FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Who Are the Modern Day Absaloms?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Today's Matin Readings got me to pondering this question. As you probably know Absalom, one of King David's sons, declared himself King in Hebron after creating a network of spies and asking his father permission to offer sacrifice in Hebron. Of course this is after he had been forgiven for killing his half-brother, and after he set himself up at the gate to know all the business of those asking for the King's verdict or judgement. He set himself up as judge. Crafty fellow.

We know that at the sound of the trumpet he will get his spies to have the people shout out, "Absalom is King of Hebron".

Now I am not concerned about the media, the NGOs, politicians, and court system, that are set up as gate keepers in the secular world. These are no-brainers.

Who are the gate keepers in the Catholic world?

Consider the problem of modernism. Why is it that no one advocates a grass roots campaign to call or write to every Bishop and the Holy Father asking for a return to a no nonsense Faith? Because that would seem the appropriate way to go about it, through official channels of the One, True, Church.

However, we see the Dimond Brothers. Could they be considered a type of Absalom? Or are they just too nutty to matter?

How about Father Gruener? He wants you to follow him to ask for the Conversion of Russia? Could he be a type of Absalom?

How about Bishop Williamson?

How about Father Frank Pavone in the Pro-Life Movement in an organization called Priests for Life? What Priest is not for Life? Don't tell me some are, because that simply means they have ex-communicated themselves already through their own heresy.

Or how about Father Sirico, the homosexual ex-Prot, who now wants to show you the way of God through the Free Market and lead you to the Neo-Cons over at First Things?

Seems to me a lot of these people want to be King.

I guess it's nice to be King.

What say you? And who would you identify as having this King Complex and the network and willing servants to undermine the Pope? Or maybe they are a little less bold and merely want to carve it their own little niche. Are all these people working for the greater Glory of God, or might some of them be working for their own glory?

Let's see if we can make this a discussion and not a shouting match. I think it is a good question and I am just starting the ball rolling here and don't mean to tip my hand. Most of you say you want authority. But, by what means is it acceptable to undermine an existing authority to set-up in your mind a real authority?

Might not some of these people be termed Revolutionaries if they did not tap into what you agree with?

How about Opus Dei with their lay spiritual directors who are known to keep notes on people?

If you guys are interested in the subject, please participate. But, note, I am going to start this and let it go for awhile. I am not going to put myself in the position of being attacked or answering every complaint. That's not my job and I don't want that role.

As a matter of fact, I think you should not argue with each other either. How about a little experiment. Let it run a few pages and just have people give their opinions on the subject. Let them speak freely, without interference. Without worrying about what one of their allies might think of them if they gave a truly honest accounting.

Or would that be too hard? Maybe we could have a debate about it in another thread. I am sick of threads getting derailed.



The actual Absalom's evil actions were used by the Lord to punish David for his sins (his principal one being taking Bethsabee for himself and killing Urias).

So your question is interesting, but I think it's also interesting to think about if the true Absaloms of today are being used to chastise David (the Church)?

Many of the liberal spirit-of-Vatican-2 super-dogma types could be seen this way.  The Church authorities encourage all manner of experimentation and openness, and then Catholics turn around and advocate positions that even some in the hierarchy try to condemn.  But it's ultimately of their own creation.  (For example, John Paul II clarifying that only men can be priests ... it's the post-conciliar silliness that allowed the idea of women priests to become so popular, then to turn around and try to condemn it, ...)

A very local example I saw with a terrible NO I once went to, to fulfill my obligation.  The priest was ad-libbing everywhere, all sorts of abuses, and for the "kiss of peace" he went down the aisle and shook hands and what not.  Well he was finally ready for the "Lamb of God," and was looking at people for their attention to the Host and the altar (and/or to himself), but people were still socializing.  Well, what did he expect?  Serves him right.  He mocked the liturgy, and he expects the faithful to limit their abuse to exactly where he limited it?  He established that the rules need not be followed, so the laity just kept doing what they felt like doing.
(07-11-2012, 02:25 PM)Adam Wayne Wrote: [ -> ]Seems to me a lot of these people want to be King.

I guess it's nice to be King.

My king was crowned with thorns :arrowright: :crucifix: :arrowleft:
(07-11-2012, 02:45 PM)newyorkcatholic Wrote: [ -> ]The actual Absalom's evil actions were used by the Lord to punish David for his sins (his principal one being taking Bethsabee for himself and killing Urias).

So your question is interesting, but I think it's also interesting to think about if the true Absaloms of today are being used to chastise David (the Church)?

Many of the liberal spirit-of-Vatican-2 super-dogma types could be seen this way.  The Church authorities encourage all manner of experimentation and openness, and then Catholics turn around and advocate positions that even some in the hierarchy try to condemn.  But it's ultimately of their own creation.  (For example, John Paul II clarifying that only men can be priests ... it's the post-conciliar silliness that allowed the idea of women priests to become so popular, then to turn around and try to condemn it, ...)

A very local example I saw with a terrible NO I once went to, to fulfill my obligation.  The priest was ad-libbing everywhere, all sorts of abuses, and for the "kiss of peace" he went down the aisle and shook hands and what not.  Well he was finally ready for the "Lamb of God," and was looking at people for their attention to the Host and the altar (and/or to himself), but people were still socializing.  Well, what did he expect?  Serves him right.  He mocked the liturgy, and he expects the faithful to limit their abuse to exactly where he limited it?  He established that the rules need not be followed, so the laity just kept doing what they felt like doing.

Yes. Of course we see many modern day Absaloms in Religious Ed departments of parishes. Youth Directors in particular seem to have this spirit. The problem is the point of contact and who has access to the people. I only brought up the more Traditional possibilities as I thought it may be more interesting.

Because frankly, I see it in some of these people and the ability to stay close to a small segment helps one to say, "the King is good, but I could surely do better".

"He just doesn't understand!". "He is compromising eternal truths as we understand them!". 

etc. etc. etc.