About three years ago I began to look into blogging. At first I had no blog myself but made comments on other blogs. The purpose of my blogging was two fold. First, my wife, my daughter, my two grandsons were all catholic. Second, my wife and I were helping a young man who had been abused in some ways. He, through my wife, was leaning to catholicism. The first blogs I tried were 'traditional' catholic blogs. This was unreal. Then I added the word "liberal" to my search and came on a Joe Cecil. Mr. Cecil allowed all kinds of opinions to be expressed and I engaged in several very lengthly discussion. I was very pleased. There were some catholics out there, liberal and conservative, who could hear differing points of view.
Later I found some other blogs that "appeared" to be open to differing points of view. But then I found out. These moderate/liberal blogs were , in their way, just as closed minded as the traditional catholic blogs. Each of these blogs had a small network of "friends" they called them who always basically agreed with the blogmaster. On ocassion they might differ on who was the greatest blues singer etc. But on religion they were hand-in hand. If you dared disagree the whole group would circle the wagons to defend their "friends." Several of them got into politics and then they really went wild if you did not follow their line letter by letter.
But I must be honest. I became catholic on the theory that latitude of belief was acccepted in the church as I thought I saw in these blogs. But a surprise. These "lileral/moderate blogs",again, were just as, if not more, dogmatic than the traditional catholic blogs. They were arrogant, dishonest, and expected to be treated as mini-gods or at least mini-popes. They were infallible in their friends eyes.
I'll probably hang around the Church for a while to help my family and the young man. And since I am officially on the rolls I will continue to comment here and elsewhere on Church matters. Jack
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I wonder if you would be interested in this article.
ReplyDeleteGod bless,
Anna
Anna,
ReplyDeleteVery interesting article. But as I said in my comment it was so "inside" I'll have to study it further. First impression: I can't tell if the author is 'supporting' clericalism or 'anti-clericalism'. And exactly how he is using these words. Thanks. Jack
Jack,
ReplyDeleteThe article doesn't really have anything to do with your complaining about blogs. I just thought you might find it interesting, in general.
The author was saying that clericalism is a real problem in America. He doesn't support some things which might *seem* to be anti-clericalism in nature but which really contradict Church teaching (like having lay people supposedly confer the sacrament of the Eucharist), but he does think that Catholics have gotten too used to clericalist thinking and need to wise up and start fighting this disease.
He gives some examples at the beginning of the paper of what he thinks clericalism looks like, and I think he explains how he is using the word clericalism when he says of it: "It fosters an ecclesiastical caste system in which clerics comprise the dominant elite, with lay people serving as a passive, inert mass of spear-carriers tasked with receiving clerical tutelage and doing what they're told."
God bless,
Anna
Anna,
ReplyDeleteI knew the article was not about blogging. Of course, you summarize what it seems to say in a few words. Kudos to you!!! Jack
Jack,
ReplyDeleteI think you are right. It's very difficult to find a good discussion blog out there. And I don't really have the time or energy to do so right now anyway. But when I first starting looking for Catholic blogs on the internet, I was hoping to find thought-provoking discussions on a variety of Catholic topics.