Hey Dale,
Just curious if you were using the phrase hocus pocus because you knew the origin of where the phrase came from or not. I found it quite interesting when I learned that the phrase came from people making fun of "Hoc es meus corpus". Perhaps magicians of the current day should keep up with the change to the vernacular and say "Thisis Shimis" I am quite easily offended 
and don't think that magicians should be allowed to keep their latin references if we are not allowed to keep them either. BTW, If I am fed up with frustrating stuff, your fisking usually helps me to blow off steam and get back to trying to be charitable. Keep up the good work!
Peace,
Patrick Quinlan
Yep, I had heard that about the Hoc Est.
It was a deliberate allusion--good catch!
Thanks for the kind words!
Dale,
I will not be able to keep you on the "work-safe browsing" list if you insist on being LOL funny.
Don't worry--I get that look every single day.
and
Look out! THE ALBINO IS RIGHT BEHIND YOU!
... "priceless."
peace,
Definitely the "Albino" stuff! Awesome picture (I could just imagine of those matrix albino killers just behing a paunchy Kavanaugh ...)
LOL
Cool. Stick a fork in Mr. Kavanaugh. He's done.
Dale:
You need to propose a column to the Register called "Our Weekly Fisk". They'll never run it of course, but it's better to have tried and failed in a righteous cause than to never have tried.
You are a National Treasure. I will link this on Sunday.
blink blink blink blink . . .
ROFL!!! ROFL ROFL ROFL!!!!!!!!!
Fascinating people, these lapsed aging Catholics. Want everything their way. And accuse those who criticize them of being too rigid. Oops- gotta stop typing- Mad Albino behind me-------
er, "The Cow" is me. My son changed the name and... oh, never mind.
Ditto the ROFL, to which add snorting water out one's nose. Ditto also the proposed column in the Register - it would quickly become *the* "must read" of the week!
Signe
Dennis Kavanaugh of course is also a liberal Democrat who had no problem voting for abortion-supporting Al Gore and the rest of his ilk.
But noooooooooooooooooo the real problem with the Church is the use of Latin.
Another great fisk Dale, though I wish you had your permalink working.
Wait... why is Mark Shea a cow again?
Great fisk!
Despite all the fisking, I think Kavanaugh makes sense on one point: Too many conservative Catholics believe that saying Mass in Latin will in and of itself lead to spiritual revival w/in the Church. Look at the intensity of the conversations around St. Blog's concerning the merits and demerits of the Latin v. Tridentine v. Novus Ordo forms.
Ultimately, it doesn't matter whether a priest says the Mass in Latin, English or Fortran, for two reasons:
1. Consecration of the Eucharist doesn't depend on the language the priest uses, but rather his ordained ability to do so.
2. True spriritual revival w/in Catholicism only will begin when priests, bishops, diocesan DRE's et al forsake the gobbledygook that is being taught for the sake of intellectual fashion and concentrate on Christ crucified and resurrected.
Dale,
Loved this piece. I also read Kavanaugh's hand-wringing article. What about this "Illegitimus Non Carborundum" though? Is this the old "Don't let the bastards get you down"? Bad, very bad "Latin"; still, however, seems to be used quite often, and I like it.
Better sign off: gotta go look over the prayers for tomorrow morning's Mass in Latin...
1. Consecration of the Eucharist doesn't depend on the language the priest uses, but rather his ordained ability to do so.
Except you reject apostolic succession and therefore the sacrament of Holy Orders.
2. True spriritual revival w/in Catholicism only will begin when...
...Catholics demand that the children of their enemies be murdered "in spades". Like you, Joe:
Only one thing will stop these bastards: the obliteration of Mecca, Medina, Al Ansar (the Islamic seminary in Cairo) and the Dome of the Rock mosque. I'm serious....
If the shahids want death, let's give it to them and their children. In spades.
Thanks for the lesson in True Christianity, Joe. You're a really convincing voice of Reform.
Dismas:
I have always been a cow. Normally though, I have coping mechanisms that shield the public from the discomfort this inevitably arouses.
Dale,
I bow before the master Fisker. Another masterpiece.
YOU'LL NEVER FIND OUT IF THE ALBINO KILLS YOU--TURN AROUND!!!
LOL! Good one that. Mark Shea was right about you being the master of Fisk!!
LOL!
RJ
I don't know what 'fisk" means, but you are a comic genius, and will become part of my daily read.
