The GoreTex!
#11
(03-01-2014, 10:09 PM)Qoheleth Wrote: Now that was an interesting video by  Mr. Verrecchio.  I really appreciate M. Voris and his work, however i have noticed his total lack of commentary on the behavior of  Pope Francis, and i have been wondering why so silent   ??? on the seeming inconsistencies from our beloved Pontiff.  We need clarification on that issue Michael, so PLEASE may we have it??

I can explain it as it was told to me --- though please take it as a given that this is what I'm remembering, and I am obviously (very!) fallible. I hope I present their position accurately, and if I get something wrong, I beg pardon:  ChurchMilitant doesn't like to talk about Popes themselves because they see it as causing despair more than helping. In other words, they're concerned with the effects of what they say on the souls of Catholics and how much those Catholics trust in the Faith. People are easily confused and "scandalized" (and truly scandalized). They're prone to not understanding the levels of papal magisterium. To sum up, lots of folks just are not that bright.  So, the folks at ChurchMilitant, rightly or wrongly, believe that talking about Bishops, for ex., allows one to go "over their heads" and appeal to Archbishops, dicasteries, the Pope himself. But with the Pope, there's no one left to appeal to but God Himself, nothing we can do about it but endure.

I believe their motives are good -- whether they should or shouldn't talk about the Popes themselves. I don't see them acting out of fear or "wussiness" but out of a true concern for people's souls. (anyone who's followed Mr. Voris in his fight against nonsense can see that it's obvious he's no wuss!)



Reply
#12
To criticize the Pope at all would probably make Voris lose a lot of his supporters. Voris is someone whose primary "base" if you want to call it that is neo conservative Catholics, some of who are trad leaning but who are not ready to take that step of criticizing the Pope.  Louis Verecchio and Michael Voris are both Catholics, both passionate and both needed today in the Church but sadly that are at odds and butting heads. This "infighting" shows that even amongst trad leaning and trad Catholics there is a sharp divide. The more neoconservative leaning Catholic just cannot bring himself to question the Pope no matter what.
Reply
#13
(03-01-2014, 09:51 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: Again, I wouldn't say that Mr. Voris "has not so much regard tor the truth" even "at times."

Actually, apart from the apparent motive for it, the manifesto itself declares that he is: It states that the truth of papal shortcomings should be hidden.


Quote:But I do think that his going after Verecchio, et. al., is very uncool.  Like Austenbosten, I can totally understand Mr. Voris's decision to not want to talk about the Holy Father himself -- and I don't like disrespect shown toward the Holy Father anywhere, "disprespectful" criticism being totally different from respectful criticism or simply respectfully expressing confusion about or respectfully lamenting something he might do or say.

Voris' decision to refuse to criticize anything the holy father does is a preposterous position, actually.  Valid criticism of the pontiff goes back to St. Paul and is enshrined in sacred Scripture as a lesson for us - as many theologians, saints, and *popes* have pointed out.  Rebuke of superiors when they err publicly is ordained in canon law as well.

It goes without saying that disrespect for the purpose of the holy father or any other person is wrong.

People who think they are doing the Church, the faithful, or even the pontiff a favor by remaining silent in the face of clearly erroneous, un-Catholic statements and actions are sadly mistaken (but such is the nature of this crisis).  I like this quote from Bishop Melchior Cano, Theologian of the Council of Trent:

"Peter has no need for our lies or flattery.  Those who blindly and indiscriminately defend every decision of the supreme pontiff are the very ones who do the most to undermine the authority of the Holy See - they destroy instead of strengthening its foundations."

(I don't personally care for the phrase "I can understand..." as it really says nothing; it is entirely subjective.  What does it have to do with what's right and best what I can understand?  I can understand - to some extent - a number of bad things.  They are still bad.)


Quote:But to go after folks who do decide to "go there" -- assuming they're doing so with respect, with humility, while giving the Holy Father the benefit of the doubt whenever possible, while not impugning motives, etc.  -- me no likey.

Going after such folks is exactly what Mr. Voris has decided to do.


Quote:I like what Mr. Voris does, as far as he goes, and think his apostolate is a very needed one. I wish he hadn't done what he did with regard to the trads he went after. It's sad to me.

Frankly, I have thought for years that sometimes his criticism of bishops was *too* biting.  He often does not properly cite sources for what he asserts.  As it became increasingly obvious that every bishop save the Bishop of Rome was fair game for him, I began to lose interest in his work.  (If challenged I can't really offer specific support for this - it's just a general feeling that grew on me over time.)

