There is a scene in one of the Die Hard movies where Bruce Willis is getting into an elevator with a bunch of Eurobaddies pretending to Americans. The Eurobaddies are intent on putting an end to the movie series by killing Bruce. Ah, but Bruce picks up on few little things that give him the advantage.
One of them calls the elevator a lift instead of, well, an elevator and another handles his cigarettes funny. Based on this evidence alone, Bruce quickly comes to the conclusion that these security guards are likely not American after all. So if they are not American, he surmises, well they must be Eurobaddies and he promptly dispatches them all to the great beyond.
What saved Bruce from an untimely demise? The dead giveaway. Keep this in mind.
Perhaps you have heard the story already about an El Paso priest who wrote an op-ed to the local newspaper. In his article, Fr. Michael Rodriquez said things that from a Catholic point of view that are undeniably true.
Remember: Every single Catholic, out of fidelity to charity and truth, has the absolute duty to oppose (1) the murder of unborn babies, and (2) any and all government attempts to legalize homosexual unions.
Any Catholic who supports homosexual acts is, by definition, committing a mortal sin, and placing himself/herself outside of communion with the Roman Catholic Church.
There is more and you should read it. For his defense of Catholic teaching in the matter the good priest was publicly rebuked by his Bishop in the same paper. His Excellency Most Rev. Armando X. Ochoa, Bishop of El Paso wails and apologizes about the incivility of the neanderthal Fr. Rodriguez. Check out Father Z for a line by line dissection of the original letter and the Bishop’s response.
However, as a result of this I fear there may be many priests out there who would like to defend the Church but now fear similar rebukes to the one suffered by Fr. Rodgriguez. So how can a priest in good standing know if his Bishop is really a Eurobaddy just pretending to be Catholic while he takes you down the elevator of death? Well just like Bruce, you need to look for the dead give-away. And fortunately there is one.
Let’s return to the the rebuke written by Bishop Ochoa. While most of the piece is obvious there is one subtle giveaway that if it had been detected in his writing prior to this incident may have saved the good priest some grief. Let’s look at it.
“As Church we want to journey with everyone as they search for meaning in their lives.”
Seems innocuous enough, right? But the devil is in the detail. As Church we want to journey says the Bishop. As what? Church. Not THE Church? No just Church. But where is the definite article? Aha, now you are on to something.
For reasons I cannot fully explain, progressive Eurobaddies abhor the definite article when referring to THE Church. Saying THE Church conveys history, truth, and authority–all things antithetical to the progressively pastoral. By removing the definite article, progressives hope to remove any sense of such unpastoral authority. They prefer that you think of the Church as an autonomous collective, a sort of anarcho-syndicalist commune in which we take turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week.
But there you have it. This is the easiest way for you to discover if your Bishop is really just a progressive Eurobaddy in disguise ready to pounce on you when you least expect it.
So what then? What do you do if, while scouring the writings of your Bishop, you discover reference to the indefinite Church? I can’t answer that for you but the Bishops should be glad the Bruce is not a priest.
August 24, 2010 at 8:13 pm
here's another word on which you might want to spend some reflecting: love. As in John 13:34-35, 15:12,17, maybe 1John 4:7. Stuff like that.
What a hypocrite. Not only do you lob an insult at someone behind the veil of anonymity, you are even more guilty of the supposed transgression that you accuse others of. How does it display "love" to lob these sanctimonious hand grenades about "hearts of stone," implicitly judging the hearts and souls of the blog proprietor and the commenters here?
August 24, 2010 at 8:50 pm
Same as Prince Charles, who decided that he is 'Defender of Faith' rather than the 'Defender of THE Faith'… In any case, THE faith here would be THE protestant one, so…
August 25, 2010 at 12:05 am
These are extraordinarily dangerous times for retaining some semblance of a moral society in America. We have endured an estimated 50 million abortions (aka murders of unborn infants) since 1973, and a radical degeneration of sexual morality in our society under the ambiguity of what passes as contemporary compassion among our religious betters. Many parts of America and our world are simply overflowing toilets of moral depravity.
I regret to say that His Excellency, Bishop Ochoa’s sentimental fuzziness in these matters is precisely why we are so flagrantly afflicted with metastasizing depravity in America, as these are the usual responses of so many of his tepid brother bishops in their calls for a civil umbrella in a hurricane.
