Normally I do not reply to readers’ comments, but the comments on my post earlier today are frankly shocking.
Thomas Peters, Communications Director of the American Principles Project, chose to speak at an event hosted by the leading promoters of anti-Semitism in Poland. The "college" that hosted him is attached to, and founded by, Father Tadeusz Rydsyk. Father Rysdyk not only also founded Radio Marija, it is clear that the college is an arm of the station and Mr. Peters reports that he got a tour of the station’s studios ("The Elders of Zion" goes hi-tech!). So there is no "guilt by association" here except for the association Mr. Peters chose: He decided to go to an event hosted by these notorious anti-Semites who dabble in Holocaust denial and have been denounced by the papal nuncio, Lech Walesa and many of Poland’s bishops. He shouldn’t have.
Mind you, I don’t think anyone should attend an event sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute but that has more to do with the allocation of that precious commodity of time than any moral concern. Choosing to associate with anti-Semites is different, it shows moral stupidity or coarseness or both, and the fact that Father Fessio was there too is hardly exculpatory.
Mr. Peters, of course, has a boss who presumably approved his taking time off to attend this conference and should have warned him against it. If Mr. Peters’ moral compass is off, he at least can plead youth. His boss, Professor Robert George, knows, or should have known, of Radio Marija’s anti-Semitism which has been a stain on Catholicism for many years, not least because it was so at odds with the obvious, determined effort of Pope John Paul II to eradicate anti-Semitism from his homeland and his Church. Professor George should explain why he thought his subordinate should attend such a conference. Or, that he did not know about it. A person in executive authority is expected to give an account of the activities of their staff, and that is not guilt by association either. That is being responsible.
Most importantly, I cannot help but detect in some of the comments posted something I have noticed before, both in the Church and outside of it, that disturbs me greatly. People, good people, smart people, sometimes forget that we need to get outraged, and outraged easily, by anti-Semitism. It is a pernicious cancer in our civilization and we must not only refuse to have anything to do with it, we must call out those who do.
Could it be a conincidence that Prof. George has recently co-authored the "Manhattan Declaration" defending the constitutional basis for religious freedom. This is a declaration sumarily dismissed on this blog without even a proper vetting. Now, out-of-the-blue, Sean Winters decides to prounce this estemeed professor from Princeton an anti-semite by association.
It is obvious that Mr. Winters is simply seeking a "Beck-style" news break (in this case a smear) in order to discredit both this very necessary declaration and also to taint the reputation of this young, popular conservative blogger, Mr. Peters.
Yes, anti-Semetism is a horrible outrage and it has been declared so by the Vatican on many occasions; however, this does not mean that such vile propaganda was present at this particular venue - it was simply an international conference on Catholic social media in the internet age.
Where you at the conference Mr. Winters? Do you have evidence of anti-semitic propaganda being dissminated? Do you also claim that Ingatious press is anti-semitic (the publisher of all papal encyclicals) due to the fact that the founder was present at this media conference?
If not, your post amounts to libel and a uncouth attempt at political posturing.
Also, what hypocrisy that you decry discrimination yet attack and slander those who support non-violent resisence (i.e. the recent declaration) to governemt power and intimidation against selected populations. This blog is all but silent by recent US government encrouchments on religious liberties of selected minorities such as orthodox Jews or Catholics...
The fundamental point stands: arguments which rely on guilt by association are both tacky and logically weak. Push the line a little further and we've devolved into something pretty close to catty libel.
I do not think that outrage over anti-semitism ought to trump logic, much less common decency (again, I dislike American Papist, but don't think Peters deserves the public excoriation you seem to think is warranted- did you try emailing him or calling before making your posts?). I think the same point was well made on this website when some people were losing their heads over Notre Dame/Obama.
That being said, I think it is important (following St. Ignatius' own principle) to interpret his actions and words in the most charitable light possible. He's an up and coming young blogger. He was invited to an international conference on social media that included prominent Catholic figures. My guess is that he was unaware of the anti-semitic background of the conference host and simply saw this as a great professional opportunity for himself. The correct response I think would be to gently and privately communicate the concern to Mr. Peters. He could then make a statement of support for Jews and against anti-Semitism on his blog and we could all be done with this. I think MSW's accusatory tone has probably not helped this situation. Anti-semitism deserves outrage, but that outrage should not eclipse Christian charity.
The criticism is directed at the questionably logical association which paints Mr. Peters as cavorting in anti-semitism, while not actually demonstrating that he supports the anti-semitic views of Fr. Rydsyk or that the conference reflected his views, nor calling out other prominent attendees like Fr. Fessio. It makes the post seem like an attempt at the character assassination of Mr. Peters, rather than a justified criticism of anti-semitism.
If you want to run a post about Fr. Rydsyk's anti-semitism, then go for it. If you wish to criticize specific points of Mr. Peters presentation at the conference or a post on his blog, then do so. But I agree with ''DT'' that regardless of one's opinions of Mr. Peters, and I for one find his blog to be problematic, his particular actions in this case ought to be viewed as charitably as possible.
The whole thing is a sham. Take this comment from the young whippersnapper: "Chris Korzen and all his buddies at Catholics United, Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, and Catholics for Choice are a bunch of self-serving, duplicitous parasites...fake Catholics...". I would look in the mirror if I were you, Mr. Peters (or is Master Peters the more appropriate sulatation?)
For Michael Sean Winters, who for months (years?) has been closely associated with the pro-abortion Barack Obama and has done his best to encourage Catholics to vote for and support the pro-abortion Barack Obama to cluck over another blogger's association with an anti-Semitic individual is almost the height of hypocricy.
On what grounds do you criticize Peters, MSW? That he is associating with a group that expounds views contrary to Catholic teaching?
Really?
Really?