Thanks Steve, you express much of what I've been thinking. I guess you could say that many of us love Tradition, it's Traditionalists we can't stand (with many exceptions!).
"Occasionally, though, when I would start to read a piece like the one at LifeSite so I could find some damning section to quote, only to not find anything really awful to grab hold of. I would realize — often with disappointment and frustration — that I was barking up the wrong tree, and only seeking out my own confirmation bias. I’d be forced to abandon my fixation on the piece and let it go if I didn’t want to try to mount a disingenuous attack."
This is why you are a good writer Steve. You were back then at 1P5, and you are now.
When I followed you at 1P5 I must confess that, as a theological spectrum agnostic (meaning I didn't automatically dismiss most views) I was more impressed with how you got to your conclusions than with the conclusions themselves. It was much like Eisenhower's dictum "The plan is nothing, planning is everything."
Or, as I put it regarding a new Trad Substack writer "I've tried reading [redacted]. Too much conjecture and innuendo for my taste. When I read something that seems uncertain I try to work it out by assigning probabilities. Somehow my 'range of uncertainty' ('error bars') with [redacted's] writings are just too broad to be useful to me." I never had that criticism of your 1P5 writing, though I did of many of your other commenters.
Steve, I think you are just too hard on yourself. You were as a Catholic and now as a somewhat ex-Catholic - "somewhat" because certain imprints remain. I pray that you will be merciful with yourself.
Definitely anti-vaxxer. They were quoting RFK Jr. at the time, who claimed that the RNA vaccines could alter our DNA, which is baloney. I called them on it, saying that I'm a Catholic and a scientist, and that they risked being dismissed as whack-jobs if they kept quoting fake science from RFK. Boy, did their leadership ever jump on me! But like you said, there's a lot of money to be made in the looney fringe.
Thanks Steve, you express much of what I've been thinking. I guess you could say that many of us love Tradition, it's Traditionalists we can't stand (with many exceptions!).
I recall seeing certain priests say that the TLM "is the Mass we love, for the people we hate" :D
'Some kind of drug dealer doling out hits to my audience lined up at my digital street corner.' Love. It. !!!
And you're right to boot! About all of it.
Good post! Toxic anger online is not doing anyone any good.
"Occasionally, though, when I would start to read a piece like the one at LifeSite so I could find some damning section to quote, only to not find anything really awful to grab hold of. I would realize — often with disappointment and frustration — that I was barking up the wrong tree, and only seeking out my own confirmation bias. I’d be forced to abandon my fixation on the piece and let it go if I didn’t want to try to mount a disingenuous attack."
This is why you are a good writer Steve. You were back then at 1P5, and you are now.
When I followed you at 1P5 I must confess that, as a theological spectrum agnostic (meaning I didn't automatically dismiss most views) I was more impressed with how you got to your conclusions than with the conclusions themselves. It was much like Eisenhower's dictum "The plan is nothing, planning is everything."
Or, as I put it regarding a new Trad Substack writer "I've tried reading [redacted]. Too much conjecture and innuendo for my taste. When I read something that seems uncertain I try to work it out by assigning probabilities. Somehow my 'range of uncertainty' ('error bars') with [redacted's] writings are just too broad to be useful to me." I never had that criticism of your 1P5 writing, though I did of many of your other commenters.
Steve, I think you are just too hard on yourself. You were as a Catholic and now as a somewhat ex-Catholic - "somewhat" because certain imprints remain. I pray that you will be merciful with yourself.
I wish I knew how. I’m only aware of my fallibility. But thank you.
Steve, one day after you posted this Mary Harrington posted a very similar essay:
https://open.substack.com/pub/reactionaryfeminist/p/face-eating-leopards?r=bbwgp&utm_medium=ios
Lifesite News lost me several years ago after I got into a pissing match with them regarding vaccines.
Which way did they go with that?
Definitely anti-vaxxer. They were quoting RFK Jr. at the time, who claimed that the RNA vaccines could alter our DNA, which is baloney. I called them on it, saying that I'm a Catholic and a scientist, and that they risked being dismissed as whack-jobs if they kept quoting fake science from RFK. Boy, did their leadership ever jump on me! But like you said, there's a lot of money to be made in the looney fringe.