Who’s behind Spadaro, et al?

firehoseOver the last few days it feels like the news is coming in at firehose volume and force.

And, from the onset, I’ll just say now that the moderation queue is ON.

A lot of the firehose sensation has to do with fallout following the malicious anti-American, anti-conservative attack piece in the Vatican sponsored and reviewed Inciviltà cattolica by Jesuit Antonio “2+2=5″Spadaro, who is so focused on the life and works of Italian homosexual writer Pier Vittorio Tondelli that he created his own website about him (HERE), and Marcelo Figueroa, an Argentinian Presbyterian.

Of recent note is Rusty Reno’s scathing review of the Spadaro attack article.  Reno is editor of First Things, though this appears in the National Catholic Register.  Spadaro smeared the late Fr. Richard John Neuhaus, the founder of First Things, with the tarry brush of hate-filled integralist ecumenism.

Prof. Chad Pecknold, in a Tweet, made a wry observation about the Fishwrap’s Michael Sean Winters, the Wile E. Coyote of the catholic Left.  This gets convoluted, but Wile E. Winters rose from his fainting couch to issue a full-throated endorsement of “2+2=5” Spadaro with celebratory chicken dance.  Fr. Raymond de Souza wrote a critique of the Spadaro Attack.  In a spectacular 1830 word display of lefty logorrhea the Coyote barked back at Fr. de Souza.  Pecknold, reading Coyote v de Souza, opined: “Michael Sean Winters condemns @ewtn and the @NCRegister as [being] opposed to the pope. I mean, come on. Is this satire? https://t.co/JFc5Wcctdv”  Once upon a time, Fr. Neuhaus quipped that the Anglican Church existed to make irony redundant.  The Anglicans need to move over.

Frankly, Fishwrap‘s MSW Coyote’s ire was probably fueled by a separate but related issue.  Thus, MSW:

Fr. de Souza writes regularly for one of the journals, the National Catholic Register, that advances the conservative Catholic and evangelical alliance rooted in the politics of abortion and gay marriage among other items. I just went to their website yesterday and there are four articles hostile to the LGBT community on the homepage, three of them attacking Jesuit Fr. Jim Martin, for daring to suggest that Catholics should reach out to the LGBT community.

Wile E. rode another ACME rocket today, against Archbp. Charles Chaput of Philadelphia.  HERE   Again, I think we see what really bothers the Coyote.

First, [Chaput] is wrong on the facts. Does the archbishop not recall Anita Bryant and her crusade against efforts to bar discrimination against gays? Does he not recall Proposition 6 in California, the 1978 ballot referendum that would have barred gay men and women from teaching, a form of bigotry so obvious that Ronald Reagan opposed it? Second, see how he immediately sees this, and seemingly every issue, as us versus them, the Christians versus the lions.

Moving on…

One this is clear from this ongoing skirmish.

Spadaro et al., in a few strategic slashes, have done more to promote division and animosity in the Church than anyone else I can think of over the years since… since…  Annibale Bugnini?

Meanwhile, yesterday I posted about a glaring, and telling, strategic omission by Spadaro: he didn’t accuse Ronald Reagan of the “Manichaenism” which he leveled at George Bush and President Trump.  HERE

In a similar vein, Fr. Martin Fox, at his blog Bonfire of the Vanities, notes another omission: the Knights of Columbus.  Fr. Fox observes that the former editor of the ultra-liberal The Tablet, Austen Ivereigh compared the KC’s to ISIS.  Yes… really.

“Frankly, it’s a narrative that’s very close to that of ISIS.”

Get that? When you and I seek to oppose the secular push to remake society, to impose a new vision of human nature (which is what the redefinition of marriage and “gender theory” is all about), we are “very close to…ISIS” — ISIS being those folks who throw gay people off the tops of buildings and give 30 lashes to schoolboys for playing soccer and sell girls into slavery.

Fr. Fox also observes that Spadaro doesn’t openly attack the KofC’s because the KofC’s pay a lot of the Vatican’s bills.

Spadaro, et al., aren’t really interested in truth.  They have an agenda.

Just like George Soros.

We know for whom Soros is carrying water.

QUAERITUR:

For whom are Spadaro, et al., really working?

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in ¡Hagan lío!, The Coming Storm, The Drill and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Who’s behind Spadaro, et al?

  1. comedyeye says:

    Today’s Collect

    O God, who show the light of your truth
    to those who go astray,
    so that they may return to the right path,
    give all who for the faith they profess
    are accounted Christians
    the grace to reject whatever is contrary to the name of Christ
    and to strive after all that does it honor.
    Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
    who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
    one God, for ever and ever.

  2. LarryW2LJ says:

    “For whom are Spadaro, et al., really working?”
    It sure doesn’t feel like they’re working for the Jewish Carpenter.

