E. Michael Jones and Michael Voris
#1

Has anyone read E. Michael Jones's e-book (more a long article) "The Man Behind the Curtain: Michael Voris and the Homosexual Vortex "? If so, what do you think? Do you see it as unwarranted character assassination, a book that lays out some points worthy of consideration, a bit of both, or --- ?

There's a Youtube video of Jones talking about all this, but I haven't listened to it yet. Here it is (I'll listen to it as soon as I can):


Obviously, I haven't read or listened to Jones enough to have any decent opinion on Jones's book, but this concerns me, as do some of the allegations (especially the allegation that Voris lied, that he wasn't being threatened to be outed by the New York Archdiocese, but that it was homosexuals with whom he'd had, um, dealings in the past that were making threats. Of course, it could be that both were making threats, as far as that goes, and that Voris just mentioned the former. I dunno, and I try to assume the best when it comes to stuff like this.)

But everyone has a "past." Everyone's a sinner. I was a major wild child when I was a teenager, and I'd hate for people to pick through my past sins to try to "get something" on me, and I don't like the idea of "the Catholic world" being one in which everyone is looking to "get stuff" on others, in which people are expected to go beyond Confession and penance, and flagellate themselves publicly (metaphorically speaking) or, worse, are expected to be flagellated by others and think it's OK -- or, much worse, in which others think it's OK to engage in such behavior against someone.

Jones is right about how healing from homosexuality takes time, that grace perfects nature and doesn't change it or just cover it up -- i.e., that we don't have a Protestant view of sin, forgiveness, and healing in which we drop to our knees, say the Jesus prayer -- or go to Confession, in this case -- and that we're not just forgiven, but psychologically and emotionally healed and healthy, have overcome our neuroses, addictions, sinful proclivities, etc.  But I also don't buy the idea that people with "issues" of some sort can't be of use to the Church in terms of evangelizing.

To my mind, the proof is in the pudding, a person's work stands on its own. Either CMTV does good generally, or it doesn't. Of course, along the way, any "apostolate" should be fairly critiqued when necessary, and any errors should be called out and corrected, of course. Of course, too, there's the danger of those "cults of personality" that develop around certain "public Catholics," but that isn't necessarily the fault of that person. If it feeds a person's narcissism, then that's a spiritual issue for that person, and someone who'd fall into a "cult of personality" likely has spiritual issues to deal with as well. But isn't that separate from the public person's work in itself? And isn't what Jones is doing here feeding into that sort of "cult of personality" mindset by implying that a person's personal life, even his past, is fair game for hauling before the court of public opinion and that those things impugn his work (or the converse)? If G.K. Chesterton had killed a man, would it make his work any less worthy? If Belloc had had homosexual sex at some point in his life, would it make "The Servile State" any less valuable? (It seems that a lot of trads do think in this way. Witness how many reacted to "Lauragate" around here, when a, well, let's face it, mentally unstable liar told tall tales to this forum, my ex-civil "husband" believed her, people eventually caught on to her lies, he wasn't convinced yet and, so, defended her (and dealt badly with it in terms of being too harsh on those calling "Laura" out, IMO), and even now, today, years later, not only is he still harangued for it in spite of having had good motives, with people coming up with reallllly strange conspiracy theories about it all, but I am as well -- and I wasn't even around much at the time. And because of that incident, ergo, "FishEaters=crazy" to some people. The years' worth of work on the main site amount to nothing because a weirdo came to the forum and lied to us all and the moderator at the time wrongly believed her and defended her. That is an aspect, ultimately, of a sort of "cult of personality.").

Anyway, it seems that Jones is saying that Voris hasn't healed enough from his homosexual past to do what he does. But what other sorts of psychological disorders should disallow a person's engaging in apologetics and evangelizing that don't involve spiritual counseling, acting as a spiritual father or mother, etc.? Is it homosexuality only? What about depression? Bipolar disorder? Smoking too much?

He talks about Voris as a narcissist. OK, let's say, arguendo, that that's true. What of it? That's a personal problem that could only become a public problem for those in his immediate life or if his narcissism were to taint his work in a way that makes it less worthy. Does that seem to be the case here? Me, I simply don't know. I don't watch that much CMTV.

I dunno, guys... I've always appreciated Jones's writings, but am not sure what to make of this bit.
Reply
#2
At this stage, I don't think it's anyone's business what happened in Michael Voris' personal life. He repented, went to Confession, is a consecrated lay celibate, and came clean in a video which required tremendous bravery to post. Anything else is just speculation, hearsay, etc.. I say let God do the work of cleaning Michael's soul of anything that is still needing purification and let us work on opening ourselves to that same act of grace.
Reply
#3
Although he made some good points, E. Michael Jones lost me when he said Mother Angelica was a narcissist.  Maybe she was, maybe she wasn't- I'm not sure how that was a constructive thing to say.  Mother Angelica was not perfect.  She tried to do the best she could with what she had in order to love Jesus as best she could, to save her soul, and to help others save their souls.  In doing this, she helped a lot of people.  This reminds me a lot of Fr. Paul Nicholson's behavior after he distanced himself from Michael Voris.

