The Online Cult of Fr. Zuhlsdorf.
But first, connecting the dots about linkies…
I’m not linking to anyone in this post, but surfing around the blogosphere, I have come to realize why some people link to the people they do. Just because one has a blog does not mean people will link to you. There is a status quo one must live up to in order to get the linkies thing going on. (I’m always the last to learn these things.)
Well, first of all, people have to read your blog and like it for them to want to link to it. (Which is why I have so few readers by the way.) Having said that, if someone has a literary blog, or an intellectual blog, they may read you, but you are not qualified enough to be on their blogroll. Nothing wrong with that.
Now I’ve commented in the past few weeks how certain cafeteria blogs seem to be trying to appeal to more sophisticated intellectual/news blogs while being somewhat dismissive of their original “lunatic fringe” fan base. It all gets so complicated.
Blog hostilities.
Now I find blog competition rather interesting, especially as it involves the elitism of several quality blogs. It is all rather humbling. Many bloggers, from whatever school of thought they hail from, tend to be more or less elitists. I’ve noted liberal and conservative Catholics alike refer to their inferiors and those who disagree with them as ‘wackos”. (They also will refer to their commenter’s with the same condescending tone.) I actually like that in some respects - they sort of cancel one another out that way, and it helps me maintain a proper introspection.
Recently, a Catholic blog that is considered to be rather liberal, let’s call it “Vox Nova” (I rather like the blog BTW) has entertained me with the lively comments their posts generate concerning the “wackos” on the Internet. Actually, this is where I learned that what I write just doesn’t count for the many elitists out there. (There is one blog in Asia…) And no, I am not offended, and I keep going back to these blogs, mainly because I enjoy other writer’s point of view - and as Liza Minelli said, “I think that’s the greatest gift one can have!” (LOL! Again!)
Finally, that “wingnut loon” and his crazy followers.
No - a commenter on that “liberal Catholic” blog was not using that term for me - although many others might - but rather for Fr. Zuhlsdorf. In fact, another commenter added, “Of course, the online cult of Fr. Z. is going to be upset that their oracle has been denounced. Seriously, he seems to be the major spirit behind the radical Catholics on the net, making them feel like they are in the norm when the reverse is the actual case. “Save the liturgy, save the world” craziness says it all — the liturgy doesn’t need to be saved.” (I don’t want to link to the article because they probably already think I’m a wingnut too. LOL!)
I especially like the last comment. “The online cult of Fr. Z.” Aside from demeaning his vast readership, it also demonstrates my point: There are various factions and cliques in the blogosphere; little people and big people, has beens and haven’t beens, employed and unemployed, intellectual and banal, spiritual and gnostic, trad and lib, and so on and so on. Some get their breaks with other media, other’s troll around the net, hoping to get their own “cult”… It is pretty much about power and influence, although it is much more about look at me, listen to me, support me. Me.
Cat Fight Update! (4:20 PM)
Oh crap! It is just too funny to miss, so I’ll link - go to Vox Nova and read for your self.
April 14th, 2008 at 11:43 am
I think the best thing to do is to keep our own voices small on the blog, and find others who have already said it better. The most obvious places would be Scripture, the Fathers, Saints,and Papal Letters. I am very proud of the fact that over 1 year of blogging, you could probably only find about 3 paragraphs (combined) that are my own words.
And again, we are preaching to a(pretty small)choir most of the time anyway, as most of the folks reading blogs are Catholics (of whatever stripe) who aren’t going to change their minds on Ecclesial matters anyway. They just want to see someone echoing what they already believe.
April 14th, 2008 at 11:46 am
Very good advice Ken. You have done this well. Thanks.
April 14th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Being a girl (and I say it that way because I don’t remember boys participating so much in this time wasting nonsense,) I was on the both the sending and recieving ends of extensive note writing in jr high. I can’t count how many hours were spent pouring over a few lines trying to decipher what “they really meant” - examination and in depth analysis (otherwise known as)reading into every comment.
When you aren’t face to face talking with someone, and are lacking the benefits of facial/bodily/vocal cues, questions and immediate responses etc. might it be true that the most prudent response would be to say a simple, “Humph…curious…” and leave it at that?
It is almost scary to write anything because there is always someone who is going to get all whacked out about nothing, and I think why do they care so much anyway? If someone was sitting across from me saying the same thing would I think anything of it? Could I be reading more into this than it deserves?
What about my grandma’s response to just pray about it as responding can often turn a misunderstanding into a regret? Dang, she was a smart lady.
Or even my dad’s advice, what would you think about it if it were to pop into your head as you rest in your deathbed?
“Gee, I can’t believe that Father Z. actually used his own blog to comment on the structure of ships used in war…How dare we be required to read that…He is a priest after all, he can’t possibly have interests like any regular guy…Yes, blowing that out of proportion really was time well spent!”
or would you think
“Humph…Father Z. was intersted in boats…I wonder if when he was a kid he ever played war in the pool with his buddies?…I’m sorry Jesus that the fuss I threw over that blog wounded your body, it was a big waste of time.”