I think the modern Catholic's sense of papalotry is entirely a *making* of this crisis.  Good Catholics in previous times understood perfectly well that pointing out un-Catholic behavior of *any* prelate is entirely fair-game.  It is more than "fair" - it is necessary for the good of the Church and her souls.

It is only because the post-conciliar popes have embraced novelty after novelty that criticism towards them became so frequent and so intense, and the reaction of the neo-Catholic is - papalotry.


Quote:I hope folks here don't "take sides" and decide to "shun" one group or the other, or to operate with the gang-banging mentality of "he's one of THEM" or "they're some of THOSE." There's room for Mr. Voris's work and Verecchio's work and and Matt's work and and and... There's room enough for all of us -- even if some of us don't think there is and might cut people off.

I'd say it's best for everyone to strive for perfection.
Reply
#14
(03-01-2014, 10:22 PM)formerbuddhist Wrote: To criticize the Pope at all would probably make Voris lose a lot of his supporters. Voris is someone whose primary "base" if you want to call it that is neo conservative Catholics, some of who are trad leaning but who are not ready to take that step of criticizing the Pope.  Louis Verecchio and Michael Voris are both Catholics, both passionate and both needed today in the Church but sadly that are at odds and butting heads. This "infighting" shows that even amongst trad leaning and trad Catholics there is a sharp divide. The more neoconservative leaning Catholic just cannot bring himself to question the Pope no matter what.

I don't see Mr. Voris as being the type to not doing something right out of fear of financial loss. I truly don't. His History has sort of "proved" that, or at least strongly indicated that, to me. And I really dislike trying to guess what's in his mind anyway. That sort of thing is something we can't know anything about other than what his external actions indicate -- and there, as I've said, I've seen nothing but guts. He's suffered a LOT for standing up for the Truth (as have I).

I really hate to see sincere, orthodox Catholics at each other's throats. I pray that Mr. Voris and his team re-think their statement about Messrs Verecchio, Matt, etc.-- maybe just say nothing about them altogether if.

BTW, Mr. Voris and his team are TLM all the way in terms of how they worship. I know that there's more than just the liturgy that goes into the making of a trad, but I'm just wanting to clear that up in case folks are wondering.... 

And as an aside:  as a "Catholic web person," I know that one does have to think about prudence in terms of the goals of a given apostolate. And in being prudent, there are tons of things to consider. Some folks hate that I have a sub-forum that allows discussion of sedevacantism (and I am NOT a "sede"), for ex. And I get grief. But then, I get grief if I don't allow such discussion.  Same with discussion of the SSPX (I've never set foot inside an SSPX chapel -- but know, too, that the Church has "okayed" attending their Masses as long as any "schismatic mentality" is avoided -- a concept some folks scoff at, but which I take seriously). Some folks are ticked that I allow pretty blunt talk about sex and homosexuality; others think it's great. To cut tot he chase:  there's no pleasing everyone, plain and simple. And if you have an internet apostolate and are constantly trying to please everyone, you'll stall. You simply have to make the calls and let the chips fall where they may..  Mr. Voris and his team have to do the same thing. I only wish they wouldn't have felt it proper to "take down" Messrs Verecchio and Matt and Ferrara, etc., in the process. Maybe they will change their minds.

--- and in the meanwhile, I pray that the folks here will support all -- or at least not shun or speak ill -- of these apostolates, "leaving the gun, and taking the cannoli" in the process.Take the good, leave the bad. Don't mix up personalities with the apostolates themselves. Truth is Truth is Truth, and there's much to be learned by listening to what all these men have to say. And there's much to be said for not "shunning" people, thereby engaging in "virtual trad gang warfare."


Reply
#15
By supporters I didn't mean simply financial, I meant supporters in general. Michael Voris would probably lose the ear of a lot of conservative Catholics who just simply cannot imagine that criticism of a Pope is ever valid should he say condemn or question one of the many things Francis has said or done that others like Louis Verecchio have no problem doing. I have no doubt Mike Voris is a zealous, serious and thick skinned TLM going Catholic, only that he realizes that in his particular apostolate criticism of the Pope would probably turn away a lot of his core audience or those that he is trying to reach.
Reply
#16
(03-01-2014, 11:35 PM)formerbuddhist Wrote: By supporters I didn't mean simply financial, I meant supporters in general. Michael Voris would probably lose the ear of a lot of conservative Catholics who just simply cannot imagine that criticism of a Pope is ever valid should he say condemn or question one of the many things Francis has said or done that others like Louis Verecchio have no problem doing. I have no doubt Mike Voris is a zealous, serious and thick skinned TLM going Catholic, only that he realizes that in his particular apostolate criticism of the Pope would probably turn away a lot of his core audience or those that he is trying to reach.

