Skip to comments.America Magazine goes after Patrick Madrid for his response to Sr. Maureen Fiedler's post on Kennedy
Posted on 08/27/2009 10:41:06 AM PDT by NYer
Well, I feel as if I've finally "arrived."
True, over the years my name has been mentioned disparagingly a few times in the pages of America, but what appeared in its online edition today has reached a whole new level of invective (even by America's standards of invective).
I responded yesterday to Sr. Maureen Fiedler's obit piece on Senator Ted Kennedy in NCR ("He Made Me Proud to Be Catholic"), and my comments obviously hit a raw nerve among that community of disciples over at America, as evidenced by my being roundly chastised by one of their writers today.
Honestly, I don't think my remarks were in any way untoward, but clearly that writer disagrees. In just six irrate paragraphs, he manages to brand me me a "boor," a "loudmouth," "ignorant of history," "callous," "inhumane," "indecent," and "hateful" — all the while insinuating that my comments on this issue (and those of other pro-life people) are simply a "rant."
Kettle, meet Pot. Pot, meet Kettle.
Here is the exchange:
From National Catholic Reporter ...
I dont often cry when a public figure dies. This morning, I cried when I heard the news that Senator Ted Kennedy had passed away.
I "grew up" with the Kennedy Clan. I remember how John Kennedy broke the "Catholic barrier" with his election in 1960. I remember Robert Kennedys prophetic words as he ran for President in 1968 his fearless embrace of the least of these and his opposition to the War in Vietnam. And I remember the wrenching agony of the two Kennedy assassinations.
But today feels a bit like the end of an era. Ted Kennedy, like his brothers, was a champion of civil rights, womens rights, and the welfare of the least of these. He strongly and eloquently opposed the war in Iraq. Because his life (and the lives of others in his family) embraced the great Catholic social justice tradition, they have made me proud to be a Catholic.
So I guess now the torch has been passed to us.
And the response from America Magazine:
Someone named Patrick Madrid, who runs a blog and is involved with something called the Envoy Institute at Belmont Abbey in North Carolina, decided to attack my colleague at NCR Sister Maureen Fiedler for her post remembering the late Senator. "Maureen, with all due respect," he begins, words that reek of condescension. He writes: "Whatever his positive qualities may have been, and no doubt he had some, the tragic reality is that Senator Kennedy's long political career was squandered by his vociferous, relentless promotion of abortion. And that, sadly, will be his enduring legacy. I agree with you that tears are appropriate upon hearing the news of this man's death, but not for the reasons you are crying them." I have my moments of hubris but it has never occurred to me to tell another soul why and why not to cry, still less in a blog post.
The Boors Who Demean Ted Kennedy
Go get ‘em Pat.
As the Democrat Party morphed into the party of death and progressive socialism, any Christian would have jumped ship. Not this slimeball family.
With those ear decorations hanging from her lobes and that vacant expression on her face, this misguided simple woman is hardly a nun.
Ah. That explains it. A dissident.
This woman doesn't seem to be much of a Catholic either.
America's getting hammered in the comments section.
One thing I have NEVER understood -- why does the Church support as "charity" the practice of using the force of government to take people's money to apply it to government-approved "charity"?
It seems to me that that damages the Church in two ways.
First, it takes away from the Church any discretion in how charity is applied. Just look at how Obama has dissed the Church on matters of abortion, conscience clause, etc. If the money were going through the Church instead of the government, the Church actually would have a say in how it was spent. As it is, they just hope the government spends it wisely - often it doesn't.
Second, it discourages members from contributing directly to the Church. If the government is already taking half your paycheck in various taxes, fees, etc., there isn't that much left to give to the Building Fund or St. Vincent de Paul.
Seems to me that the Church is cutting its own throat every time it supports the "social action" instituted by the likes of Sinator Ted.
opposed the war in Iraq. Because his life (and the lives of others in his family) embraced the great Catholic social justice tradition,
I guess condoning the killing of 60 million little souls doesn’t enter into that “social” thingy. Maureen - you can HAVE that torch and on judgment day I don’t want to be within 10 feet of your sorry @ass!
