Choose style:

Author Topic: Remnant Columnist banned from Fr. Z's "blog"  (Read 11939 times)

CatholicThurifer

  • Member
  • Posts: 716
  • Gender: Male
http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/blog/?p=243

This post on this blog is very revealing concerning this priest who purports to be tradition, but censors views which may be in favor of the SSPX and other related groups.

An excerpt:

However, when Scots Catholic Truth reader and often-times columnist, Martin Blackshaw suffered the same fate, censorship and blockage, I decided that the time has come to act. Decisively. Now, where do I begin?  Oh Yes.   Just WHO does he think he is, this Fr Z?  What’s this with ”my blog”?  Hasn’t he read the autobiography of a soul, the life of the Little Flower, St Therese, who prevented  herself from being proprietorial about anything, even her thoughts if a Sister in religion passed off an insight of the saint’s as her own?  Is he or is he not, in the business of education (I can see no other purpose for a Catholic priest to run a blog) because it is a key part of education to allow pupils to speak freely in order to, where necessary, correct errors.  If Fr Z really thinks Martin Blackshaw is in error, he should correct him with factual information not (as you will soon see for yourself) by ridiculing him and giving the daftest excuses for censoring his remarks (I mean, can you believe this one:  we’re not allowed to criticise Pope John Paul II because he ordained Father Z…  Hello, hello, Fr Z, please come back down to land safely on the Planet Earth). Goodness, I’ve heard better explanations from a man wearing a balaclava and carrying a gun in one hand an a bag of goodies in the other…       

SoCalLocal

  • Member
  • Posts: 994
Re: Remnant Columnist banned from Fr. Z's "blog"
« Reply #1 on: October 18, 2009, 01:37:pm »
Sounds like Sour Grapes to me. Or jealousy.

So what if he censors posts? Posts are censored here, too. He's under no obligation to provide space for dissenting views on his site. Let them start their own blog.

If you carry this irrational Scot's arguments to the logical end, we should allow anyone and everyone to challenge the priest during his homily - after all, it's to teach, is it not? "a key part of education to allow pupils to speak freely in order to, where necessary, correct errors.

Someone send Jack Chick, or those wackos from Westboro Baptist, to this guy's parish. I hope the pews are comfortable.   

CatholicThurifer

  • Member
  • Posts: 716
  • Gender: Male
Re: Remnant Columnist banned from Fr. Z's "blog"
« Reply #2 on: October 18, 2009, 01:40:pm »
You clearly don't get it. I agree that things should be censored, but not the Truth!! And that's what happens on that blog.

A homily/sermon is not the same thing as a blog.

Sounds like Sour Grapes to me. Or jealousy.

So what if he censors posts? Posts are censored here, too. He's under no obligation to provide space for dissenting views on his site. Let them start their own blog.

If you carry this irrational Scot's arguments to the logical end, we should allow anyone and everyone to challenge the priest during his homily - after all, it's to teach, is it not? "a key part of education to allow pupils to speak freely in order to, where necessary, correct errors.

Someone send Jack Chick, or those wackos from Westboro Baptist, to this guy's parish. I hope the pews are comfortable.   

SoCalLocal

  • Member
  • Posts: 994
Re: Remnant Columnist banned from Fr. Z's "blog"
« Reply #3 on: October 18, 2009, 02:00:pm »
You clearly don't get it. I agree that things should be censored, but not the Truth!! And that's what happens on that blog.

A homily/sermon is not the same thing as a blog.
Why don't you go get indignant about this blog, then? http://ncronline.org/blog/16

SCG

  • Gold Fish
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12,608
  • Downton Addict
Re: Remnant Columnist banned from Fr. Z's "blog"
« Reply #4 on: October 18, 2009, 02:07:pm »
I read the exchange on Fr. Z's site between he and Martin and I think Fr. Z explains himself quite well.

Quote from: Fr Z
I think you are. You have referred to the Novus Ordo as bearing “poisonous” fruits, for example. I guess I must be one of those poisonous fruits. I was first attracted to the Church through good reverent and traditional celebrations of the Novus Ordo. I was ordained by John Paul II in a Novus Ordo Mass and ordination. I say the Novus Ordo when am asked, I think both validly and reverently. Yet I apparently am producing poison when I do so. I once permanently banned someone from this blog for the suggestion that no priest offers the Novus Ordo reverently and that nothing good can come of it. I am very happy to do so again. Yes… I think you are agitating, to an extent. And while that would be fine on your blog, on mine I… well… I won’t have it. I don’t have this blog so that people can call these things poisonous and suggest that John Paul II violated the First Commandment. I am happy to have various views expressed and discussed, but with reason and reasonably.]

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2008/10/benedict-xvis-popular-new-traditionalism/


Gerard

  • Banned for disrespecting the Holy Father, snarkiness, and rad-traddy negativism
  • Member
  • Posts: 4,690
Re: Remnant Columnist banned from Fr. Z's "blog"
« Reply #5 on: October 18, 2009, 06:36:pm »
This is one of Fr. Z's comments on a Reuters story from October 14th about the SSPX doctrinal discussions with the Holy See. 

Quote
Fellay, who was readmitted into the Roman Catholic Church in January with three other bishops after two decades of excommunication, said the Church was in such a crisis that it would take more than one generation of “constant efforts in the right direction” and possibly as long as a century to overcome it.  [?!?]

He said he had no idea how long the SSPX’s doctrinal discussions with the Vatican would take.  “This will certainly also depend on what Rome expects. They could take quite a long time.”  [You get the sense that he is speaking to the "money".]

It's those kinds of low class, and likely malevolent comments that reinforce Fr. Z's lack of trustworthiness or his competence to make honest comments.   If Bishop Fellay can be "bought off" by the "ultra traditionalists" that he thinks are dripping with money,  why isn't Fr. Z bought off by unscrupulous Churchmen to be a consensus cracker for traditionalists?   All it would take is a nice cottage, a stocked refrigerator, a few good bottles  and a few nice bird feeders. 


Gerard

  • Banned for disrespecting the Holy Father, snarkiness, and rad-traddy negativism
  • Member
  • Posts: 4,690
Re: Remnant Columnist banned from Fr. Z's "blog"
« Reply #6 on: October 18, 2009, 07:04:pm »
You clearly don't get it. I agree that things should be censored, but not the Truth!! And that's what happens on that blog.

A homily/sermon is not the same thing as a blog.
Why don't you go get indignant about this blog, then? http://ncronline.org/blog/16

A wolf out in the open is less dangerous than a wolf in Sheep's clothing.   

CollegeCatholic

  • Banned for snarking meanness, disrespect toward the Holy Father, twisting what others say in order to mock them, etc.
  • Member
  • Posts: 8,991
  • Gender: Male
  • Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam
Re: Remnant Columnist banned from Fr. Z's "blog"
« Reply #7 on: October 18, 2009, 07:35:pm »
But he's a PRIEST! 

The saints have said to never criticize a priest!!!

Funny how fast some things go out the window when some disagree with others.


Also, when you're paying the bills, you can censor whatever you want. 

CatholicThurifer

  • Member
  • Posts: 716
  • Gender: Male
Re: Remnant Columnist banned from Fr. Z's "blog"
« Reply #8 on: October 18, 2009, 07:37:pm »
Never? Even when they're wrong???  :fish:

Unum Sint

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,740
  • Gender: Male
Re: Remnant Columnist banned from Fr. Z's "blog"
« Reply #9 on: October 18, 2009, 08:01:pm »
I agree with Fr. Zs response to the that post.