It's smart of you to mention the pocketbook: though we can't know actual motivations, we know it must be a factor, just as it is with Catholic Answers and other "mainstream" apologists.

This is why I have so much respect for men like John Salza and Louie Verrecchio who gave up respectability and the dollars that go with it to embrace Tradition.
Reply
#17
(03-01-2014, 11:10 PM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote:
(03-01-2014, 09:51 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: Again, I wouldn't say that Mr. Voris "has not so much regard tor the truth" even "at times."

Actually, apart from the apparent motive for it, the manifesto itself declares that he is: It states that the truth of papal shortcomings should be hidden.

And, like I said, I disagree with that. No, on second thought, to be more clear, I don't find his own unwillingness to "go there" a necessarily bad thing at all, but I do disagree with his going after other people who do talk about papal shortcomings (again, assuming they're going about it with respect, humility, prudence, etc.). I can understand (um, by which, I see good reason, see the sense of) his not wanting to do that himself. Different apostolates have different purposes, and he seems to have discerned that the goal of his particular apostolate is to talk about the goings-on in the Church without risking undermining the faith of Catholics who might not be well-educated, who are prone to confusion, who don't understand the levels of the papal magisterium, etc. And to me, that's just fine. But what's not fine is his going after Messrs Matt, Verecchio, etc.


(03-01-2014, 11:10 PM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote:
Quote:But I do think that his going after Verecchio, et. al., is very uncool.  Like Austenbosten, I can totally understand Mr. Voris's decision to not want to talk about the Holy Father himself -- and I don't like disrespect shown toward the Holy Father anywhere, "disprespectful" criticism being totally different from respectful criticism or simply respectfully expressing confusion about or respectfully lamenting something he might do or say.

Voris' decision to refuse to criticize anything the holy father does is a preposterous position, actually.  Valid criticism of the pontiff goes back to St. Paul and is enshrined in sacred Scripture as a lesson for us - as many theologians, saints, and *popes* have pointed out.  Rebuke of superiors when they err publicly is ordained in canon law as well.

I don't think his decision is "preposterous," and the fact that it is, in fact, OK and has been done since the Gospels and epistles have been around, doesn't mean that that is Mr. Voris's particular calling -- especially if his true concern is (as I believe) for the souls of folks who are, um, intellectually limited, shall we say, and who leap from A to Z with faulty logic in between.

(03-01-2014, 11:10 PM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote: It goes without saying that disrespect for the purpose of the holy father or any other person is wrong.

Amen to that -- but it is pretty rampant in SOME trad circles. It makes sense for a sedevacantist to not have respect for (a proclaimed) Pope's office, but I've seen some serious disrespect, out and out venom, from non-sedes, and that sort of thing needs to be stopped.

(03-01-2014, 11:10 PM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote: People who think they are doing the Church, the faithful, or even the pontiff a favor by remaining silent in the face of clearly erroneous, un-Catholic statements and actions are sadly mistaken (but such is the nature of this crisis).  I like this quote from Bishop Melchior Cano, Theologian of the Council of Trent:

"Peter has no need for our lies or flattery.  Those who blindly and indiscriminately defend every decision of the supreme pontiff are the very ones who do the most to undermine the authority of the Holy See - they destroy instead of strengthening its foundations."

I agree with the quote.

(03-01-2014, 11:10 PM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote: (I don't personally care for the phrase "I can understand..." as it really says nothing; it is entirely subjective.  What does it have to do with what's right and best what I can understand?  I can understand - to some extent - a number of bad things.  They are still bad.)

See above for how I use the phrase. But I see your point insofar as "understanding" in se doesn't make something right.

(03-01-2014, 11:10 PM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote:
Quote:But to go after folks who do decide to "go there" -- assuming they're doing so with respect, with humility, while giving the Holy Father the benefit of the doubt whenever possible, while not impugning motives, etc.  -- me no likey.

Going after such folks is exactly what Mr. Voris has decided to do.

It seems so, alas. And I dislike it.


(03-01-2014, 11:10 PM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote:
Quote:I like what Mr. Voris does, as far as he goes, and think his apostolate is a very needed one. I wish he hadn't done what he did with regard to the trads he went after. It's sad to me.

