Skip to main content

View Diary: Putin to Meet with Pope Francis (60 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Money makes everything copacetic, not so? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Betty Clermont, Don midwest

    I can understand why JamesGG is so astonished to learn that evangelicals and fundamentalists were cavorting with what they were simultaneously calling the Whore of Babylon. And why the Catholic Church would cavort with people they called apostates and heretics.

    But money puts everything into such a soft, warm glow that who can resist?  

    •  Especially when transferring the wealth of the US (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Don midwest

      into the pockets of the 1% was actually accomplished.

    •  Astonished? Hardly. (0+ / 0-)

      I don't dispute that Roman Catholics were involved in some of the earliest stages of the Christian Right; in fact, much of my dissertation is about the ways in which the fundamentalists and evangelicals in the Christian Right have had to alter their narrative worldviews to allow for cobelligerence not only with Roman Catholics, but also with Mormons.

      I also don't dispute that many of the resources used by the Christian Right were provided by people who had other agendas, who were interested in using the energy of frustrated Protestant evangelicals and fundamentalists to push for people who would fulfill their own political aims.

      But Clermont also goes to pains to point out that a few of those involved in the foundations of the Christian Right were Roman Catholic, and paints them as the masterminds of the movement—completely overlooking that many, if not most, of those who provided the intellectual, political, and monetary resources for the movement were not Roman Catholic, and some were vehemently anti-Catholic.

      To suggest that it was the Catholics pulling the strings with the fundamentalists and evangelicals as their puppets or dupes is, in my opinion, inaccurate at best; in fact, from the evidence I've seen, I'd say that particularly at the beginnings of the movement, the official Roman Catholic Church was a junior partner in a movement whose intellectual, political, economic, and personnel resources came almost entirely from Protestant fundamentalists and evangelicals.

      And until Ms. Clermont presents the evidence to support her claim (which I requested in the above comment), rather than simply presenting reviews of her book, I will continue to side with the academic historians, who do not present the Roman Catholic hierarchy as playing nearly as significant and dominant a role in the Christian Right as does Ms. Clermont.

      "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

      by JamesGG on Sun Nov 10, 2013 at 02:45:56 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You are misstating what she said (0+ / 0-)

        Betty said:

        The religious right was an artificial construct of
        the neocons in the 1970s. Using historical precedents of the successful alliances of church and state, they intentionally created a coalition of conservative Protestant and Catholic voters...

        Her book (Chapter 4) clearly states who she was referring to. Some are Catholic. Some are Protestant. Sun Myung Moon was neither. She names certain Catholics who had important leadership positions

        You said

        Clermont also goes to pains to point out that a few of those involved in the foundations of the Christian Right were Roman Catholic, and paints them as the masterminds of the movement
        except that she's clear these "masterminds" (actually, movement managers) were using money provided by non-Catholics like Olin and Scaife.

        and

        I have come across no evidence that the movement is "an artificial construct of the plutocracy."
        a statement which is well contradicted by Clermont's book.

        You are misstating her position, probably conflating neo-conservative with neo-Catholic, shifting the basis of the discussion, and trying to pass yourself off as an expert based on an unwritten dissertation that I suspect I would not accept were I on your committee.  

        People who have taken the trouble to write books have a right to find annoying people who won't take the time to even look at what they have said before making pronouncements on it.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site