A Man for "Ball" Seasons?

George Neumayr writes:

In 2003, Jesuit St. Louis University (SLU) received an $8 million tax abatement to start building a sports arena. This annoyed the Masonic Temple Association, whose property abuts SLU. Arguing that a religious school should not receive government monies, the Association filed a federal lawsuit to block the abatement.

The case was ultimately dismissed, but not before exposing the utter shamelessness of Jesuit officials at the schools.....

Such as that SLU is basically not really Catholic after all.

...This latest controversy at SLU is the inevitable collision of a habitually bombastic coach, his secularized Jesuit patrons, and a principled archbishop tired of the school's fraud.

St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke has said that the Jesuit school should take "appropriate action" against Majerus for his pro-abortion popping off at a recent rally for Hillary Clinton. Burke also said that he will withhold Holy Communion from the coach who is Catholic unless he accepts the teachings of the Church.

Naturally, this simple canonical matter (in which Burke is right; it is his duty to oversee the Catholic identity of schools within his jurisdiction and protect the sacraments against misuse by dissenters) has been trumped up into a boring, beside-the-point discussion about free speech.

Boring is the right word...The free speech argument is being used as a red herring to obfuscate the oft-missed truth that Majerus has caused grave scandal and he has become the new poster boy for local dissenters and malcontents.

It is good to see that at least one American bishop isn't putting up with this nonsense. In the media's telling, Burke is the villain here. (Majerus has told a sympathetic media that his "elderly mother" has been rattled by the controversy, to which we are apparently supposed to respond: Well, that settles it; you, Majerus, are in the right and Burke is in the wrong.)

Yes, Burke is "controversial," which is just a euphemism for a bishop who turns out to be a believing Catholic who has enough sense of duty to reclaim the Church's freedom against ceaseless secularist encroachments.

Neumayr is right on target. Catholics in the U.S., generally, have been lulled into believing that the Church approves and supports the 'cafeteria' style buffet approach to one's faith (or lack thereof) and they are surprised and often indignant when they are informed of the Church's true position. And many become openly hostile if a bishpo or priest actually possesses the courage of Christ and admonishes them to recant or repent of an immoral or heretical belief or position.

This is where we are now in this "I'm OK, your're OK" realm of confusion in the Church. When bishops like Raymond Burke clearly explain the Church's teachings on matters of faith and morals, confused, ignorant, or dissenting "Catholics" seemed poised to revolt and rebel. Prayer and charitable explanations are helping bring more of these Catholics out of the darkness and back into the light. We must not forget to continue to pray for our bishops and priests for the srength to persevere against the forces of evil and darkness.