Regret to inform you, however, that the funniest line in the piece, indeed, one of the funniest things I have ever read was not yours --
"Greater understanding and participation by lay members led to a renaissance of the Catholic Church in the 60's and 70's."
I'm cleaning Merlot off the monitor screen after that one...
Shea, suppose I never made those comments about Muslims, Mecca and Medina. You'd just find something else to bring up. That's your MO, not just with me, but with everybody.
Why are you so obsessed with me, Shea? Have you failed to work through that bullying stage of your youth? Or do you find my ideas truly threatening, and have to engage in personal attacks whereever and whenever you see it -- even in my private e-mail -- just to justify your own positions?
Why do you constantly try to tempt me to engage in flame wars with you, Shea? Is it because your life is so boring, meaningless and without purpose that you must engage in such activities to justify your own existance?
Aren't you nothing but a pathetic, middle-aged poser engaged in a full-blown midlife crisis because your life hasn't turned out the way you hoped? Aren't you nothing but a silouette of a man who fears the ultimate lack of fulfillment and the oncroaching approach of death?
Hello Dale,
I also lost it when I reached the "Albino" line.
This one should go in the Hall of Fame.
best regards,
"Or do you find my ideas truly threatening?"
Call me crazy, but I find your repeatedly proposed ideas of killing innocent children as well as the populations of five cities "threatening". I'm funny that way.
And since you propose yourself as the Voice of Reform and the Conscience of the Catholic Church, I prefer to remind readers of the Full Package you are offering.
There's a very simple solution for you, Joe. Repent your evil and murderous rhetoric and it won't come back to haunt you when you pose as the Prophet Joseph.
By the way, gotta love the Spanish socialist approach you have to people who stand up to your murderous rhetoric. When you propose the death of children "in spades" that's just striking up a conversation. When I expose your murderous rhetoric for what it is, I'm "tempting" you.
We should all just sit quietly while Joe does his Osama bin Laden impression at the top of his lungs throughout St. Blog's--urging the death of children for a Higher Cause. If we challenge your vicious hatred, we're "tempting" you. It's the fault of people who tell you to cease stirring up evil, not your fault.
Dale... You are my hero. BTW, the progressive, liberal priest at my campus Newman Community... guess his name. Yeah... it's Fr. Cool. That was eerie, Dale, eerie!
Shea, you have the nerve to consider yourself my conscience when you have none of your own? When you routinely make excuses for such imbeciles as Martino, Poupard and other Vatican cronies who make idiotic statements about Islam and the West? When you make similar excuses for a Pope who fails to hold the vast majority of bishops whom he appointed accountable for their misfeasance? When you routinely misrepresent others' arguments (cf, Justin Katz, Victor Morton) or engage in personal attacks instead of confront those arguments forthrightly? When you would use any and all resources at your disposal to discredit anyone with whom you disagree? When you are nothing but a toady for ecclesiastical tyranny? When you behave like the Pacific Northwest's representative for Beelzebub, Inc.?
By the way, gentle reader, if you wish to know why Shea is suddenly calling for my "repentence," read the following e-mail I sent him regarding a recent flame war at Patrick Sweeney's blog:
"I suggest you listen to somebody for whom you have a least a modicum of respect: 'someguy' from Patrick Sweeney's blog:
'Mark: As sincere and moral person as you are, I cannot ever imagine you ever going up to someone who struggles with lust and waving a centerfold under their nose. Yet you keep on pursuing Joseph to other people's blogs and making statements
to and about him that any reasonable person could see would provoke him to a sin that tempts him every bit as a lecher is tempted by porn. I submit for your consideration that you might be confusing love, mercy and patience with 'thoughtful chin-stroking'
and 'acquiescence to evil.' Only you know for sure.'
more to come..
"Now, you and I both know that you are anything but a 'sincere and moral'
person. But perhaps you can prove 'someguy' right and me wrong, just for the heck of it (you'd love that, wouldn't you?). How?
1. Admit on your own blog that you have obsessively and neurotically pursued me on every Catholic blog on which I've corresponded for the past two years.
2. Admit on your own blog that you were trying to draw me into flame wars to get me banned from said blogs because you somehow found my opinions threatening.
3. Admit on your own blog that your pursuit of me has meant more to you than obeying the Gospel that you claim to believe and preach.
more to come...
4. Admit on your own blog that you *routinely* distort other people's arguments
and deliberately berate those who advance those arguments because you don't have
the wherewithal to rebut those arguments forthrightly and fairly.