April 14th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
Jennie - really great points.
It is so funny really, that they went after fr. Z for an innocuous post such as that. It was a nothing post to begin with - just a man’s fascination with ships and remarks in admiration for the military. That entire post and comment section on Vox Nova criticising Father was such an eye-opener for me.
Thanks for your comments.
April 14th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Good points, Jennie. Especially the thought, “If someone was sitting across from me saying the same thing would I think anything of it?”.
April 14th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Very interesting observations Terry. At a church social the other day, one of my fellow Catholics said she liked my blog and reads it from time to time–she asked how many hours I spent blogging a day. My husband said, “she spends at least 20 hours a week blogging.” He could be correct–but I like reading what other Catholics think and believe–and I learn about things going on in the world. Blogs are about ourselves–but we are sharing ourselves with others–I think the people harrassing Father Z are just jealous of his popularity–sheesh.
April 14th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Tara - I agree - I think envy and jealousy play a big role. Fr. Z is so not what these people accuse him of being.
April 14th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
If you really wanted a link, all you had to was ask.
You’re tempting me to write a post sending as much traffic here as I can. Mr. Snyder is always a good friend to have in the blogosphere.
April 14th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
For the anti-cult of Fr. Z, you need to visit the Angel Queen Forum.
April 14th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Thanks! I wasn’t really trolling for a link - but I do like Vox Nova. I don’t know who Mr. Snyder is? And I’m just a guy who plays at being a blogger.
April 14th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
I read Fr. Z for what the blog is titled and liturgical matters.
The other stuff needs it’s own section away from the main focus…
April 14th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Mr. Snyder is the proprietor of the Western Confucian. I think he has thrown some traffic here from time to time. I’m pretty sure that is how I found you oringinally. I thought that was the Korean blog you were referencing.
As to Father Z, I’ve seen a couple roastings he has received in Angel Queen. He and I have disagreed. I’ve disagreed with his commenters. Pretty par for the course in blogging. MM’s allegation isn’t one I would be inclined to give generally. I figure I’ll save any objections to Father Zuhlsdorf for his comboxes.
April 14th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Oh - that Mr. Snyder - I like and admire him and I read him all of the time - he is in my favorites - In my post, I was referring to an Asian blog. I’ve never read AngelQueen - never participated in a forum.
Fr. Z is from around my parts and I like him quite a lot - aside from being brilliant, he is a rather normal guy - which is why I think the comments on VN have been so funny about Father’s post.
Thanks for your kind remarks.
April 14th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
They’re all a bunch of wingnuts, on both sides.
April 14th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Well, compared to myself, I find Fr Z a moderate! But when you are (shameless plug) more Catholic than Pope! that isn’t surprising. (Satire, actually the whole MCTP thing is satire, but people take me too seriously).
The real question is, can our liberal blogger refute Fr. Z’s points? Is there a cult around Fr. Z? Probably, but personally I don’t think that is Fr. Z’s fault. It is the stupidity of people who don’t think for themselves. Fr. Z offers opinions, and gives a good number of sources, even though I don’t agree on the more pointed issues of Romanità.
It is like my blog. I don’t think that I am a counter magisterium, in fact that is on a disclaimer at the top of my blog. I offer opinions, sometimes I’m dreadfully right, and sometimes I’m dreadfully wrong. That is the nature of opinions. Our little mini-website blogs are places to make arguments, no one is obliged to take any one of us seriously. I do hope when I present the magisterial teaching on something and not my own that people accept that, but if not what am I going to do? I’m not the Pope! I just hope that people argue based on principles and logic and not on emotions.
But people take blogs way, way, way, way too seriously! I have found blogs where I am criticized, so what I’ve got a 6 month old baby to play with. Someone writes things I don’t like, even in the curia, so what! I have more important things to do. You can’t get a big head about blogging! I love it but there are more important things in life. The day you think that you are some sort of magisterium is the day you need to get off the internet and get in Church! That is my 3 cents or so. God bless Terry, and I praise you for your humility, you are one of the few people in the blogosphere who is truly concerned with heaven.
April 14th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Terry, I love your blogs and am honored to be on your blog roll. You were one of the first to show me that kindness and I am grateful. Keep making us laugh, cry, think and pray!
April 14th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Wow, I had no idea Fr. Z is being roasted. I don’t often visit his blog, but now I’m curious about all the fuss.
When I started blogging I was in “snark mode” much of the time, and I’ve noticed the pattern among other bloggers…recent converts or reverts, really angry at the tripe we were fed growing up(if we grew up Catholic) or in college, etc., and taking it out on the world, wanting to go after the heretics to preserve others.