    Honestly, not that I’m a huge Star Wars fan; but at the rate things seem to be spinning out of control lately, I feel like I’m hearing Han Solo’s, “I’ve got a bad feeling about this” line over and over and over again. Seems every time we come out of hyperspace, there’s that big ol’ Death Star staring us in the face again.

  3. dahveed says:

    Regarding the question of whom Spadaro, et al, are working for, this comes to mind:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubCl5_kDWks
    Thank you, Church Lady.

    I’m adding Spadaro, and Wile E. Winters to my Rosary intentions. And the one they genuinely work for, as opposed to the silly youtube clip.

  4. Anneliese says:

    First, I think you’re one of my favorite blog writers at the moment, Father.

    Secondly, is Michael Sean Winters actually Catholic? I believe some of the writers at the National Catholic Reporter are Protestant, so it makes me curious.

    As a convert, I’ve noticed some things from observing practicing Catholics and those who live secular lives. I think most of the problems arise when people want to live their lives on their terms rather than on God’s. People who approach sexual morality in a moral relativistic way do so because it allows them to engage in activities without having to deal with the consequences or the guilt that can accompany illicit behavior. Don’t you ever notice how people tend to quote Jesus when it comes to not judging people? Or how the line “go and sin no more” always seems to be omitted when the discussion of being merciful (which means being nice) towards individuals who are in illicit relationships is brought up? It removes culpability from a person.

    The priests who are orthodox to the faith and promote virtue and are willing to call out those who are in error are in the business of saving souls. People like Michael Sean Winter, Antonio Spadaro, etc. aren’t interested in my soul or even theirs. They’re concerned with what’s convenient for them and those who think like them. You ask who Antonio Spadaro works for, Father. At this time he is working for the Enemy, and we all know what the Enemy’s agenda is. Whether Fr. Spadaro is aware of what he is doing remains to be seen.

    I apologize in advance if my comment seems rude.

  5. Alexander says:

    Another contradiction I noticed: the article attacks “conservatives ” for defending a certain religious liberty but also says “conservatives” have a nostalgic dream of theocracy.

    Not sure how you get Catholics and evangelicals to agree on a desirable theocracy…

  6. Poor Yorek says:

    The revenants of Ledward and Wray, of course.

  7. Benedict Joseph says:

    Many events have taken place in the contemporary history of the Roman Catholic Church that have struck me the wrong way of far greater significance than this homework assignment produced by Spadaro and Figueroa. Despite its lack of substance it has generated within my consciousness a particularly unpleasant response. The baseless ruminations of these two lift the veil on the sophomoric connivance presently holding pride of place within the Church.
    Europe, and the Church which has sustained it over millennia, has now more than once fallen under the spell of fascism erupting from its own corruption. Presently it draws upon that imported from the southern portion of the western hemisphere. Will we be able to save them from themselves once again? It is looking doubtful, given their bold contempt for the values which rescued them from their last attempt at self-extinction.
    In the meantime, we can trust the hubris driving “Civilta Cattolica” to continue its exhibition of infidelity to the perennial Magisterium. All the better so that in a moment God provides, the current connivance will find its terminus and be recognized for exactly what it is.

  8. OldProfK says:

    “Sophomoric connivance,” as Benedict Joseph rightly puts it, seems to be the spirit of the age, or at least the tone in which the spirit of the age communicates: the hot take, the sick burn, the stupid (stoopid) meme. The novelist who went by the nom de plume Trevanian (I had issues with some of what he wrote, but he was a close and often accurate observer of society) once wrote something along the lines of (paraphrasing) “the end of the world would come not by a criminal mastermind, but by Sancho Panza.” I think Trevanian was on to something, though instead of the Four Horsemen (or even Sancho Panza) we seem to be getting Larry, Curly, and Moe. Romans 1:28 and Proverbs 14:34 suggest we deserve it.

  9. Aquinas Gal says:

    Ah yes, Fr Martin and his bridge. Just as news is coming out that Tim Gill, rolling in money and gay rights activist, has sword he will “punish the wicked” (that would be us) for opposing same-sex “marriage.”

  10. Traductora says:

    I asked the same question yesterday after Sorondo made his bizarre remark about this being a “magic moment in which the magisterium of the Pope parallels the magisterium of the UN.”

    First of all, who knew the UN was considered to have a “magisterium”? Secondly, why should it be a point of pride that the Pope’s so-called magisterium is identical to that of the UN?

    But the most important question is where these people get their talking points from. Obviously, from Satan, but the Devil always works through a human being. Even the Communists knew who was directing the party line, but we have no idea who is calling the tune in this case. Everybody who doesn’t want to be driven out of the civilized universe is dancing to the tune, which changes overnight (who would have thought even two years ago that “transgenders” or “gender fluid” would have been turned into sacred beings?). Who is behind all this?

