Today the pithily perspicacious Fr H looks at the Synod’s (“walking together”) notion about developing ways to certify Catholic blogs to avoid “fake news”.
He wrote along the lines of what I wrote HERE. He also wrote:
We seem to have come a long way from those broad sunlit uplands when Benedict XVI (remember him? The ‘Rat’, the ‘Inquisitor’, the ‘Panzer Cardinal’? Yes, that one) encouraged blogging, and especially clerical bloggers. Now, the era of the boors and the bullies. [It’s the age of the Hoopers. Indeed, it’s the age of the Hooper/Blanche Hybrid, but with none of the charm or insight and all of the perversion.]
Shall we, in a few years’ time, discover that we have Diocesan, National, and Worldwide systems for closing down free discussion in the Church? After all, the Synod will have “called for it”, won’t it?
“Synodality” sounds so democratic, modern, open and free. What’s not to like? And this Synod has concluded with the usual flurry of synthetic Bergoglian rhetoric about the Holy Spirit. In such liberated and happy times, don’t you need to be paranoid to be suspicious?
Don’t you believe it. Bullies are bullies are bullies.
Perhaps it is too early and, as yet, unfair, to bring in the image of Perón.
In my above-mentioned post I said:
If they want to know the meaning of total, unrestricted and asymetrical warfare just try that. They won’t know what hit them.
Can you imagine what the reaction would be in the blogosphere and through other media were there to develop such an initiative in the Church? To certify (censor) Catholic sites?
I didn’t pull that image of “unrestricted and asymetrical warfare” out of the blue. Years ago I read a book by a couple of Chinese colonels about how they could take down the USA. The book has become an important resource. It describes a way of fighting with limited resources a much greater power. US HERE – UK HERE
I bring this up because such an effort would be a waste of time and energy, highly divisive, and a complete failure.