5. Admit on your own blog that this whole process titilates your ego, and that such
titilation is more important to you than obeying God.
6. Renounce on your own blog these activities in perpetuity, regardless of whether
they concern me or others.
All of this is true, and you know it far better than anybody.
more to come...
You said in the past that you want peace. This is the *only* way you'll get it.
Perform this Lenten penance and I will not only leave you alone but publically apologize
for everything I said about you. You don't even have to open your blog for me; I
can send a message to your Catholic Exchange address that you can paste into your
comment boxes.
Refuse and I will respond to your obsessive pursuits with even more vitriol than
I demonstrated on Patrick's blog (but I will wait for *you* to initiate such behavior).
And you know I'm a man who carries out what he says.
If you feel these terms are unjust, Shea, ask yourself this: How do you like receiving
the rhetorical abuse that you routinely heap on others? Not fun, huh? Well, now
you know how I feel after *two years* of it, you satanic charlatan.
You started this garbage, Shea. You started it when you fisked my response to your
opinions of capital punishment in July 2002. You're the one who has to stop it.
Repent or else.
With Utmost Sincerity....
Uh, Dale, it's your comment boxes and your decision, of course, but would you please consider turning the firehose on the flame war? It's detracting from discussion about the points brought up by your classic fisk.
Thanks for considering it, and thanks for the wonderful post!
Joe:
I (and others) have kicked you out of my comments boxes more times than I can count. I've killed filed you. I've spent a great deal of time avoiding you. You're like a bad penny. And despite your protestations about being "pursued" the reality is you've tried numerous times to force and trick your way on to my blog. I finally banned you for good and all, but I keep running into your obnoxious and abusive crap on blogs I regularly read. For long periods I ignore it, but periodically you say something repugnant, such as advocating the cold-blooded murder of children while posturing as the Prophet Joseph, that I can't stomach it.
And now you have the temerity, after being an abusive jerk, not only to me, but to anybody who crosses you, for the past couple of years, to whine about being a victim and to deliver an ultimatum.
Sheesh!
Mark, why does all this matter to you? Why am I so important to you?
Gentle reader, before you consider Shea's latest remarks, consider the following testimonial written on my behalf by Victor Morton, an editor at the Washington Times and Catholic blogger (cinecon.blogspot.com) to the editors of FrontPageMag.com, for whom I wrote an op-ed piece:
"Re the column by Joseph D'Hippolito about "The
Vatican's pro-Saddam Tilt" of Jan. 8:
You will be getting much criticism about this column from a segment of the Catholic blogosphere -- not
because of anything actually said in it, mind you, but because of who its author is. I advise you to ignore
them and to advise you that it is nothing more than a personal vendetta on the part of a couple of people
and some others who know of Joseph D'Hippolito primarily through the distortions of those few, small
(in the fullest sense) people.
more to come...
Joseph is, for reasons known only to God and maybe not even Him, hated (CQ) by Mark Shea of Catholic and
Enjoying It!, the 800-pound gorilla of the Catholic Blogosphere and a man who has made it part of his
vocation to destroy Joseph's reputation and ability to
have his work published at all based on a couple of ambiguous notes in a comment field.
more to come...
As someone who is a Roman Catholic and a political conservative and who has been on the other end of Mr.
Shea's methods -- here is what they are: distortions, crudifications, sound-bitizations, perpetual
restatements of hostile characterizations as fact,
sloppy and careless readings, uncharitable characterizations, tonedeafness to metaphor, ignoring
of subtleties, qualifications and specifications. In short, every manner of forensic and intellectual sin known to heaven (and the other place too). I urge Front Page Magazine and its editors to ignore the
howls from the Shea minions who know of Joseph ("mass murder advocate") D'Hippolito primarily through him,
and judge Joseph's submissions based on the content of their character and publish them or not on that basis
alone. (Here is Shea's method and his latest imprimatur --
http://www.markshea.blogspot.com...12252872090019)
more to come...
Front Page should be especially sensitive to the use of the tactics of the PC Police in anathematizing
persons as such because of, at worst, a careless phrasing that they then use to characterize the
person. This is one man's vendetta -- nothing more.
It should be noted, BTW, that the selfsame tactics used on these people who be very interesting -- Mr.
Shea is the pal of Saddam Hussein, an anti-Semite who favors a Final Solution to the Israeli problem, who
calls homosexuals Nazis, an intentionally closed-minded simpleton who calls National Review anti-family idolators, and more. (If those statements sound absurd ... they are; and they are every bit as
defensible as the characterizations of Joseph you will get from Shea and his minions)."