Bingo. Check this out...
See the comments as well.
What do we expect after Communists, freemasons infiltrate and our ‘leaders’ water down the faith with the world council of churches?
God forgive me, I pray for all, but some I wish would leave... so obstinate are they. I guess there are lessons from everything, but it’s scandal bar none.
Pray for the church and our priests.
Something the sister should read about ‘social justice’, as the Lord said “The poor you will always have with you”.
Kennedy and Obama Care
Bookworm on Aug 26 2009 at 8:06 am | Filed under: Britain, England, Health
I said I wouldnt blog about Kennedy himself and Ill keep my word. I would like to point out something, though, about Kennedys health care, since word is out that the Dems have instantly leaped upon his death to advance their health care agenda. If anyone among the population is paying attention, this should backfire.
The fact is that Kennedy is a poster child for the chasm Congress hopes to create between their health care and ours. Kennedy was a man who abused his body fiercely throughout his life. Although hed apparently given up the worst of his vices, he was still obese, which is a big no-no in the Nanny state. He had reached the demographic point of no return, since he, a male, was diagnosed with brain cancer after his 75th birthday. Lastly, he had an incredibly aggressive cancer which, absent the most sophisticated and expensive treatment, would have carried him off in months, not . . . what was it? Years? Kennedy survived, not because he got the Obama Care the Left is demanding for the rest of us, but because he got the best that American medicine is capable of providing.
More than that, Kennedy would have gotten his care even if he had become ill after Obama Care became a reality. This is because he is part of the nomenklatura. He was a high level party apparatchik. In the Soviet days, these guys always got good care, even if their stalwart comrades were lying two to a bed, no sheets, in a ward crammed with the sick and dying.
I forgot which talk show host (Limbaugh? Beck?) made headlines for saying that Steven Hawking would have been dead under the rationing that is both implicit and explicit in the various proposed health care bills. Many sneering opponents pointed out the obvious which is that, despite living in England, land of death panels, Hawking is, in fact, still alive. Sneering aside, Hawking is a perfect example of the unegalitarian realities of socialized medicine. Hawking became ill when he was already famous. The rich and powerful always get saved under socialized medicine, precisely so that, without ever having been subject to its statist cruelty, they can become poster children for the system.
Now, without Kennedy even being cold in his grave, and without socialized medicine having yet become the American reality, the Left is trying to turn Kennedy into a poster child for American socialized medicine, just as theyve turned Hawking into the poster child for British socialized medicine. And just as Hawkings poster child status is part of a big lie, I hope that the average American has the wit and knowledge to see that Kennedys status is too.
No. I actually heard the quote broadcast on Glen Beck’s show a while back. Miltojn Friedman, in a Seante session had just remonstrated with the audience that socialism had failed in every case where it had been tried in the last 6000 years. That quote was Kennedy’s arrogant response.
What a monster.
Oy, this is a “nun”!??!?!?! Lawsa! Mother Angelica she ain’t! She wants women priests.....I recall John Paul II spoke on that issue but apparently “sister” didn’t get the memo.
And why “6,000 years”? Socialism hasn't been an active political system anywhere near that long.
So don’t. I know what I heard, and it was unmistakeable.
As for your contention that socialism hasn’t been a political force for 6000 years, by adhering to a fairly narrow and rigid interpretation of that remark, you are technically correct but you’ve utterly lost the point and the significance in every other sense.
Men oppressing other men HAS been a recognizable force ever since humans decided to pursue agriculture. It’s the age-old face-off between those of us who wish to live our lives as we see fit and those who believe that it is their right and their duty to exercise dominion over every sphere of human thought and endeavor.
As a student of history and human nature, surely you must understand that.
In the excellent Danish film, “After the Wedding,” one of the main character is a very rich man dying of cancer of an unspecified nature. He has kept this secret and his wife has just found out about it. She is devastated and says that surely there is something to be done, “ In America they...” she begins before he cuts her off to make it clear there is no hope. That tells us tons about the reputation of American medicine. “The last best hope of mankind,” said Lincoln.
Sign me up as a “Boor Who Demeans Ted Kennedy.”