A question recently posed to Cardinal Dolan demonstrates the spinelessness of the politically correct Left: "What do we do when our church leaders harbor hatred for homosexuals?"
Cardinal Dolan didn't do a very good job answering the question because he immediately agreed with the unspoken premise at the root of the question: those who hold that the homosexual act is intrinsically evil and that same-sex attraction is a grave disorder are hateful people. This is a ridiculous assertion, but it dwells at the heart of all political correctness.
The truth is that we who hold to the Church's ancient teaching that the homosexual act is intrinsically evil and conclude that same sex attraction is a psychological and moral disorder are not "hateful". We simply disagree with those who hold opinions to the contrary. Those who hold opinions to the contrary, rather than argue their point with facts and reason, stoop to the "hatred" canard, ironically demonstrating that is they who are motivated by hatred. Their argument is complaint. Such a tactic is childish and feckless.
Unfortunately this tactic is all too common among even internet traditionalists. I was reminded recently of this sad fact as I became a persona non grata in certain circles due to my position regarding the Dialogue Mass. Finding ourselves in disagreement with others can be a painful reality, especially if we share with those in disagreement common ideals, values, interests and convictions. These disagreements can also be opportunities for the Devil to tear down communities and noble endeavors. All too often grown men and women wallow in prideful childishness rather than engage in fruitful debate for the purpose of discovering truth.
Sure, I'm irritated to be personally pointed out and ostracized for a legitimate and studied opinion. Sometimes that happens, especially when debating liberals. What troubles me more, though, is the childishness that has been displayed by certain individuals who are on the front lines in the battle over Catholic Tradition. As a former paratrooper and infantryman, I can assure you that these are not the kinds of people I would want having my back in a fight.
Too many internet traditionalists lack pliancy of character, which includes but is not limited to a willingness to set aside personal preferences and whims, a desire to be pleasant, and a willingness to listen and allow convictions to be challenged. This isn't spinelessness; rather, it's quite the opposite. It takes courage and intestinal fortitude to challenge our preferences, personal idiosyncrasies, and stubbornly held opinions. Pliancy of character is a willingness to learn from others, and if there are disagreements, to debate them in charity, with an openness to facts, logical argument and the realization that the Self could be in error. We debate to learn, not to prove we are right!
I've been as guilty as any other in this regard, and I pray that God will give me a greater degree of pliancy.
This is important! How can we internet traditionalists criticize the false premises at the heart of political correctness, when we act with the same degree of childish disregard for truth. How can internet traditionalists pretend to herald truth when, after being confronted with disagreement with those who ought to be brothers in a greater common cause, they become spoiled, angry children who hide behind internet anonymity?
Tradition deserves better than this feckless childishness from those who pretend to be its defenders.