Moreover, here's another testimonial from a Naval Officer serving in Italy (for obvious reasons, he wishes to remain anonymous):
"Dear Mr. Glazov:
Thank you very much for all the good work you do at FrontPage Magazine. I very
much appreciate the work you and David Horowitz do in revealing the dangers to America
both from Islamic terrorism abroad and the radical Left at home.
I found about an email written to you regarding an article written by Mr. Joseph
D'Hippolito via a blog by Mr. Justin Katz in this post on his blog:
http://dustinthelight.timshelart...int/
000040.html
more to come....
Actually, as you can see, neither the email nor the entry at Mark Shea's "Catholic
and Enjoying It" blog are about the article. They are instead designed as
a personal attack on Mr. D'Hippolito. Nor is this the first time that Mark Shea
has engaged in this kind of behavior on the internet. To wit, here is another example
of one of Mr. Shea's personal attacks on Mr. D'Hippolito on another blog:
http://
extremecatholic.blogspot....180790562576412
In the comments box, without any personal provocation from Mr. D'Hippolito, he writes:
"This from the man who agrees with Osama Bin Laden on the need to inflict mass
death on civilians for a Higher Spiritual Purpose. I'm simply amazed you would run
the piece without pointing out that tiny inconsistency in the author's thinking,
Pat"
more to come...
And if you have time, Mr. Glazov, you might be interested to know that Mr. Shea
is not only anti-American, but possibly anti-Semitic as well. In the comments box
on Mr. Katz' blog, there are examples of his hostility and indifference towards
Israel from his blog that can be found there on an almost daily basis.
I hope you will see by these examples, Mr. Glazov, that neither Mr. Shea nor those
who are sympathetic to his views are either honorable or decent people.
Thank you for taking the time to read this."
(Note: the author has since recanted his belief that Shea is anti-Semitic)
Uh, Joe. I never wrote Front Page. Somebody else did. I simply posted the letter on my blog. Remember? I get lots of mail I post on my blog. If you don't like being identified with your own rhetoric calling for the mass murder of innocent civilians and children, perhaps you should consider ceasing to emit it. As the letter to Front Page shows, it is not just me that finds it ugly and evil.
Fr. Ray,
That was a favorite of Gen. 'Black Jack' Pershing, the commander of the AEF in WWI.
Although not real Latin, Carborundum was an industrial abrasive of the era.
_
Dear Dale,
It cannot be nostalgia for those of us born after Vatican II, like many seminarians nowadays.
Shea, when did I or the letter writers in question ever said that you wrote Front Page? This is just another typical diversionary tactic on your part.
And what is more ugly and evil? Advocating something that the person advocating it has absolutely no power to enact, or engaging in a constant campaign of "murdering" reputations, which you would do with me regardless of any remarks I make about any subject?
Why don't you ask Victor Morton and Justin Katz, neither of whom defend my "modest proposal" yet have no tolerance for the way you abused them?
Moreover, Shea, why don't you just end this vain folly now? You started it two years ago; you have the responsibility to finish it -- nobody else.
News flash, Joe. Quoting your own words--words you nowhere repudiate and words you repeatedly reconfirm is not "murdering your reputation". It's called "quoting". If you are ashamed of the things you say (as well you should be) then there is a simple solution: tell people "I was wrong to call for the death of innocent children in spades and I was wrong to publicly advocate the destruction of millions of innocent lives. Sorry. Got carried away cuz I was so angry about Islamic terrorism." and then stop doing it.
Joe:
Have you renounced the Mecca nuking/death to the children comments?
Dale:
I hear crickets.
This will come in a few parts:
I swore I would never again acknowledge Mr. Shea's existence, but this thread is a perfect example of why Joseph is right that he is pursuing a persecutionist vendetta.
The reader will note above that the thread, prior to Joseph's first post, had not involved Mr. Shea. Further, it had nothing to do with the war on terrorism, nuclear weapons or just war, the state of Islam or anything else remotely related to Joseph's comments. Further, that Joseph's comments did not introduce those topics.
