Franky Schaeffer, Traitor and Nutcase

And trust me when I say I searched for printable words to use in my title.  His trashing of Charles Colson and the late great Richard John Neuhaus is beyond despicable.  

(I have chosen not to link directly to his blog because I don’t want to give the jerk the traffic.)

The Chuck Colson obituary that Schaeffer posted on his blog Sunday, though, is truly extraordinary, and I don’t see what purpose his fulmination-from-afar serves. The obit memorably begins, “Evangelical Christianity lost one of its most beloved and bigoted homophobic and misogynistic voices with the death of Charles W. ‘Chuck’ Colson, a Watergate felon who converted to ‘evangelicalism’ but never lost his taste for dirty political tricks against opponents.”

Schaeffer’s evidence for that charge: “Colson teamed up with far right Roman Catholic activist Professor Robert George of Princeton to launch the dirty tricks campaign to brand President Obama as ‘anti-religious’ with Colson’s and George’s ‘Manhattan Declaration.’”. . .

After numerous paragraphs of Colson-bashing, Schaeffer turns his ire on another departed leader, “the reactionary’s reactionary, Richard John Neuhaus.” He argues that Colson and Neuhaus fronted for “oppressive ideas rooted in an anti-constitutional theocratic far right wish list for changes that were supposed to roll back the parts of the democratic processes—say Roe v. Wade, women’s rights and gay rights—that far right Catholics and Protestants didn’t approve of.”

Oh yeah, that great monument to the democratic process, Roe v. Wade, that arbitrarily threw out the abortion laws of all 50 states.  How democratic.  And the Manhattan Declaration is a dirty tricks campaign?

I don’t know if I should have pity or contempt for someone so far off the deep end.  Franky better pray it will be pity on God’s part . . . a lot of it.  Trashing good men who have contended for the Faith, for freedom and for “the weakest of these,” particularly the unborn and those in prison, is a hellish thing.

Franky Schaeffer’s change on abortion indicates that God may have instead chosen to give him over to a depraved mind.  Franky knows (or knew) how wrong the Roe v. Wade abortion regime is.  He helped produce the seminal documentary featuring his father and C. Everett Koop, Whatever Happened to the Human Race.  And later on, I personally saw him speak at a Texans United for Life dinner.  (He already seemed a bit odd then, by the way.)

How far he has come . . . down.

I hope in heaven Francis Schaeffer does not have to know what has become of his son.

 

----

Housekeeping: Yes, I know the formatting looks awful.  You have no idea how difficult the new blogger is to use.  It's driving me to the nut house myself.

“Bishop” Bennison follows Neuhaus’ Law

Perhaps the most famous pronouncement of Richard John Neuhaus of blessed memory was Neuhaus’ Law – “Where orthodoxy is optional, orthodoxy will sooner or later be proscribed.”

The Episcopal Church, particularly the Diocese of Pennsylvania, keeps proving that law correct. The “bishop” in said diocese, Charles E. Bennison, wrote a little note to the clergy under him.

In a note to the clergy on The Commemoration of Absalom Jones, Bennison wrote to "clergy colleagues" saying, "I am very concerned that to date only 43 of us have registered for the Conference on Rites for Blessing Same - Gender Relationships on February 21- a week from tomorrow.”

“Only 43 of you are registered for ze party meeting. I am vvverrry concerned about that.”

Is this the CCCP? Or is this the KGB? Or is this the DNC? I thought it was the TEC! (With apologies to Johnny Rotten.)

”This means that a large number of us may not be adequately prepared to respond pastorally, either to people's reactions to this summer's General Convention vote on rites proposed by the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music in response to Resolution C-056 at the 2009 General Convention, or to same gender couples who may ask us to use the rites for the blessing of their relationships if, as seems likely, Convention adopts them.



"Unless the implementing resolution states otherwise, none of us, should we be asked to bless the relationship of a same-gender couple, may refuse to do so on the basis of their sexual orientation."


Mandatory gay blessings. Welcome to the future present of The Episcopal Church.

Richard John Neuhaus, R.I.P.

First Things just posted the following:

Fr. Richard John Neuhaus slipped away today, January 8, shortly before 10 o’clock, at the age of seventy-two. He never recovered from the weakness that sent him to the hospital the day after Christmas, caused by a series of side effects from the cancer he was suffering. He lost consciousness Tuesday evening after a collapse in his heart rate, and the next day, in the company of friends, he died.

My tears are not for him—for he knew, all his life, that his Redeemer lives, and he has now been gathered by the Lord in whom he trusted.

I weep, rather for all the rest of us. As a priest, as a writer, as a public leader in so many struggles, and as a friend, no one can take his place. The fabric of life has been torn by his death, and it will not be repaired, for those of us who knew him, until that time when everything is mended and all our tears are wiped away.

Funeral arrangements are still being planned; more information about the funeral will be made public shortly. Please accept our thanks for all your prayers and good wishes.

In Deepest Sorrow,
Joseph Bottum

Editor

First Things

-----

Such weeping indeed is in order. He will be greatly missed.

Rest in peace, Fr. Neuhaus.

Pray For Fr. Neuhaus

I am grieved to pass on a report that Fr. Richard John Neuhaus, editor of First Things, may not be long with us. He has been administered last rites by Fr. George Rutler. Fr. Rutler said, “It is appropriate that prayers be offered for a holy death.”

As an avid and appreciative reader of First Things, this news has really hit me this morning. Please pray for Fr. Neuhaus.

Neuhaus on the Motu Proprio

Just a quick post to let you know Fr. Richard Neuhaus has posted an excellent analysis of the Motu Proprio over at First Things. His post is quite perceptive, of course. I commend it to you.