  11. Fr. Vincent Fitzpatrick says:

    Who are Spadaro, Figueroa, et al., really working for?

    “An Unholy Alliance: the UN, Soros, and the Francis Papacy – Elizabeth Yore”
    https://youtu.be/TS1GC2kX9HY

    “POPE SOROS & the Novus Ordo Seclorum”
    https://youtu.be/k20q_BwtWpM

  12. Bosco says:

    I found this interesting but you, Father, are the language expert. Is this correct?

    Greek New Testament ‘sorovß’ – Luke 7:14
    Transliterated Word ‘soros’

    Definition:
    an urn or receptacle for keeping the bones of the dead
    the funeral couch or bier on which the Jews carried their dead forth to burial

  13. laurel says:

    “We know for whom Soros is carrying water. ” Whom do you mean? Someone with a human nature? A cabal of globalists? The Bilderbergers, for example. or Someone else with a different nature?

  14. Tamquam says:

    In his 1958 book, “The Naked Communist”, Leon Skousen lists 45 goals of the Communists for the United States. Among them are these:

    25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
    26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”

    These are among the goals aimed directly at weakening the family, thus eroding and ultimately destroying the basis for civilization itself, thereby paving the way for Communism, under whatever name, to seize power. Although no longer guided from Moscow Center (probably … maybe) the goals on Skousen’s list have been internalized by wannabe totalitarians all over the world. Whether emanating from the Fifth Directorate or elsewhere, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that at least one of Screwtape’s colleagues in the Lowerarchy is keeping the pot boiling. It is, as always, the same old serpent.

    The solution is the same old solution: fidelity to Christ and His Blessed Mother. Things will get worse before they get better, but they will get better.

  15. Athelstan says:

    “Spadaro smeared the late Fr. Richard John Neuhaus, the founder of First Things, with the tarry brush of hate-filled integralist ecumenism.”

    Actually, to be fair, Fr. Neuhaus is not mentioned by Fr. Spadaro and Mr. Figueroa in their essay. Rusty Reno notes this as well, wondering if Fr. Neuhaus was one of their targets.

    Not that one doubts that, to the extent that they are aware of Fr. Neuhaus and First Things generally, both men find them politically and theologically unpalatable.

  16. chuckharold says:

    One is left to believe that too many people give Soros too much credit. It’s like saying that anyone who wants to feed the hungry is an Alinsky cohort. Dualism is all over these comments. The truth is, the “right wing” (is there such a thing) of our church and the Evangelicals seem, at least on the surface, put all their efforts into supporting the right wing of the Republican party. Just saying! Does that make sense? Well, you have only two choices, neither palatable. So you end up supporting the least onerous, don’t you? Which one is that? Well, that is what divides the country. One party is an avid supporter of abortion. Can’t support that! One party wants to take healthcare away from tens of millions. Can’t support that! Ranting may not be helpful. We need more choices.

  17. SKAY says:

    “We know for whom Soros is carrying water.”
    Yes we do. Thirty pieces of silver buys a lot of souls unfortunately.

  18. Windswept House says:

    Is there a way to follow the money? Without any obvious links and only speculation, I suggest Sparado et al work for Pope Francis. Isn’t he Sparado’s boss?

  19. Fr. Vincent Fitzpatrick says:

    chuckharold:

    “One party is an avid supporter of abortion. Can’t support that! One party wants to take healthcare away from tens of millions. Can’t support that!”

    There IS a party that supports abortion. There is NO party that “wants to take healthcare away from tens of millions.” That is a lie spread by–wait for it–wait for it–the party that supports abortion!

    You do realize, don’t you, that the party that supports abortion is going to lie, and lie, and lie about everything else and everyone else?

    That was the genius of Cardinal Bernardin. (Admired and imitated by Cardinal Cupich.) He gave out with tepid noises about abortion–and roared like a lion against those who wanted to kill the poor! throw grandma out in the snow! and BLOW UP THE WORLD!!!

    And who were these horrible politicians? The politicians who opposed abortion, of course!

    If NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and the DNC never sent Cardinal Bernardin a check for a billion dollars for inventing the Seamless Garment–he got ripped off.

  20. Pingback: SATVRDAY CATHOLICA EDITION | Big Pulpit

  21. philosophicallyfrank says:

    Why do we continue to fight the Left on their terms? There is a strategy that came out of WWII Germany called “The Big Lie”. (It is easily ‘googled’) Homosexuality is not “genetic”; there is no “Gay” gene and yet we do not fight them on our terms which are scientifically verifiable. Should it not be adequate to demand that they “prove” their agendas? They will not because they can not; so, all we need do is keep repeating the truth with it’s scientific proofs and stay on our terms. The “Truth” and only the “Truth” over and over and over as often as necessary can not but destroy “The Big Lie”. If you want to destroy a target; you “HAVE” to stay on that target.