The Exalted Middle
I read Whispers in the Loggia every now and then, about twice a week. There is a reason I can't read him more often. Even though I suspect he's more on my side of things on the political spectrum, I can't stand his self-righteous exalted middle stance (i.e, the conservatives say this, the liberals say that, but I say . . .). But it appears it's not only me. This was in his comment box today:
I doubt I am the only one getting rather sick of your pretended "even handedness" between the "cons" (i.e. orthodox Catholics) and radical liberals (i.e. heterodox), positinioning yourself (a moderate liberal) in medio ecclesia.
I have no problem at all with moderates. I have a problem with the notion that moderates are superior because they are free from the biases and passions that characterize each side. I once heard a reporter say that "the average between the truth and a lie is a lie." Moderation as an a priori principle regardless of the issue is useless. Everyone can claim to be moderate and everyone can be said to be one side or the other, it is simply perspective.
I'm a firm believer in conviction. Wherever your convictions place you is where you are. If it is in the middle then so be it. If on the left or right, or far left or far-right, so be it. This was what John Henry Newman discovered as an Anglican. Prior to his conversion to Catholicism, he held the Via Media principle, the middle way. This, until in reflecting on history, he realized that the moderate stance in the Arian heresy would have been Semi-Arianism, which was a heresy. You can multiply the examples.
Just a pet peeve, soap box thing. I just get tired of the conservatives saying their thing and the liberals saying their thing. I'm just glad that I'm above the partisanship and able to see both sides clearly unlike the liberals and conservatives.