Mismatch
By Phil Lawler | September 20, 2012
www.catholicculture.org/commentary/the-city-gates.cfm?id=410
Image Books, which once published so many Catholic classics, has put out a new volume: Vatican II: The Essential Texts. That’s odd. With so many compilations of the Vatican II documents already on the bookshelves, why would we need a new one? From the publisher’s perspective, what is the “added ingredient” that could spark sales?
Image touts the book’s two introductory essays: one by Pope Benedict XVI, the other by James Carroll. What an astonishing mismatch!
James Carroll walked away from his priestly ministry [as a Paulist Priest] almost 40 years ago, and has spent most of the intervening years writing a column for the Boston Globe, in which he continually attacks the history, teaching, and integrity of the Catholic Church. A shamelessly partisan writer, Carroll has been frequently caught massaging the facts to suit his ideology.
What in the world gave Image editors the idea of pairing this author—a paragon of the “anti-Catholic Catholic”—with Pope Benedict? And who at the Vatican consented to the pairing? Why bother including the Pope’s appeal for a “hermeneutic of continuity,” if it will be cancelled out by another essay claiming that Vatican II reversed traditional teachings?
Not recommended.
James Carroll walked away from his priestly ministry [as a Paulist Priest] almost 40 years ago, and has spent most of the intervening years writing a column for the Boston Globe, in which he continually attacks the history, teaching, and integrity of the Catholic Church. A shamelessly partisan writer, Carroll has been frequently caught massaging the facts to suit his ideology.
What in the world gave Image editors the idea of pairing this author—a paragon of the “anti-Catholic Catholic”—with Pope Benedict? And who at the Vatican consented to the pairing? Why bother including the Pope’s appeal for a “hermeneutic of continuity,” if it will be cancelled out by another essay claiming that Vatican II reversed traditional teachings?
Hey, Phil. Did you ever consider James Carroll and Pope Benedict may, in some respects, be on the same page? Especially the magical pink unicorn, “the hermeneutic of continuity”.
Does Lawler actually intend “anti-Catholic Catholic” to mean the writer of an “…essay claiming that Vatican II reversed traditional teachings?” And how does that comport with Lawler’s allegation that Carroll attacks the integrity of the Church?
Since Carroll writes for the Globe, I get the latter. It’s the equating of anti-Catholicism with opposition to Vatican II’s war on traditionalism that I don’t get.
Oh, wait. I just scanned back up and saw this piece of agitprop came from “catholic culture.”
Never mind………