Rorate Caeli is engaging in one huge piece of hypocrisy with its post entitled: “Our supreme priority is love.” Dawn Eden has taken RC’s reporting to task because of its use of the opinions of an antisemitic blogger, and now RC accuses her of being an uncharitable ideologue.
RC is a clearing house for every spiteful opinion on the postconciliar Church, and no one is exempt as a target, including Pope Benedict, who now RC claims as their great ideal—the man who reached out the SSPX in charity and has been despised by the progressives for doing so. Now RC claims to share in the Pope Emeritius’ persecution because like him, RC is a the promoter of pastoral charity towards those most marginalized. Like Pope Benedict, RC wants “to educate with love.”
The blogger New Catholic at RC has generally been careful in his manner of critiquing the Holy Father. However, the comment section is miserable pit disrespect for everything postconciliar. I happen to know personally that New Catholic stands at the gate of the comment section like a preconciliar Noble Guard. The comments are always moderated. Nothing gets through until it has been manually approved by the blogger. I have had a number of comments rejected that were critical of Rorate Caeli and were no more offensive than this post. However, the most vile comments against the person of the Holy Father, including Pope Benedict, have gotten through on a regular basis. The things that have been said about Pope Francis are beyond the pale.
Here is one comment that got through in reference to what New Catholic called “The Official End of the Reform of the Reform by Example.” that is, Pope’s Francis liturgical choice to wash the feet of two girls on Holy Thursday:
. . . there is no natural reason to hope for something positive to happen in the Church . . .
The public face of our Faith has been disfigured to such an extent that the New Theologians and the Modernists and the Media and the Masons and The Jews could not be happier.
So this appeal to the value of charity and the example of Pope Benedict is a bit of subterfuge to keep people from observing that antisemitism within the traditionalist movement is not restricted to the flamboyant rantings of Bishop Williamson. Bishop Fellay himself, the man at the top of the SSPX and highly venerated by many of the readers of RC claimed that Vatican II was not a Council of the Church but one of “the Jews, the Masons and the Modernists.”
In typical traditionalist fashion, RC bloggers use Pope Benedict for their own purposes and are now carefully constructing the mythology that Benedict was their champion and Francis their enemy. This is pure ideology and archetypically traditionalist. The comment section has already painted Dawn Eden as a CPA (Convert from Protestantism Apologist), who is engaged in a conspiracy with other CPA’s. But real people like Pope Benedict, Pope Francis and Dawn Eden, who are not traditionalists, do not fit nicely into the boxes created for them by ideologues. For RC to call all of this “charity” is just mind-boggling.
I am waiting to see if someone dares to take this conspiracy theory to the next level. The traditionalist narrative is so predictable: just isolate a text or event and fit it into the narrative. Works every time.
I just want to go on record as frankly admitting that I am not always as charitable as I should be on this blog. I am sarcastic by temperament and it is often my downfall. I am not excusing it. But neither have I ever painted myself as a paragon of charity. RC’s self-righteousness just amazes me. But no amount of lace and brocade or appeals to Pope Benedict’s pastoral charity will cover this piece of hypocrisy.
Rorate Caeli permits a gross lack of charity on a regular basis and then gratuitously asserts that charity is the supreme guiding principle in its work. Hence, Rorate Caeli will now go radio silent on the matter, which New Catholic considers “closed,” and let the commenters (only those who are approved) do the talking.
Update 1: Here is a comment from Dawn Eden’s post that she chose not to publish, but which I have been give permission to publish here. The commenter is a regular over at Rorate Caeli, and the one to which I refer in this post. Par for the course.
Update 2: Mark Shea has posted on the matter, revealing another one of the vicious comments that Dawn chose not to approve. You can read the “Jews = Christ-haters” comment here. And here is an excerpt from Mark:
Patient, thoughtful and not-at-all-bigoted-or-crazy representatives of Truly True Traditional Traddery try to explain to her that there is a huge–HUGE–difference between Holocaust Denial and Holocaust Belittlement. RC’s source just belittles and laughs at the millions of dead. He doesn’t deny they are dead. But will she listen to this totally reasonable distinction? No. Of course not. You know how Those People are. So sensitive about a little mass murder. Not at all attuned to the truly crucial things, like the silk and lace obsessions of not-at-all-crazy anti-semites in their weird little hothouse of self-absorption. . . .
Padre and I, on the other hand, both thought it was important to offer some rejoinder since this kind of vicious and poisonous Jew-hatred is, as the other stuff that *did* get published in Dawn’s comboxes attests, a not-uncommon feature of Urine and Vinegar Traddery and is, in the most exact sense of the word, scandalous. It brings the faith into disrepute, it causes honest and good people to stumble when they might enter in, it harms innocents like Dawn, and, worst of all, it even tempts new Catholics who think they are embracing “hard truths” but are, in fact, embracing ancient evil to become twice the sons of hell that the Trad anti-semite is. It is pure filth and every Catholic, but most especially every lover of the EF, should smash it flat. People have died by the millions because of this crap.
And this brings me to
Dawn Eden’s concern over Marcelo Gonzalez’s article is absolute warranted. She is being much maligned for her courage.
Gonzalez bends over backwards to excuse the Nazi regime, comparing its intention for putting Jews in concentration camps to the reasons why the US interred the Japanese during World War II. He also suggests that many of the deaths were more or less accidental from poorer living conditions in war-torn Europe. But the icing on the cake is this:
And to say that everything done by the Axis was a cruel plan of systematic extermination is as unacceptable as saying that the inmates of these places lived in a recreation area.
Marcelo Gonzalez is doing much more than distinguishing between extremes. He is just repeating Rad Trad boilerplate, while attempting to present it in a moderate tone. He is not disputing the numbers. He says he is not even interested in that question. No, what he suggests is that the whole Nazi malice to exterminate the Jews is a political fabrication, which other Trads will say has been created to destroy the Church. I wonder if the history of Nazism in Argentina has anything to do with Gonzalez’s sympathies.
There is no serious historical dispute at the root of this problem. What we have here traditionalist paranoia that is in need of tracing everything that has happened over the last 50 years to the Jews, Masons and Modernists, including Vatican II and especially Nostra Aetate and our having dropped the word “perfidious” as a modifier to “Jews” from our prayer for the Jewish people on Good Friday (along with other changes).
Dawn Eden does not owe Gonzalez an apology. This is old traditionalist hat. It doesn’t sustain parsing ad infinitum.
Which leaves us to ask the question of what exactly was going on with Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio in regard to his dispositions for the Latin Mass community in Buenos Aires. Perhaps the situation is a bit more complex than Gonzalez would make it out to be. Perhaps Cardinal Bergoglio had reasons to want to make sure that those who attended the Latin Mass under his auspices actually accepted Vatican II.
Dawn is right on the money. And she has kicked a hornets’ nest.
Update 4: Dawn has a new post, “An evil not even tolerated among the pagans,” in which she answers the objection that she is being divisive. I have also posted her response to Gonzalez’s non-clarification clarification in “Six Million Jews Killed by Mistake.” Kevin O’brien as well has weighed in on the matter in “Why Should We Think When Hating Is So Much More Fun.”