Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
Dr. Erin goes after “left-wing” bloggers

Dr. Erin goes after “left-wing” bloggers

Last updated on: July 12, 2007 at 4:40 am by Policraticus

Dr. Erin goes after “left-wing” bloggers 2007-07-12T04:40:00-05:00 Policraticus

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Gerald Augustinus of The Cafeteria is Closed has turned to his wife for support against the barrage of “left-wing Catholic” criticism that is aimed at his views on immigration. Why do I bring this up? After all, some of Vox Nova’s own contributors have stated their views on immigration and have refuted many times the “law of the land/national sovereignty” approach that Gerald and others embrace, consistently ignoring or disregarding the consistent and holistic teachings of the Catholic Church on immigration. Not that the contributors of Vox Nova rely solely on magisterial teaching for answers to the multifarious problem of immigration worldwide; indeed, those of us who have commented draw liberally from sociological, economic and political studies.

Rather than replying to our arguments in a fashion that is attentive to detail, desirous of understanding and respectful toward rational discourse, Gerald and others resort to merely rehashing the same, tired “law of the land” arguments as if shouting the same story over and over, louder and louder, somehow constitutes a responsible, incisive and ultimately faith-filled response to a global situation that requires the precision of mind and openness of heart. Notwithstanding the obvious theological flaws and the philosophical inconsistency in beginning immigration discourse with legality or national sovereignty, those who disagree with the Vatican’s view on immigration in general and with the USCCB’s view on U.S. immigration in particular have failed to produce a viable argument for their positions, relying instead on assertions derived from a thinking that is strikingly conditioned by geographical and cultural localism.

As I mentioned, Erin has now entered the fray. My hopes that she would be a voice of reason were quickly quelled as I read her latest post. Her full post appears here in red with my comments interpolated.

One can disagree with other Catholics and still be faithful, say on how to handle immigration in detail. Unfortunately this is a notion often rather lost on some people, including certain left-wing bloggers for whom Fr. Neuhaus, Catholic Answers, my husband and the majority of the Catholic blogosphere apparently play the role of pinata. While he maintains an astounding degree of civility towards them – he calls it his daily mortification – I find them rather tiresome in their condescension and arrogance.

Right off the bat, Erin delineates the antagonists against whom she plans to launch her rhetorical salvo: “left-wing bloggers” who drip with “condescension and arrogance.” Before spelling out the terms of the debate, before considering the positions of those who disagree and before considering the supposed plurality of positions one can take within Catholicism with regard to the details of immigration, Erin sadly reduces the discussion to a “right-wing” and “left-wing” sling fest. This “us” and “them” approach, which without question distills dialogue into sophomoric categories, falsely presupposes that the terms of the immigration debate among Catholics are set by essentially political limits rather than characterized by the genuine fides quaerens intellectum (faith seeking understanding) approach of Catholic intellectual endeavor.

But to whom does she refer in her slippery use of “left-wing”? Is she implying that disagreement with her and her husband, along with Fr. Richard John Neuhaus, necessarily locates one along left-leaning lines? And for the sake of argument, let us imagine that it does. So what? Isn’t “left-wing” being used here as a derogatory term employed to discredit its unsuspecting subject? Does being “left-wing” mean one’s opinions are bereft of merit, whereas its counterpart “right-wing” characterizes informed, useful or correct sentiment? Is the use of the “left-wing” label just a covert manner of dismissing the merit of some one’s viewpoint? In any case, portraying anyone as “left-wing” (or “right-wing, if you prefer) in order to convey the sense that being “left-wing” entails being in error or producing farcical commentary is a mark of alarmingly dreadful tribalism and plain, bad logic.

I know Katerina and I have refuted Gerald’s positions on several occasions at the Cafeteria, at Evangelical Catholicism and at Vox Nova. Perhaps Erin is referring to us. But Katerina and I agree that there is no univocal Catholic position on the details of immigration policy. In fact, I’m not sure any so-called “left-wing” blogger would submit that the Catholic Church has a concrete immigration policy. Morning’s Minion and I both have occasionally gone after Fr. John Richard Neuhaus‘ non-sensical responses to certain U.S. bishops, but for entirely legitimate reasons: Neuhaus‘ position is untenable from both a Catholic and philosophical point of view. I don’t think pointing out the many flaws in Neuhaus‘ political and theological positions stems from a “liberal” standpoint, nor does a belief in a homogeneous immigration policy necessarily follow from such a critique.

