Wolfe stated that satirizing aspects of modern American life became next to impossible during the later half of the 20th century. No matter what a satirist dreams up these days, he is bound to find himself one-upped by reality.