Forgive my title; they’re not my words, but David Griffey’s. In his post on January 9, Mr. Griffey tells us that it’s a new year, and in this new year he’s grown tired of blogging about issues and politics. He, Mr. Griffey, is “no writer,” he says. He’s not “invested” in it. But Mark Shea, once upon a time before he became a mean and angry heretic, suggested that Griffey start a blog; and Griffey did; and his blog took off, even though it involved a lot of hitting his head against a brick wall. He wanted to quit many times, but political controversy drew him back in—and a pity too, because political controversy amounts to nothing more than people calling each other Hitler. And after explaining all this to us in a remarkable ramble, Griffey finally gets around to talking about—who else?—Dave Armstrong!
“The Collapse of Dave Armstrong.”
BY: Henry Matthew Alt • January 12, 2023 • False Report; On Other Blogs
Mary writes: “Meanwhile I have seen many, many people whose birth trauma or traumatic memories of abortion were triggered by the photos and videos the past several days, leading to terrible suffering. I have seen many, many pro-choice people more convinced than ever that pro-lifers are ghoulish and insane. I have seen no minds or hearts changed. None at all. Graphic and disturbing attention-seeking media circuses don’t change people’s minds about abortion. If they did, they would have by now. We’ve had many. They don’t work.”
Over on the aptly-named Daffey Thoughts, David Griffey attempts, ineptly, to deconstruct my blog post exposing some Catholics’ idolatrous attitude about Scott Hahn. “Most conservative Catholics I know,” Griffey blares in his headline, “do not believe Scott Hahn is the fourth member of the Holy Trinity.” Only “most”? Does Griffey mean to suggest that some conservative Catholics do think that Hahn is the fourth member of the Trinity? Fact is, I don’t know anybody who thinks that a trinity has four persons (that would be impossible), still less that Scott Hahn is one of those persons. Nor did I suggest any such thing in my post
When someone is wounded — whether it’s a parent who lost a child and blames God, or someone who’s been sexually abused and is struggling to figure out who they are, or someone who’s been falsely accused by people he knew — the last thing they are looking for is the Right Answers. And certainly they’re not looking to be interrogated by someone who wants to know if they’re still following all the moral laws. There are times when this kind of response only makes their hurt worse. They want love.Apologetics has an important place, but this is what God revealed to Julian of Norwich: “I saw that God is to us everything which is good and comforting for our help. God is our clothing, who wraps and enfolds us for love, embraces us and shelters us, surrounds us for love, which is so tender that God may never desert us.”
Fr. Bill McCormick asks the question in connection with a discussion that arose after two articles by Massimo Faggioli in La Croix International. Michael Sean Winters had a response at the National Catholic Reporter and Pedro Gabriel at Where Peter Is. That’s just the background; Dr. Faggioli is a Facebook friend of mine, thinks the America article misrepresents his argument, and I don’t wish to wade into that dispute. My purpose is just to add a few footnotes where I think Fr. McCormick gets the answer to his question exactly right.
There I was, dear reader, minding my own business when I noticed a sudden spike in traffic coming from a post at One Luther Five. Someone named Eric Sammons had just accused me of “idolatry.” How cute; I had to double check that I wasn’t reading some anti-Catholic, King James Onlyist blog. I wasn’t alone — the other “new papolaters” (you have to follow Mr. Sammons’ links to find out who they are, because he doesn’t name us in the text) are Austen Ivereigh, Dawn Eden Goldstein, Rich Raho, Massimo Faggioli, and Mike Lewis. So I’m in good company.
Yesterday my very excellent fellow Patheos blogger Mary Pezzulo asks: What Must a Christian Do For the Helpless? Her answer is that we must “conform ourselves to Christ” and what he would do. When we see the helpless, we must live in imitation of Christ; the imitation of Christ is not just for when we are feeling pious at adoration. Still less is it for when we take to our blogs and defend, neither Christ nor the helpless, but ourselves. Christ never, Mary points out, blamed the helpless for being helpless. Neither do I condemn you. 
Now, I do Catholic apologetics myself, and I love reading Catholic apologetics, and Catholic apologetics helped to bring me into the Church. So I am not at all averse to a presentation of rational reasons for a position. When I was a kid, my mother used to defuse arguments by telling me that I should become a lawyer because I love to argue. But argument worked with me when I was in the process of converting to Catholicism because an argument in favor of the faith was what I was looking for. I had already opened my mind.