Assuming that Erin is referring to Katerina, Morning’s Minion and me (she explicitly calls out Michael Iafrate in her next paragraph, so I imagine she has Vox Nova in mind), she’s tragically confused. You see, we do not dispute the claims that Catholics can legitimately dispute the terms of immigration policy. However, what we do claim is that there is a single Catholic fashion of viewing the migrant and its immediately inferred implications are not up for dispute. These first principles of immigration, so to speak, are fundamental to the working out of the details of immigration details, and while these principles are not negotiable for Catholics, the details of policy that follow from these principles can legitmately vary. The fact is that the three of us stand unyieldingly with Pope Pius XII, Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI, the Roman Curia and many U.S. bishops on the fundamental principles of: 1. The primacy of the migrant’s dignity and value of the human person; 2. The right for all humans to migrate to nations for a better life if they cannot acquire the basic needs for survival and economic viability in their homeland; 3. The need for reform of immigration laws that place unnecessary burdens on migrants and whose enforcement entails injustices; 4. The recognition that undocumented migrants are not equivalent to criminals and the “law-of-the-land” approach is incompatible with the Gospel.

I’ve linked several times to these official and uncompromising teachings of the Catholic Church on immigration, and I cannot help but notice that neither Erin nor Gerald (nor Neuhaus, for that matter) ever produces a real argument against our position on immigration, which is by and large a reiteration of the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church combined with philosophical reasoning and empirical evidence that buttress this teaching. Gerald and Erin unwaveringly assert the right for “diversity” of opinion, but then fail on every occasion to produce an argument in favor of their opinions. Invoking some phantom right to disagree is not an argument. It is not due any respect from an intellectual standpoint. And yet, those of us who do produce arguments out of the constant Catholic tradition are labelled “left-wing.” If being “left-wing” is co-extensive with being Catholic, then color me liberal!!!

Of course the USA, let alone the military, are also constantly attacked. The fundamentalist, blue-eyed, bleeding-heart views expressed by some left-wing Catholics would be cute if they weren’t a cause of Gerald’s high blood pressure when they show up in the comments 🙂

Whoa, hang on now. Suddenly Erin switches gears from immigration to alleged verbal attacks on the U.S. Is she talking about the same “left-wing bloggers” when she speaks of “left-wing Catholics”? Who knows? Erin’s more concerned with mocking chimircal “left-wing” opponents that she’s fabricated. But what precisely is her point? Again, notice the lack of any argument in her predictable, Sean Hannity-style diatribe on “liberals.”

I particularly found it lovely when July 4th was being “honored” by the Michael from Canada, I believe his blog is called Catholic Anarchy, by quoting Dorothy Day, saying that it’d be better the USA perished than survive by war. He even has that as the motto on top of his website.I really appreciate the notion of being fine with 300 million people dying. Be my guest to martyr yourself for the cause of your choice. I’m a country girl who learned to shoot at an early age and I would not hesitate to shoot anyone attacking me or my family, and, by extension, my country. I even applied to join the Navy but slight asthma as a child kept me from being accepted.

For the record, Michael’s not from Canada. He’s from West Virginia. That’s right, he’s a bonafide U.S. citizen. He happens to be studying in Canada.

Also, I couldn’t help but notice Erin’s not so subtle shift from the U.S. building up and using arms to protection of family, as if these matters composed some seamless garment. War, whether it be for protection or not, may be relatively analogous to defense of family, but pacifism in regard to war is not the same as indifference with regard to protection of family. War does not simply affect the military involved. Innocent civilians are wounded and killed, domestic economies often suffer while specific defense and arms corporations benefit and the criteria of just war is complicated and difficult to apply to practical situations. Defense of family, on the other hand, ordinarily entails defense against an aggressor who may intend to hurt or kill the family. Beyond the conflict between the protector and the aggressor(s), there is ordinarily no “collateral damage.” That said, Erin’s implication that Michael would not defend his wife because he objects to American economic and military imperialism is simply preposterous and unwarranted.

So, learning to shoot and desiring to join the Navy is part of Erin’s response to the “liberals”? I learned to shoot at young age, too, but alas I only aspired to join student council. The question I have is: Why does Erin bring up Michael’s affection and admiration for Dorothy Day’s pacifism? On the one hand, she seems to affirm Michael’s right to choose his cause and to put that cause on his website, but on the other hand, she seems to frame Michael’s admiration for Day in an unflattering light. I suppose the fact that Pope John Paul II declared Dorothy Day a “Servant of God” and placed her on the road to sainthood means that any devotion or honor of her and her work makes one a “left-wing Catholic”. The seems to me to be devoid of sensibility.

Now if we could just find a motto from a saint or blessed that lauds recreational shooting.

I find it silly to make up impossible, let alone undesirable, standards, and then denigrate the USA for not living up to them. I find it annoying to question people’s Catholicity if they don’t agree on the interpretation of a particular subject if there is clearly room for such differences in interpretation. There is room between “let nobody immigrate” and “let every poor person in the world come”, for example.

