Father Fessio and Jimmy Akin defend Schönborn

Father Fessio once discontinued his relationship with the magazine, 30 Days because he felt the anti-war stance of the magazine and its focus on Freemasonry were not things that the average American would care about. Of course, considering the Church's long-standing Magisterial teachings against Freemasonry, and the prevalence and perniciousness of it in the US, you'd think that Father Fessio would take up the sword of 19th Century Ultramontane Jesuits against that scourge, right? Well, no. Father Fessio didn't see it that way. Very suspicious indeed.

So now, Father Fessio is going to step in and defend Cardinal Schönborn, here. Could it be that it's because Cardinal Schönborn has strong connections to Freemasonry, or perhaps it's more likely that Fr. Fessio has had a long-standing and intimate publishing relationship with the Scandal Cardinal? It's certainly a lot more likely than the excuses Akin and Fr. Fessio weave for the Cardinal.

Quasi liberals count on book sales to support their overarching activities. It's completely understandable that men like Fr. Fessio and James Akin would step up to defend the Cardinal, because that's the kind of men they are. Akin's a mercenary and will whip out his pen in defense of whatever, but Fr. Fessio's interests are more clear in this case as many will be quick to point out. These men count on the average pewsitter not recollecting things in the past, and relying on Cardinal Schönborn's reputation as an alleged conservative and engaging in a little intellectual razzle-dazzle and special pleading.

So, in the case of Father Fessio, we have a defense which suggests that the Cardinal's remarks were taken out of context during an "off the record" interview when the Cardinal would have been off-guard. Surely, a seasoned Cardinal, despite his alleged openness to the press, he'd have to realize that such interviews have their dangers. His comments which smack of utilitarianism are, according to our jesuitical apologist, explained by an appeal to the Aristotelian, pursuit of happiness or eudaimonia. Even granting that is true, Fr. Fessio still attempts to explain away the Cardinal's comments on marriage (the Cardinal has said similar things before), or his remarks on homosexuality (again, he's said things before that were scandalous) and given an ear (and some legitimacy) to the Austrian Call to Action, hosted a depraved homosexual art show in his Cathedral, blessed a homo-sexual love-in and even permitted a funeral Mass for the same homosexual artist given by the DUI Rector of his Cathedral, while some of the homosexual's artwork still hangs in the St. Barbara Chapel, right here.

Then, the Father tries to explain away the Cardinal's attack as being a "criticism". Well, won't some people just stretch the truth to save their printing business?

Here's the original offending Tablett article, here.