The hierarchy needed a good talking-to for the way they were twisting the Faith into something that wasn't Catholic.  That was not a decision she made rashly.  She spent a lot of time praying about it, and had spent the last few decades of religious life in prayer and preparation to hear and follow God's will.  Ideally, Mother Angelica's statement would have come from the pope, or at least a senior cardinal.  It didn't.  Why, I don't know- I don't think John Paul II liked it any more than Mother Angelica did, but for some reason Mother Angelica was the one who was able to say it.  I'm grateful for that message, even if it came from an unexpected source.  Before we had the internet and had access to independent sources, Mother Angelica showed us that the historic Catholic Faith is still alive in spite of the fact that many people wanted it gone.  She gave converts like me hope, because she reminded us that the Church we had learned to love is still alive.

I've done my share of sins too.  I wonder what Fr. Paul Nicholson, E. Michael Jones would think of me.
Reply
#4
(01-18-2017, 04:16 AM)Credidi Propter Wrote: Although he made some good points, E. Michael Jones lost me when he said Mother Angelica was a narcissist.
I only skimmed through the video. Why on earth does he think Mother Angelica was a narcissist?
Reply
#5
I don't really follow Jones, having skimmed some of his work in the past, or listened to a talk or two. Nor do I follow Michael Voris' work these days. I did, though, in the early days of his The One True Faith series. I'd long since fallen astray in a number of ways. And someone standing up boldly for the Faith was something I'd completely missed. This was before freepers like Dr. Brian Kopp and others had pointed me toward your work here, Vox. If Mr. Voris is as moderns say, a work-in-progress, a man still contending with those tendencies which drew him toward those sins of his past, I can understand that, and sympathize, as I am mindful of my own past days, awful though they were. I think there may be better topics of conversation for Dr. Jones than excoriating Mr. Voris, personally.
Reply
#6
Watched some of the video and read the book, the book was interesting. What happened before Michael Voris converted is irrelevant, he chose to disclose his past in a video which was his choice. Hopefully others found solace and were encouraged by his testimony.

The book itself raises some pretty intense accusations after the fact of CMTVs creation some things that have allegedly occurred in the last few years that were troubling as well as some strange things that allegedly occurred at CMTV.  Again, it is hard to say what the truth is without hearing both sides of the story. Some of the details involve Father Paul Nicholson who has, coincidentally or not, disappeared from the scene since the incidents described in the video and book have occurred. The story is truly bizarre and I could not say if it is character assassination without hearing both sides of the story.

CMTV has done some amazing work, The One True Faith was, and still is, and incredible resource for the Catholic Church. Like anything watch CMTV's videos and decide what to do based on whether the content is orthodox or not. As far as the behind the scenes stuff, who knows. God uses imperfect people to do His work all the time. We can condemn others once we have perfected ourselves.
Reply
#7
(01-18-2017, 05:01 AM)In His Love Wrote:
(01-18-2017, 04:16 AM)Credidi Propter Wrote: Although he made some good points, E. Michael Jones lost me when he said Mother Angelica was a narcissist.
I only skimmed through the video. Why on earth does he think Mother Angelica was a narcissist?

I have no idea where he got that.  Something about spending too much time in front of a camera, and how she shouldn't have gone off on the hierarchy like she did.  The whole talk just didn't make a lot of sense to me.
Reply
#8
(01-18-2017, 07:26 AM)Credidi Propter Wrote:
(01-18-2017, 05:01 AM)In His Love Wrote:
(01-18-2017, 04:16 AM)Credidi Propter Wrote: Although he made some good points, E. Michael Jones lost me when he said Mother Angelica was a narcissist.
I only skimmed through the video. Why on earth does he think Mother Angelica was a narcissist?

I have no idea where he got that.  Something about spending too much time in front of a camera, and how she shouldn't have gone off on the hierarchy like she did.  The whole talk just didn't make a lot of sense to me.
She spent time in front of a camera to tell people about her Spouse, and she went off on the hierarchy when she saw them doing things that would potentially lead people astray. That hardly makes Mother a narcissist. That doesn't make any sense to me, either.
Reply
#9
I didn't read the material, or watch the video.  I do watch the Daily Vortex, and until I see something that clashes with the Faith, I will continue.  Voris chooses appropriate topics and issues to address and does not hammer in some sick way on inappropriate issues.  I agree with Vox that a past is a past.  Think Mary Magdalene.  Would that we had all been perfect Saints and died at the age of 24 to float in to Heaven.  That is not the usual case.  I feel safer listening to Voris than a certain high ranking Church person.  These are confusing and difficult times.  We need all t he help we can get, and I think Voris shows good fruit and courage.  That in itself is enough to offend some people!  Why do some busy themselves with casting stones instead of helping with the situation?  Perhaps it would be interesting to know what the stone throwers have done in their lives; what kind of past do t hey have?  And mercy?  Let's talk about mercy.  By the way, do not listen to my post.  What do I know?  A background check on me would disappoint some.
Reply
#10
I don't really care that Voris was formerly homosexual or bisexual (it wasn't made clear in his video which it really was). It really has no bearing on my feeling for him or CM. I stopped watching CM well before that all came out, but I still go there occasionally when things are kind of slow in the Catholic news world since they tend to report on stuff that I don't find in some other places.  Either way, my opinion of CM changed when they started charging for all of their content except Vortex and started an unnecessary attack on the SSPX while never saying a peep about what has been the most controversial Pope in maybe the history of the church or at least since Trent (and that's saying a lot).
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)