Hyper-super-ultramontanism and the new evangelization

Note- the point I’m making is general it doesn’t refer to any specific act or statement of the current Pope.

Fr. Hunwicke’s post which I linked to in my last post came well timed. We have had a local Catholic radio station for a couple of years now. I had decided a couple of months ago there was absolutely no way I could listen on the drive home. They had changed the schedule and the Al Kresta show is now on at that time. He primarily discusses Catholic issues in public life, but it is in his own neo-conservative and Americanist perspective, one which I quite disagree with. He also speaks from that dangerous and annoying position, which I have written of before (here and here), in which the papacy is elevated into a sort of super-papacy.

Anyway yesterday I unwittingly flipped on the radio just in time to catch the last 2 minutes of his show. He was saying something which I heard him say several months ago about the time I wrote him off. “I don’t understand how this helps the new evangelization, all these conservative Catholics who criticize the popes opinion you can’t say ‘come join Christ’s church it’s the true Church… but the guy leading it is an nut’” I of course don’t know the context and this isn’t verbatim since I haven’t gone looking for a transcript or archived recording, but it doesn’t matter. I got really irritated and was literally yelling at the radio “No, no, he’s the pope… he’s just the pope, he’s not God incarnate”.


NO, Wrong. What doesn’t help evangelization new or otherwise is being dishonest. It’s entirely possible for an imbecile to be elected pope. The pope in his personal opinions can be very wrong. In his acts in governing the Church he can be imprudent and damaging. The fact that the Church is divine is confirmed not confounded by these things. The head of the Church is Jesus Christ not the man sitting in Peters place. The Papacy has a special role, but acting like groupies for the current occupant of that office regardless of who he is, and pretending he is some sort of demigod (aside from being contrary to what the church actually teaches about the office of Pope) isn’t going convert those outside the Church who think we mindlessly submit to a man in place of God. One has to wonder… if Al lived in the time of Pope Alexander VI if he would have been opposed to speaking out about the countless papal concubines in that papacy.


Rant thus ended.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Hyper-super-ultramontanism and the new evangelization

  1. cpttom says:

    It always amuses me when the professional Catholics (like Al) get annoyed with those who point out problems with Pope Francis. Al just can’t see that Pope Francis is causing more problems with the New Evangelization and pew Catholics by being unclear, confusing, and oblique in his teaching. The Pope is his own worse enemy, not the Orthodox Faithful who find themselves scolded on a regular basis by Pope Francis for being rigid, joyless, and obsessed with rules. Sorry, but it isn’t a far jump to wonder what is up with the Pope. Yeah, he leads the Church, and he is a nice holy guy, but, that doesn’t mean he doesn’t make mistakes, and can destabilize the Bark of Peter by being vague a lot more readily than any “Conservative Catholic.”

    [What does that even mean? Here again we have political language being used to describe Catholics. You can either be Heterodox or Orthodox. There is no Conservative sect like in Judism]

    Al Kresda needs to tone it down. I suspect he isn’t a neo-con (again, what does that even mean?) I suspect he is just as bothered about things as the rest of us, but he doesn’t want to admit it. It would pull away the warm fuzzy blanket of the papacy, and he would actually have to pay attentiion to the Catechism and the commandments of our Lord. +JMJ+

    • bgpery says:

      Well now, we need to be careful here, as I said this is not word for word it’s possible he didn’t use the word ‘conservative’. I characterize him as a neocon based on his political views from limited listening to him in the past and he may very well not describe his views as such. He does in my opinion spend too much time for a Catholic talk show talking about ‘the founders’, ‘liberty’ and ‘freedom’. But lets not get to far into what being Neoconservative is or is not.The particular comment seemed, and again I didn’t catch much so I don’t really know, to be about wealth distribution and certain Catholics saying the Pope didn’t know what he was talking about. But what I wrote above isn’t really about Al he is just a catalyst for me writing about it… its about.

      1. The belief or if not actually believed, implied – that the man who steps into the role of the papacy somehow looses his humanity and becomes quasi-divine. Fr. Hunwicke’s post does very well at making sense of this.
      2. The notion that it’s good for making converts to hide the churches warts.

      I have more to say but not time right now I’ll continue later.

      • cpttom says:

        I am not terribly concerned with what Al Kresda said, he is certainly a representive of a class of Catholic Commentator who share these views. I think it is bad practice for the Church, which is supposed to be the embodiment of truth to shy away from the unvarnished truth.
        In Islam there is the concept of Taqiyya, which is lying to disbelivers to convert them to Islam, because it is for their own good. This is the danger of going down the path that Al and company suggest. It isn’t about the number of converts but their souls.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s