We all seem to go through that phase. And there’s a TON of encouragement to do so. (maybe this is worth its own post). Anyway, the reality is that people LOVE to jump on others and their opinions, they can do so freely online where we are all depersonalized, and the biggest online bullies are likely the biggest weenies in real life.
But I digress…I like what Ken said…to let others speak. And I do think that depends upon what one is writing. For the “newsies”, yeah, and for those writing about doctrine…yeah. Although I would still argue that there are many (such as myself) who are students and often find blogging as a way to sort out our thoughts as we write our papers. It’s helped. And I’ve been called out on heresies! But I don’t often write about dogmas and doctrines anymore. I let others do it entirely. I don’t write about news…usually. Since I’ve begun, my philosophy has been quite tamed.
In the beginning, I wanted to blog for Christ; and I hope, today, that is still true, but with a more pure intention. The fallen nature of humanity will always be around (especially mine!) but I think for MOST of us, it’s not about competetion. There’s a lot out there stumping for links, and it’s nice to be recognized and linked to, but ultimately…who’s going to care? My voice will fall silent, and my words will be lost, buried among all the others. It’s just a passtime, and hopefully it has a positive effect on someone on their journey to the Lord.
That’s how I see it.
NOw….my curiousity is up and I must travel….
April 14th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
I just posted this over there:
Boy, it’s like I’m in a foreign country. I don’t recognize a soul and I’ve been Catholic blogging for over two years. And none of the commenters seem to espouse the “Love Thy Neighbor” message.
April 14th, 2008 at 10:31 pm
Since I haven’t read his blog or the particular post(s) causing all the controversy, it would be completely inappropriate for me to formulate a derogatory opinion about Father Z. I will say, however, that I have read blogs maintained by priests who display aggression with the use of descriptive, violent terminology.
In criticizing that propensity, people like myself inadvertently look like “lefties” or , worse yet, dissident Catholics with liberal lineaments. That’s total buls#!%. I’m not suggesting that the Catholic faith is so passive that under no set of circumstances is violence to be utilized. I am saying that some of these priests (I have one specific priest in mind and his name I will exclude from my comments) speak or write with using violence to get their point across. If I were to do some fo the things they carelessly describe in their blogs, I’d first go to prison then the confessional. It’s as if they’d anoint your forehead with a Coup de grâce.
April 15th, 2008 at 7:24 am
I’m in Terry’s cult. :>
April 15th, 2008 at 7:34 am
There is elitism evident in Catholic blogs.
If you had published a book, Terry, it doesn’t matter if it’s just re-writing Catholic teaching (a dozen of these would set you up—one could be pumped out in an afternoon)or telling women they should make a schedule for their day (hello?) or telling them to dress modestly (hello?) or not to have sex before marriage (hello?), then you’d be “in”—but since you’re a TRUE artist trying to follow God and avoiding self promotion, you shall not be in the “elite”….
choose always to stay little, that’s where it’s safe.
Your followers love you, not your productions, nor your fame.
April 15th, 2008 at 9:02 am
Well, I followed your link and I’m not inclined to read so much bloviating. I prefer blogs that are humble and unassuming. I don’t frequent the “popular” blogs because as you said, it seems to be more about being heard rather than what is said - in the comboxes that is. We are not to seek popularity, nor fame nor power. We are to seek God and only God. It is not easy to seek God in the blogosphere.
April 15th, 2008 at 11:30 am
I’m in a bit of a quandary regarding this one - I recommend everyone visit the site, but it’s never one of my first ports of call - there’s something not exactly… no, that’s the wrong way to put it , there’s just something about it which uneases me. I cannot put my finger on it exactly , but something feels missing. Of course it must be just me, but there’s something a little too existentialist about it - my indolent self so much finds the worth of being rather than doing….
April 15th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
What in the world? I’m glad I keep my head down and don’t go to these larger blogs and sites. Wingnuts is right. Like Santus Belle, I frequent only a handful of smaller blogs…and yours, Terry ;}
Don’t get the brouhaha…so what if Father Z posted on the military…is he supposed to have tunnel vision for only things considered strictly Catholic? Who wants to know someone who has only a solitary interest? Father Z can quote you anything from the Church Fathers to Shakespeare to Star Trek…pretty cool.
April 15th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Paul - which site are you referring to? Fr. Z or Vox Nova?
April 15th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
What Ken, Jennie, Jeffrey, Ray, SF,
and Sanctus said, in particular.
I don’t really read bigger blogs - I prefer blogs that tell me about you, not recycled NOR material. I like personal blogs, and the big ones just don’t do it.
I often post stuff that isn’t specifically Catholic just because I want a little balance.
April 15th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
I wouldn’t read Abbey Roads at first because I thought it was esoteric. However, I am now one of of Terry’s groupies….er cult-members…er…blog buddies!
April 16th, 2008 at 7:39 am
Thanks everyone - that is it! You have all convinced me to stop trying to be Perez Hilton.