Friday, May 27, 2016

Crux Jumps the Turtleneck


Yesterday, we reported on Crux making a funny typo. Today we're going to cite (in sincere disappointment) Crux's continuing employment of Fr. Dwight Longnecker as a "contributor." Anyone can make a typo, but it takes intentional idiocy to host Turtlenecker.

And, yes, now he's back with yet another adjective-laden screed about traditionalist Catholics:
Is the radical traditionalist blogosphere not only “a cesspool,” but an asylum for Catholic crazies? . . . Self-appointed online teachers fill the vacuum, and a poisonous, self-righteous extremism takes the place of true, simple, and humble piety . . .The venomous and vitriolic bloggers will most assuredly not accept criticism, but lash back with a fuller fury and loftier righteousness . . . Impervious to both gentle reproof and harsh attack, they will, like cornered animals, snarl and bite back.
There you have it. 
Snarling 
Radical 
Poisonous
He's Allen Ginsberg with an ex-Anglican marriage exception.

You can find many of his targets on my blog list to the right.

The word on the street is that he does it to get more clicks. All of his targets have more traffic than he does, so he's hoping they'll take the bait and link back to him. (This time there seems to be a conscious effort not to do that--see, for example, Vox Cantoris). But why Crux would give any space to Fr. Turtleneck is beyond me. And I think this is the first time they've published one of his now ubiquitous anti-trad joints. It's not that he's a "liberal" (he isn't really), nor simply that he's wrong (though he is). It's that he's just such a bloody boring ass.  

16 comments:

  1. Even sicker than him doing it for clicks, i feel like he's upping the rhetoric to get back and forth going, secretly hoping he can drag the other side down to his level in a mutually beneficial soap opera. It's really undignified. And creepy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Longenecker is Mark Shea without the obsessive, self-destructive anger.

      Delete
  2. The Good Lord knows I've tried to be charitable with the man, but he's not interested; he's all about poking the bear.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't think of any woodland creatures who like being poked. Except maybe skunks, who always seem to be shouting "Come at me, bro!"

      Delete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I know Fr. Longenecker to be a good and holy priest and an excellent pastor. He is faithful to the magisterium and to traditional, orthodox Catholicism. And, he has the courage to blog and post comments under his own name, not a pseudonym or anonymously like the author of this blog. It is scurrilous and highly disrespectful to a priest of the Church for you to use such terms as "Fr. Turtleneck." You should be ashamed of yourself and go to Confession.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh, give me a break. Everyone knows who I am. And unlike Turtlenecker, I'm sticking my neck out in the sense that I really have something to lose if some busybody wants to make an issue out of me writing this blog. Whether Fr. Longneck is otherwise an "excellent pastor" or not, he well deserves to be called out for continuing to slander good Catholics.

      Delete
    2. Deacon, I don't doubt Father's degree of commitment to saving souls. But I do think his words and actions evidence a shocking level of clericalism. Not to mention the way he foments and exacerbates conflict in the online Catholic community. I wrote an article on all of this and tweeted it to him, but received no response. You can read it here:

      http://theradicalcatholic.blogspot.ch/2016/04/on-fr-longenecker-and-catholic-pharisees.html

      Delete
    3. Really, Mr. Spalding? I didn't realize you were so famous that "everyone knows who" you are. But, perhaps that's just me. I don't get out a lot, and I certainly don't spend a lot of time reading disrespectful comments about good priests.

      Delete
    4. I'm not famous. But the fact that every post and comment comes with a "Posted by Oakes Spalding" shows that I'm not hiding behind anonymity or a pseudonym. And of course, "everyone" who reads the blog would know that, including you. Claiming otherwise is just your way of being bitchy.

      And of course, contrary to your "I certainly don't spend a lot of time reading disrespectful comments about good priests" assertion, you DO seem to spend a lot of time doing precisely that. In fact, you posted EXACTLY the same comment on the blog of Vox Cantoris just a few hours ago.

      I understand that you're Fr. Longnecker's assistant at Our Lady of the Rosary. And I sincerely appreciate your loyalty. But there is absolutely no question that your pastor has a well-deserved reputation for making regular overblown and nasty attacks on faithful Catholics.

      As I said, I don't even have that much of a problem with that. Vox and the others can take care of themselves. It's just that Longnecker's posts have become so boring and predictable. And of course that partly explains why he appears to have the need to scream even louder.

      Delete
    5. With all due respect, Deacon, by your words you call into question your qualifications for defining what "good" is. Fr. Longenecker, for all your praise, is incapable of defending his lofty position by any manner of legitimate argumentation (to include the Catechism, Canon law, etc), but regularly resorts to name calling, and that clerical "I'm the priest" card that is nothing but proof of his lacking the natural gifts to undergird the grace of ordination.

      That's why he staunched all comment on his blog. He didn't have the time? He didn't have the legitimate principles to back his hyperbolic attempts to steep controversy so as to sell more books and get paid for more articles.

      The man has a family to support and regularly demonstrates an utter lack of understanding Catholic doctrine. That's not to say he isn't a nice guy. But that's not the point. Turtlenecks notwithstanding.

      Delete
  5. Thanks for the good laugh. You have a way with words.

    ReplyDelete

  6. Thanks Oakes. Somehow this occurred to me when you mentioned "more clicks". Samuel Beckett would had a apt title for a new book. Today his 'More Pricks Than Kicks' published in 1934 could have be re-imagined as "More Clicks than Pricks" or something like that.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It's always puzzled me as to why Eccles has a link to him. Mind you, he used to have a link to Tony Flavin. I suppose it's his sense of humour.

    ReplyDelete