"Empty" arguments and their uncanny resemblance to Fundamentalist cant (part 2)
12/31/2002 2:43:30 PM
I’m already receiving angry e-mails from folks upset over part 1 of this post. I’m being told that my tone is flippant and glib (check), that I’m in over my head (check), and that I’m taking part in the work of Satan (doubtful). Well, I suppose that if I deny I am working for Satan, I only prove that I am. Nifty.
Here, then, are Twenty Empty Zingers –– actual quotes from recent e-mails to me. Enjoy. And keep the lovely e-mails coming. I get paid by the insult and my hourly wage is now shooting through the roof. Original comments are in quotes and bold; my replies follow in regular type:
1. "Sadly, Mr. Olson, you come across as just one more of the naive and totally uninformed ‘conservative’ Catholics who continue to turn a blind eye to the obvious problems WITHIN the Vatican II documents. You say you have read them--are you sure?" Now that you mention it, no, I’m not. Let’s see . . . I had the book open and I was turning the pages, carefully, one by one. And I read them as part of my Master's program and I did manage an "A" in the class. But I’m not sure I actually DID read the pages. In addition, I’m spiritually blind (see #14 below), so there’s a good chance I was simply daydreaming about that Notre Dame-USC game. BTW, this is proof of #3 in part 1 of my post.
2. "The Holy Spirit didn't ‘blunder’ at Vatican II, He didn't show up." There you have it. Who do Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II think they are to disagree? Case settled.
3. "He's [Pat Buchanan’s] right. You're wrong. You sound like the typical lib who has lost his soul. There is no explanation, no illustration, no amount of reasoning that will convince you or your ilk. You have a philosophical cancer." This sounds suspiciously similar to a Fundamentalist who told me, upon learning I was becoming a Catholic, "You are not saved. You are going to hell. You do not love Jesus. You do not understand the Bible." Is there a class you can take to learn this sort of stuff? It’s very impressive.
4. "…nor did you mention the foul, lewd, blasphemous and pornographic novels of Father Andrew Greeley, which are endorsed by Catholic authorities such as EWTN answer board which says it is no crime to write best-selling novels. So VII was a great and glorious achievement?" Whew. Got me there. I give up. The obvious connection between Fr. Greeley’s fiction and Vatican II is so incontrovertible and damning that you never see folks like me try to defend such apostate activity; we just turn a blind eye to it. Same with the Catholic Church’s rousing endorsement of all best-selling novels. Come to think of it, this writer may have a point. After all, who can deny that The Bridges of Madison County, Love Story, and nearly everything written by Danielle Steele have the fingerprints of Monsignor Bugnini all over ‘em?
5. "Please come to your senses and always be HONEST. We are not ALL imbeciles." I’d say you’re volunteering too much information considering I never said any of "you" were imbeciles. Is there something you want to get off your chest?
6. "Your article was poorly written." Perhaps the most damning piece of evidence, I sadly confess. Mea culpa. But if you think that article was badly written, you should have seen my high school term paper titled, "Miami Vice, Melrose Place, and Post-Modern Antithesis: The Golden Age of the 1980s In the Light of Neo-Hegelian Dialectics."
7. "I guess you don't want to be confused by the facts." Why are you guessing? Are you not sure of yourself? Well? I guess not. I should note that Fundamentalists like to use similar taunts when telling Catholics about the "facts" re: 90 million killed during the Inquisitions and how the Catholic Church secretly runs the world from a McDonalds in Toledo, Ohio.
8. "And please do not doubt the loyalty to the Church of a person like Mr. Buchanan or people who believe like him. Your loyalty of 5 years can be doubted then too." I really doubt I could ever be Catholic long enough to make a difference. After all, John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger have been Catholics for quite a while and you don’t give them much credit either.
9. "What is also so crazy is how many convert ‘neo-Catholics’ take it upon themselves to excommunicate lifelong Catholics like Mr. Buchanan." Ample proof of point #1 from my previous point: I criticize Mr. Buchanan and all of the sudden I am accused of things I never said, cannot do, and have no interest in. Regardless, I will admit there are far too many of us making big money off of this lucrative enterprise of "excommunicating" Empties. So, I suggest we start excommunicating others as well. I vote that we start with Senator Ted Kennedy and Voice of the Faithful and then move on to Martin Sheen and Nicole Kedman.
10. "Mr. Olson, How blind can you be?" Who said that? I can’t seeeeeeee you . . .
11. "It was not the Holy Spirit who blundered, it was the un-holy spirit, Satan, who convinced the like of you to believe in VII. The Church is now ruined and will eventually after many generations come back to it's roots that existed for 1500 or more years. Yes, the damage has been disastrous - in that only fools cannot see. Come back before Satan completely destroys you." Someone needs a hug.
12. "Your side is, finally, going to lose, but only after you finish this persecution." Yeah, that’s right [roll of the eyes]. But first I have to finish organizing my stamp collection, reading the Vatican II documents, making coffee, and choreographing a music video for the Mormon Tabernacle Choir.
13. "Pat Buchanan is a chronic whiner and harper, but he's not 100% wrong." That is a rousing endorsement. I suggest you call Buchanan and offer to run his presidential campaign for 2004.
14. "I didn't read Pat's commentary, but ANYONE who thinks the Catholic Church is better off today then before the Council must be SPIRITUALLY BLIND." Not only did you not read Pat’s commentary, you obviously didn’t read my original post. And, please, stop shouting. I'd hate to be both blind and deaf. Proof of #2 and #5 in part 1 of this post.
15. "Vatican II was not an inspired gift of the Holy Spirit. Rather, it was the stupidity and ego centric mind of Pope John XX III along with Pope Paul VI..." Forget the hugs, give this writer a massage, a manicure and a case of the finest Scotch. Let’s see, that’s proof of #7.
16. "If Vatican II is such a treasure, please describe for me any great good that has resulted from its implimentation." The Catechism of the Catholic Church. A far smaller good is that I became Catholic because of the documents of Vatican II, the Catechism, and the person of Pope John Paul II.
17. "I fear the devil has you and others completely fooled. Proof: You renounce 2000 years of traditional Roman Catholic teachings for today's pagan catholic rites. Communion in the hand while standing up. Really!" This is eerie. Check out a Fundamentalist comment: "You have been brainwashed. You have renounced two thousand years of true Christianity and are practicing pagan Babylonian mysticism." Perhaps twins separated at birth? Proof of #6.
18. "For Pete's sake, who are you covering for?" Well, I could tell you, but then I’d have to track you down and take away your Blockbuster card and scratch all of your Ted Nugent CDs. Let’s just say I work for a purple dinosaur who sings lousy songs on television and is a Commie.
19. "When you have studied Catholic history some, your opinions might be more credible. Unfortunately you have neither the experience nor the knowledge of Pat Buchanan so your little piece written here has no impact on Catholics who do know Catholic history." Mom, is that really you? Mom? Proof of #4.
20. "The Changes in our Holy Catholic Church are lead by Freemasons, Illuminati. Bilderberger Society and United States Wealthy Government." Hey, don’t stop there! What about the Rockefellers, Opus Dei, WalMart, Disney, and Starbucks? Proof of #5.
Wasn’t that fun? And I just received an e-mail admonishing me "to refrain from purposely dividing Catholics" I think I am being given a bit too much credit in that department, don’t you?