Frankly, I have thought for years that sometimes his criticism of bishops was *too* biting.  He often does not properly cite sources for what he asserts.  As it became increasingly obvious that every bishop save the Bishop of Rome was fair game for him, I began to lose interest in his work.  (If challenged I can't really offer specific support for this - it's just a general feeling that grew on me over time.)

I think the modern Catholic's sense of papalotry is entirely a *making* of this crisis.  Good Catholics in previous times understood perfectly well that pointing out un-Catholic behavior of *any* prelate is entirely fair-game.  It is more than "fair" - it is necessary for the good of the Church and her souls.

It is only because the post-conciliar popes have embraced novelty after novelty that criticism towards them became so frequent and so intense, and the reaction of the neo-Catholic is - papalotry.

I think papolatry has played a big role in all this for sure, and I do think that Mr. Voris's unwillingness to go there could help that sort of thinking along. On the other hand, though, I do think it's reasonable to think that "going there" can easily undermine the faith of the type of Catholic I've described above -- which means most Catholics. I disagree with that conclusion, but don't find it irrational or a sign of wussiness.


(03-01-2014, 11:10 PM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote:
Quote:I hope folks here don't "take sides" and decide to "shun" one group or the other, or to operate with the gang-banging mentality of "he's one of THEM" or "they're some of THOSE." There's room for Mr. Voris's work and Verecchio's work and and Matt's work and and and... There's room enough for all of us -- even if some of us don't think there is and might cut people off.

I'd say it's best for everyone to strive for perfection.

Well, that goes without saying. But our striving for perfection is between ourselves, our priests, our family/close friends, and God Himself. And it's the same with Mr. Voris, and Mr. Verecchio, and Mr. Matt, and Mr. Ferrara, and everyone else on earth. IOW, our striving for perfection doesn't (necessarily) mean we should shun people who don't do things the way we ourselves would do them.

Reply
#18
(03-01-2014, 11:35 PM)formerbuddhist Wrote: By supporters I didn't mean simply financial, I meant supporters in general. Michael Voris would probably lose the ear of a lot of conservative Catholics who just simply cannot imagine that criticism of a Pope is ever valid should he say condemn or question one of the many things Francis has said or done that others like Louis Verecchio have no problem doing. I have no doubt Mike Voris is a zealous, serious and thick skinned TLM going Catholic, only that he realizes that in his particular apostolate criticism of the Pope would probably turn away a lot of his core audience or those that he is trying to reach.

Let's say, arguendo (!!!), that that is at least one of his concerns -- losing a conservative base. There's nothing wrong with having that concern -- and his NOT losing that base can only help awaken people to the fact that there is a serious, SEVERE crisis in the human element of the Church. Their having their eyes opened to that is a good thing -- and would likely lead to their looking around and coming across places like FishEaters where they can read about the different levels of the papal magisterium, etc. Think of St. Paul's having said to the Corinthians, "I gave you milk to drink, not meat; for you were not able as yet." Or to the Hebrews: "For whereas for the time you ought to be masters, you have need to be taught again what are the first elements of the words of God: and you are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that is a partaker of milk, is unskillful in the word of justice: for he is a little child.  But strong meat is for the perfect; for them who by custom have their senses exercised to the discerning of good and evil."

I support the ChurchMIlitant apostolate and think it does a LOT of good in getting folks to open their eyes -- so they can move on from milk to meat down the road.  But again, I think it totally sucks that Mr. Voris went after Verecchio, Matt, etc. I hope he repents of that. If, for some reason he thinks he can't in good conscience outright support them, he should simply say nothing given that (as far as I know anyway) their criticism is respectful and "in-bounds."
Reply
#19
To all Catholics from the NO-Conservatives to the staunch-Trads

To throw out the Rodney King tagline....can't we all just get along? :shrug:
Reply
#20
(03-02-2014, 12:40 AM)austenbosten Wrote: To all Catholics from the NO-Conservatives to the staunch-Trads

To throw out the Rodney King tagline....can't we all just get along? :shrug:

Haha... Well, I, for one, wish we could get along at least insofar as we refrain from name-calling, gossip, hyperbole when describing folks who disagree with us, impugning motives --- you know, I just wish we could be basically charitable.  I think our being charitable (which is our MAIN purpose for being on earth!) can only attract folks to Tradition, a la the old bit about attracting flies with sugar or vinegar, etc.  I don't think trads should water down the Faith one BIT to make it more palatable to the ignorant -- but there are ways of going about teaching the Truth without being, well, assholes about it LOL Considering people's feelings (yes, I said the F word!), where they're coming from, how they understand language -- it all boils down to prudence, really. (ah, prudence, the forgotten virtue...)
 
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)