Let us stipulate that Joseph's comments about nuking Mecca et al are something less than orthodox (they are not insane or Satanic, because, as I once repeatedly and without answer pointed out to Mr. Shea, the Church does not condemn any possession of nuclear weapons as a sin, which means SOME uses of them have to be moral despite the unquestionable fact they kill civilians en masse). Joseph did not attempt to engage Mr. Shea, did not attempt to hijack his blog, did not refer to him. So it's rather unconvincing to hear "I've spent a great deal of time avoiding you. You're like a bad penny. ... I keep running into your obnoxious and abusive crap on blogs I regularly read." Everybody has some people they don't like, or can't imagine engaging even for the sake of collegial disagreement, someone at St. Blogs whose orthodoxy they question. Tough titty. (See me engaging Suspicious Severity or whateverhisnameis.)
Mr. Shea's disagreement (he is not a bishop and has no real authority in these matters, so nothing he says can ever rise above that) is not an excuse to try to destroy somebody's reputation by repetitively injecting himself wherever Joseph may go, talking about whatever subject Joseph may, and calling him Osama bin Laden or a mass murder advocate. This was NOT disagreement with somebody, but an attempt to demonize a human being, to make him anathema as such, to pursue him like a stalkign siren. And Joseph is right to protest it.
As for the "I merely posted it" defense of the Front Page letter, give thou me a break. Yes, you did just print the letter, and followed it with this comment, after which I will sign off. Read them and see if this defense would be any more convincing coming from the king's musings about Thomas a Becket:
[This is all Shea]
----------------------
[Front Page Magazine] is, of course, hardly to blame for giving a forum to this most remarkable thinker. They didn't know him from Adam and he managed to maintain a facade of sanity throughout his article (though members of St. Blogs will recognize the Same Old Monomania is not very far below the surface). However, having been alerted to some of the author's other and less sane positions on world affairs, such as the advocacy of the pre-emptive nuclear annihilation of millions of innocent non-combatants "for a higher cause" (much like his soulmate Osama bin Laden's advocacy of same), it is to be hoped that FPM does not lower itself to affording him a chance to gain respectability for his vile and monstrous ideas.
[This is still Shea, and my last post in this note and probably this topic. Disinterested readers already know.]
----------------------------
Kudos to my reader for calling FPM's attention to their blunder. If this man becomes a regular go-to guy for pro-war journals seeking pundits to make the case for some Grand End to Evil Project and to rally the troops against the Church when Just War doctrine becomes inconvenient, it will do more than any thing they could possibly do to demonstrate the bankruptcy of the Agitprop Campaign. He should not be touched with a barge pole. Only utter ignorance of his fanatical views or total desperation would explain it if he goes into editorial rolodexes as some sort of serious Catholic Pundit. And FPM is no longer ignorant.
We'll see.
Victor:
Thanks for the reprint of my golden prose. You could have just provided a link. Now, if only Joe would just answer Dale's rather simple question rather than fill multiple boxes with prose about how satanic I am...
Really, it's quite simple and it is as I said. I try to ignore Joe for long periods of time. But (as you apparently can sympathize with) sometimes Joe's posturing as the Prophet Joseph, Voice of Reform, become unendurable when, on blogs a click away, he is openly and repeatedly calling for the death of children "in spades" and advocating the nuclear annihilation of five whole cities. You can pretend such rhetoric is "ambiguous" if you like, just as you can pretend that when somebody else chooses to complain to an editor that it's all my fault, but the reality remains that Joe has yet to disown this rhetoric which is "ambiguous" to no one but you.
I am genuinely sorry for whatever it was I said or did to render me a non-person in your eyes, Victor. I was rather surprised when you logged off my blog and even more surprised to discover myself banned from yours (I think I commented a handful of times). I hope we can be reconciled somehow. But I will not back down in my complaints about Joe's extremist rhetoric and the hypocrisy of his posturing as a True Christian. If he doesn't like being associated with his own views then he should retract them.
OK, this is going to be pretty effing simple:
1. I thought my question was pretty simple, and to the point. I haven't received any form of response. Troubling.
2. Mark's point about the immorality of "giving death" to children as a terrorism response is indisputable.
3. Mark's comment that nuking Mecca and Medina as a response to another 9/11 terrorist atrocity would be outside the pale of just war principles is indisputable. Um, proportionality?
4. I am sick to death of this s__t right now.
Any response will have to be emailed. Because, as of now, this thread is closed.
Thanks to everyone who offered comments on the actual post.
OK, Joe and Mark. Take it outside boys. Very disedifying. No-one wants to see it.
HJW
Very nearly caused me to have to clean my computer screen. I don't usually read your blog (I followed a link from Holy Whapping), but apparently I need to start!
Commenting by HaloScan