Now who’s Erin talking about? Does any genuine Catholic really hold the perspective of “let nobody immigrate,” which would be contrary to Catholic social doctrine? Does any reasonable Catholic, including anyone at Vox Nova, actually promote a “let every poor person in the world come?” immigration policy? I’m honestly curious to know who Erin is talking about, for I certainly have never seen anyone advocate either of these absurd positions, and the Catholic circles in which I move on a daily basis are quite diverse. I’m afraid Erin’s use of hyperbole and penchant for strawman construction never permits her post to get off the ground of intemparent rant.

I do find it odd, however, that Erin begins her post with the affirmation of the right for Catholics to “disagree with other Catholics,” but then goes on to lambaste “left-wing Catholics” for disagreeing with her, all without producing even a semblance of a rational argument. That’s a colossal double standard. Perhaps this is why the only real evaluation she could muster came not from the intellect, but from feeling: “left-wing Catholics” are so “tiresome” and “annoying.” And lest I be accused of misogyny or masculine bias, let me point out that Katerina has offered some very solid criticism of Gerald’s take on immigration to which he has responded with blind assertion rather than methodical reasoning.

So I close my critique of yet another menu item from the Cafeteria with a final thought: Have U.S. Catholics become so assimilated to the Western world that they can no longer think beyond the political categories of the West? Do they fail to detect the radicality of the Gospel? Are they perhaps afraid of it, eschewing it and labelling it as “left-wing”? I pray not. But if Erin is correct that the “majority of the Catholic blogosphere” falls within her camp (a claim I readily dispute as sheer hyperbole), then our hope for a transformed society has taken quite a hit. But then again, as Ressourcement adumbrated, the Church does not move or save souls through blogs.

