Today’s Andrew Sullivan Award goes to . . . Andrew Sullivan
Who continues to mock and denigrate core teachings of the Church he professes to be a member of and love.
That is, when he isn’t mocking and denigrating the religious practices of Mormons.
November 29, 2006
Nobody Has Trackbacked Yet
The trackback URL for this post: http://www.southernappeal.org/index.php/archives/2176/trackback
November 29th, 2006 at 11:55 pm
I’ll bet Andrew has more exotic, um, garments in his closet!
November 30th, 2006 at 1:59 am
well, i least see where you’re coming from on the lace post. but the sign “birth control is harmful” should be criticized. from a strictly public policy perspective, birth control prevents a whole universe of problems (teen pregnancy, STDs, ABORTIONS). And, it’s girls and women in poor states like my own state of kentucky that pay the disproportionate costs of birth control bans.
now, yes, I understand that birth control is banned by the church. but i would venture to say that the number of sexually active Catholics that have never used birth control hovers at around 1-2%. so, either everyone is sinning, or it’s just a rule that doesn’t make sense and should go. and yes, i understand that one of virtues of the catholic church (which i respect) is that it doesn’t evolve into “do what you feel” faith. but you can think that this particular ban is harmful and wrong, without ignoring the rest of the Church’s teachings.
November 30th, 2006 at 7:01 am
“say that the number of sexually active Catholics that have never used birth control hovers at around 1-2%. so, either everyone is sinning, or it’s just a rule that doesn’t make sense and should go.”
Actually, it is the former. The fellow who started our Church was quite used to setting standards in the sexual area that most humans fail to meet. All that talk about lusting in one’s heart being equivalent to adultery and banning divorce. Those groups of Christians that fail to follow Christ’s example in this area, hard as it may be, are precisely the same groups of Christians that are on a fast path to extinction.
November 30th, 2006 at 7:29 am
Some methods of birth control actually cause health problems. Some forms of the pill are associated with an increased risk of blood clots and cancer. There’s also a pretty fair argument to be made that making sex consequence free and unmoored from love, which birth control facilitates, is destructive of the social institutions of marriage and romantic love, as well as many individuals’ mental health. Thus I’m not sure birth control is the unalloyed good that liberals make it out to be. Of course it is helping Iran commit demographic suicide, so I guess even some evil things can sometimes do some good in the world…
But hey, I’m with Sullivan. I’m an oh-so-devoted Catholic, but I’m not going to vote for this Pope’s re-election until the Church supports the worship of other gods, the use of God’s name as an epithet, the dishonoring of parents, theft, adultery, lying, murder, and envy, along with some other ancillary progressive values like sodomy, gay marriage and birth control. Thus I am forced to point out that it’s a terrible church. Like Andy, I didn’t leave the Church, the Church left me, blah blah blah subjective temper tantrum because I know God’s mind better than everbody else blah blah blah blah.
I can’t figure out whether Andy is suffering from dementia, or whether he’s just an intermittently rabid Unitarian. If somebody could clue me in I’d appreciate it.
November 30th, 2006 at 8:51 am
Since when is the theatrical regalia of High Mass one of the “Core teachings” of the Church? I thought those were things like the ten commandments, “love your enemies,” stuff like that, not what color combinations look best through a cloud of incense smoke.
Besides, you can’t deny there’s an element of theater to the liturgy, and that’s hardly a bad thing. Lighten up.
November 30th, 2006 at 9:11 am
And today is the Feast of St. Andrew…hmmm.
“As one of the Twelve, Andrew was admitted to the closest familiarity with Our Lord during His public life; he was present at the Last Supper; beheld the risen Lord; witnessed the Ascension; shared in the graces and gifts of the first Pentecost, and helped, amid threats and persecution, to establish the Faith in Palestine.”
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01471a.htm
FYI–Ala. state flag “Adopted in 1895 and patterned after the Confederate Battle Flag, the flag shows a crimson St. Andrew’s cross on a white field. The bars forming the cross must not be less than six inches broad and must extend diagonally across the flag from side to side.”
St. Andrew intercede on our behalf and correct Mr. Andrew Sullivan’s thoughts. Come Holy Spirit-Bring him to HIS TRUTH.
November 30th, 2006 at 10:48 am
It’s perhaps a bit early to suggest this, but maybe we should start pushing the idea that the blogosphere can take a Lenten “Fast” from ol’ Sully when the time comes. No one cites him, links to him, talks about him, or reads him. Ignore, Ignore, Ignore.
Heck, why wait until Lent?! Let’s start now!
November 30th, 2006 at 11:05 am
QD:
You are a man of vast wisdom. I’ve been supporting your initiative even before you suggested it.
November 30th, 2006 at 11:08 am
DITTO - QD & Paul Zummo
November 30th, 2006 at 11:23 am
Ignore who? Link to who?
Not sure who you’re talking about, but I think it’s a good idea.
November 30th, 2006 at 11:30 am
I know. I know. But I just can’t help myself. Linking to outrageous blog posts by Sullivan is just who I am. I was born that way. It is part of the very fabric of my being. How can y’all possibly ask me to stop doing what I am biologically compelled to do?
November 30th, 2006 at 2:51 pm
Reason, Steve, reason…we have to live according to reason…
…now off to teach Aquinas….
November 30th, 2006 at 2:52 pm
ooops…sorry…meant to put one of those little emoticons there…
November 30th, 2006 at 5:57 pm
What’s that, QD? You say St. Andrew was close to Christ? Close, eh? Well, then. Clearly, that means the church should favor gay marriage. /sarcasm
Yeah, I think I might be able to take part in that Andy fast.
November 30th, 2006 at 11:51 pm
The posts on the Pope are just plain sad. Sullivan is essentially arguing that being gay means adopting the shallowness of a 13 year old girl, ooing and ahing over fur trim and the like.
I thought “pride” was part of the equation.
Either that, or he’s arguing that an appreciation of aesthetics, the recognition that God truly became man and thus that the sacraments and liturgies have a necessarily physical dimension that appeals to the physical senses, means that one’s either a sodomite or catamite.
Again, I don’t get it.
December 1st, 2006 at 1:27 am
Let’s see now. Posting a photograph of very modest underwear is offensive. Spouting dogma about how and why other people copulate is not. Got it!
Over and above that, Steve asks rhetorically, “How can y’all possibly ask me to stop doing what I am biologically compelled to do?”
Have I stumbled on Bizarro world?
December 1st, 2006 at 9:26 am
I don’t know if Feddie did this on purpose, but Boyd K. Packer (a Mormon church official) wrote a book about twenty years ago about temples (The Holy Temple, if you’re curious), and in it he compared Mormon temple garments to the various priestly vestments that you see in other churches. The gist is that most priests, pastors, etc. wear clothes that are full of important symbolism as part of their job. The Mormon bishop (and others) wear similar clothing with important symbolism, but because they also have day jobs the rest of the week, those clothes are worn underneath their regular work clothes. Not so strange now, is it?
By linking to the Sullivan post about the pope’s vestments and also the Sullivan post about Mormon temple garments, you’ve stumbled on something that many people would do well to learn.
December 4th, 2006 at 12:13 am
Yeah, drawing conclusions from anthropology is offensive!!!
How dare you make distinctions, much less judgements!
Wait, that’s what @$$hat was just doing, wasn’t it?