Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Vortex Follow-Up On "Catholic Politics"

Real Catholic TV posted this video today in response to some of the comments that they've received from avowed atheists.  (Click here if you can't see embedded video).

As far as the vitriol that he reports, I can attest to that.  Upon doing some googling, I found an article and some discussion on the pharyngula blog (run by the professor who drove a rusty nail through the Eucharist).  I saw some of the comments. 

When I wrote about Judge Vaughn Walker taking pot-shots at the Church in his ruling, I received a number of comments.  In utilization of some tools, I noticed that they were linking from a comment on the pharyngula blog.  WIth one regretable exception, the comments on my posting were relatively tame, but not so on the pharyngula blog.  I wouldn't be surprised if a good number of the venomous coments to the Vortex post came from that blog.

All that being said, I still differ from Real Catholic TV on this matter.  I do not hold the opinion that differences between democracy and republic are "hair-splitting" in the least; such a dismissive attitude towards that distinction is really quite ignorant.  Now Voris does state plainly that he favors a "Catholic monarchy".  He opines that "civilization would be better off if it were a Catholic monarchy.  How this comes about?  I don't know."  What???!!??!   That's almost as bad as Pelosi saying that "we have to pass health care to find out what's in it."  The devil is in the details - and I think sometimes quite literally!

History tried Catholic monarchies; their successes or failures were clearly dependent on the one occupying the throne.  History has proven that such dependence on one individual is not acceptable.  Do I say that what we have now is perfect?  No, it isn't.  However, much of the current morass is due to too many people looking for a de facto king to take the reigns.  I might suggest a close study of 1 Samuel 8 in the Old Testament.  The people clamored for a king.  It seems to me that the Lord granted their request, albeit reluctantly. 

What Voris is suggesting is somewhat similar to an idea that floats about in some sedevacantist circles, called "divine right of kings".  They somehow think of the days of Charlemagne as being the "glory days of Catholic civilization".  One such proponent is a lady named Solange Hertz.  I read a book of hers some years ago called "Star-Spangled Heresy".  If my quotes from this book are not 100% accurate, it's because I pitched it in the trash.  She sees only a Catholic monarchy, preferably a French monarchy, as being the only legitimate form of government.  She also opines that the Bill of Rights is all wet.  In her book, she completely opposes freedom of speech for the average citizen.  Now think about it.  She trashes the First Amendment and the American system - in a book that she was free to write precisely because of the First Amendment.  Am I the only one who sees the irony here?  An important aside to my sedevacantist friends - Satan wants all to leave the Church, and he doesn't particularly care if you exit "stage left" or "stage right"; it's all the same to him.  Come back to Rome, lest you imperil your own immortal souls!

I agree that self-governance is hard work, one for grown-ups.  The answer is not to regress to a monarchy.  As I asked earlier, what would be the checks and balances?  What redress would the people have in the case of a corrupt monarch?  Real Catholic TV, please do take more care to think these proposals through before you broadcast them.


  1. Unfortunately, I think on this issue Voris is adhering to the church's party line. The church much more prefers to deal with a dictator of the right or the left because only have to appease one person and if that person is trustworthy/ likes you, you're secure until the regime changes (also the devil you know is better than the devil you don't etc.). For that same reason even though U.S. wants internal democracy we favor dealing with dictators in foreign policy; (also most political parties favor dealing with "bosses"/incumbents in state & local elections). The church itself is a benevolent dictatorship (pope-cardinal-bishop-priest); so what Church is actually saying is that everyone should do what the pope says which was the theory behind the Holy Roman Empire.

  2. Catholic monarchy can and does work. What do you think the Catholic Church is? Yes, a Catholic Monarchy. The Catholic Monarchy that Mr. Voris envisions would be very much like the Papacy, but without the infallibility of the Pope. However, the monarch would be chosen by a kind of College of Cardinals and would be an individual who would best merit the position. In other words, the monarch would be a leader chosen by a caucus of people who themselves deserve high merit for their knowledge, foresight, and intellect. They would choose someone who was holy, just, strong, kind and considerate, someone who was truly qualified for the job. The monarch would be someone who is an imitator of Christ. See what I mean?

    Hey, you who wrote under the name Restore-DC-Catholicism, do you still not get it? Perhaps you are the one who should think before you write.

    My two cents.
    Vivat Christus Rex, tenete traditionis.


Please be respectful and courteous to others on this blog. We reserve the right to delete comments that violate courtesy and/or those that promote dissent from the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church.