If a looming social disaster is increasing for the sheep then what does it say about the quality of our shepherds?
August 25, 2010 at 12:50 am
Well said, John Hetman. We need to be sorry for our sins, not boastful or indifferent to them. Someone identified some sins as sins, and was criticized for doing so.
This appears to be the non-judgmental mindset that kept child molesters in our church for decades.
August 25, 2010 at 12:53 am
Here's a great video of Fr. Michael Rodriquez on this very issue:
http://www.kvia.com/video/24644887/index.html
August 25, 2010 at 1:35 am
Does that mean that Archbishop Dolan of New York is a Eurodaddy? He witnessed a progressive Mass at a known homosexual parish that routinely has a float in the gay-lesbian parade each year.
August 25, 2010 at 1:59 am
I am not sure what a Eurodady is but I am quite sure Bp. Dolan isn't one.
August 25, 2010 at 5:28 am
Why does the dropped definite article remind me of Borg?
August 25, 2010 at 2:21 pm
Yes, check out Fr. Z. He has something meaningful to offer. The commentary here is basically useless, except in its over-the-top ridicule of the bishop.
August 25, 2010 at 5:39 pm
"..but I pray that your heart of stone may be softened by the one who reached out to sinners. All sinners."
Let's dispense with the euphemisms. Christ did and does much more than "reach out" to sinners. It is that kind of language which serves as tools of philosophical and theological confusion. Terms like "reach out" are not religious, but vauge terms borrowed from pop culture. They can mean about anything, and are used primairily as misdirection. Christ's life, death, and ressurection was to redeem. And this redemption is from Sin -not from differences in life-style, world views, or bad choices.
Fr Rodriguez's message was a firm message of Hope. His message contained active verbs, few if any cliches. But more to the point, his message was perfectly in line with official Church teaching. To be redeemed, one most fully understand what one is being redeemed from. Yes, it is Bp Ochoa's diocese; he is free to administer it as he sees fit. But his job description doesn't include hiding the Church's message of Hope behind a wall fuzzy language.
August 25, 2010 at 6:45 pm
I stand open-mouthed at how many people don't get the point. The Sister Chit crowd live on saying "We are Church" which, whether you like it or not, is as identifiable as lib-talk as "valley-speak" is for young girls.
August 26, 2010 at 2:21 pm
Matthew Siekierski wrote:
Why does the dropped definite article remind me of Borg?
Ooh! That's a point I never considered, before… 🙂
But yes, definitely: the lack of a definite article when describing holy things, along with the incessant desire to fuse smaller "Church-sounding words" into one clumsy-sounding word (e.g. "womanpriest", "ritualsong", etc.), are "progressivist red flags", for me.
August 26, 2010 at 2:57 pm
For anyone who wishes to get to the bottom of the We are Church conflageration, check out We are Church at Wiki. Or better yet, go to thier website. Among other things, We are Church is an international organization devoted to the ordination of female priests, reforming the Church hierarchy, and promoting the homosexual lifestyle. The name We are Church is derived from the German phrase (why am I not surprised) Wir sind Kirche. The actual organization began in Austria in the late 90s.
Any Catholic who drops the definite article when using the word Church obviously endorses the movement.
August 26, 2010 at 3:16 pm
Progressive, Liberal, Conservative! Are we as The Church becoming a mirror of the American body Politic? The 73 BOOKS, the writings of The Fathers, The CCC, these are the measures of THE CHURCH. "Judge not least ye be judged."
Co-incidently, arn't the official writings of Vatican II in Latin, the official language of The Roman Catholic Church? It is true that Latin does not recognize "the" in any of it's grammar.
August 26, 2010 at 3:54 pm
CarlJ,
You cannot seperate the forest form the trees. The We are Church movement is a dissident movement whose agenda runs 180 degrees counter to the RCC. You seem blissfully unaware that it is the We are Church who began to politicize the RCC – that is, they see the Church's moral teachings as political teachings. And when lay-people protest thier actions, people like you accuse the lay people of politics. Nice try.
And no, Latin doesn't use the definite article. And the English language doesn't require noun declensions. Who cares? That was really never the focus of this debate, anyway.
It is groups like We are Church who openly defy the RCC and promote a heretical agenda. And it is not wrong highlight those events when a Bishop uses the same language of dissidents.