Blogs

Catholic Social Teaching

Immigration

Policraticus

Previous Post

July 11, 2007

Waiting for Health Care

Next Post

July 12, 2007 Gun Control and the Culture of Life

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2019 A Consistent Ethic of Life Aaron Weldon Abortion absurdity Abuse Scandal Academics Adoption Advent Africa agreement/disagreement with Church teaching Alexander Schmemann Alexham Alterity America Amnesty International Anarchism angels Anglicanism Animals Annual Statistics Anthony Anxietas Apocalyptic Apophatic Appalachia Aquinas Art Atheism Atonement Augustine Authority Baptism Beauty Bible biblical criticism biblical scholarship Bioethics Bishops Black Catholics Black Theology Blackadder Blogs Books Breastfeeding Brett Salkeld Buddhism Bush administration Byzantine Catholic Calvinism Canada Canon Law Capital Punishment Capitalism Caryll Houselander Catholic Blog Awards Catholic Blogging Catholic League Catholic Social Teaching Catholic Worker Movement Catholicity CFL Charity Children Chris West Christ and Culture Christian Democracy Christian Unity Christmas Christology Church Church Doctrine Church History Climate Change Cohabitation Colbert Collegiality Communion Communism Comparative Theology Competition Conferences conscience conscience rights Consequentialism Consistent Life Ethics Consumerism Contraception Contrition Conversion Converts Coptic COVID-19 Creation Critical Thinking Cross Cuba Culture Culture of Death Culture of Life Darfur David Cruz-Uribe David Wheeler-Reed Death Death Penalty Democracy Demons Desert Fathers Devil Dialogue dignity Disability Disarmament discernment Discipleship discrimination Dissent Distributism Division Doctrine Domestic Church Dorothy Day Double Effect Doubt Down syndrome Driving Early Church Easter Eastern Churches Ecclesiology Economics Economy Ecumenism Education El Salvador Election Election 2020 Ellul Embryonic Stem Cell Research Empire Energy Enlighenment Environmentalism Ephraim Radner Episcopal Church epistemology Equality Eschatology Ethics Eucharist Europe Euthanasia Evangelization Evil Evolution Excommunication F.X. Durrwell Facism Facts Fair Trade Faith Family Fashion Feddie Feminism Feminist theology Fertility Fetal Rights Fiction Film Finances First Things flags Folk Religion Food Foreign Affairs Forgiveness Frank Sheed Free Speech Freedom gay & lesbian persons Genocide George W. Bush George Weigel Gerald L. Campbell Girard/Mimetic Theory Global Warming Globalization Gnosticism Good Friday Grace Gratitude Greed Grey Cup 2009 Guadalupe Guest Post Guest Posts Gun Control Gustave Martelet Habitat for Humanity Hans Urs von Balthasar Harry Potter Hate Speech Health Health Care Healthcare Heather King Hebrew Bible Henri de Lubac Henry Karlson Herbert McCabe Heresy HHS Mandate Controversy History Holidays Holiness Holy Spirit Homiletics Homily Homosexuality Hope Hospitality How Far Can We Go? How Far Can We Go? Human Person Human Rights Humanae Vitae Humility Humor Hunger Hunting Identity Idolatry Ignacio Ellacuría Imagination Immigration In Memoriam Income Inequality Inculturation Indigenous People Individualism Inklings Intellect Interdependence Internet Interpretation Interviews Introduction Iraq War Islam Israel Jain James Alison James Martin Jazz Jesus Christ Jews Joe Biden Joe Hargrave Johann Baptist Metz John Allen John Henry Newman John Paul II John the Baptist John XXIII Jonathan Josef Pieper Joseph (the husband of Mary) Joseph Bernardin Joseph Ratzinger Josh Brumfield Journals Joy Judgment Just War Justice Kari Lundgren Karl Rahner Katerina Ivanovna Kenya Keynes Kingdom of God Kyle R. Cupp Labor Language Latin America Law Leanne Ogasawara Legion of Christ Leisure Lent Liberalism Liberation Theology Libertarianism Libya Lies Life life & dignity & responsibility of the human person Literature Little Way Liturgical music Liturgical Year Liturgy Living Simply Living Wage Local Church Lombard Lord of the Rings Louis Dupre Love M.Z. Magic Magisterium Mark DeFrancisis Mark Gordon Marriage Martin Luther Martin Luther King Jr. Martyrdom Marxism Mary Masculinity Matt Talbot Matthew Fish Matthew Levering McCain Media Memorial Day Mennonites Mental Illness mercy Michael Iafrate Middle East militarism Miroslav Volf Mitt Romney Modesty Moral Theology Morality Mormonism Morning's Minion Mother Teresa Music Muslims Natalie Nate Wildermuth Nationalism Native Americans Nature Nazis Neuhaus New Evangelization New York City News NFP nihilism Nonviolence Not Abortion Nova's Ordo Nuclear weapons Nuns Obama Occult Old Age Opus Dei Ordination ordination of women original sin Orthodoxy Oscar Romero Other Voices Pacifism Palestine Palin Papacy Papal Peace Messages Papal Social Encyclicals Particular Affections Partisanship Patriotism Paul Paul Ryan Paul VI Peace Pentimento persecution Personalism Phantastes Philosophy PKD Planned Parenthood Pluralism Poetry Policraticus Politcal Apathy Politics Poll Pope Benedict XVI Pope Francis Pope John Paul II Pope Leo XIV Population Postcolonialsim Poverty Power Prayer Preaching Predictions Predictions for 2012 President Barack Obama priestly formation & discernment Pro-Life Progress Prophetic Witness Proportionalism Public Diplomacy Public Policy Question Quotes Rachel Maddow Racism Radical Catholic Mom Radical Catholicism Raymund Schwager Real Catholic TV Real Presence Reconciliation Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange Religion religious freedom Responsibility Ressourcement Resurrection Rick Garnett Ridiculous Crap You Never Thought You'd See Robert Barron Roe v. Wade Roman Curia Rome Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation History Sam Harris Sam Rocha Same-sex Marriage Saskatchewan Roughriders Satire School of the Americas Science Scripture Seamless Garment Second Vatican Council Seeing Sex sexual violence Sexuality Sia Sin social justice Social Security Socialism Society of Jesus Sofia Loves Wisdom Solidarity Sophia soteriology Soutenus Spirituality Sports St. Dismas St. Joseph Stanley Hauerwas Statistics Stimulus Suffering Sunday Reflections Supernatural Supreme Court Symbolism Syria Taxing Technology Terrorism The State The Tea Party The Trump Administration Theological Anthropology Theology Theotokos Thomas Merton Throwaway Culture Tim Muldoon Tim Riley Tim Tebow Time Titian Tolkien Torture Toys Trade Traditionalism Transgender Transportation Transubstantiation Trinity Truth TV U.S. Affairs Uncategorized Unions unity among people who disagree US Catholicism USCCB Usury Utilitarianism Utopia Valentine's Day Vatican Vatican II Veterans Vicarious Suffering Video Violence Virgin Mary Vocations Voluntary Associations Voluntary Poverty Voting Vox Nova vox nova blog war War and Peace War Strategy Wealth Weirdness Welfare state Women Women Priests Work Woundedness Youth

Select a Month June 2026 May 2025 February 2025 January 2025 July 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 July 2023 March 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 November 2021 September 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How many books are in the Bible (Protestant version)?

Select your answer to see how you score.

66 40 73 12