Church Militant Action Arm

[commenter]

But is it a good idea? To have an external entity investigate the bishops?

Not external, but different.
Before 1960 the bishop of a diocese had more ability to hold his priests accountable. He himself was held accountable by officials at the Vatican, by the papal Nuncio, by his archbishop Metropolitan.

Since V2, there is far more collegiality. There’s a lot more lay leadership in the diocese. That’s not bad, but did not bring accountability. The clergy and religious regard the bishop more as “first among equals”. The Metropolitan is mostly just a ceremony function since 1960. The papal Nuncio and Vatican Curia have less power now, consultants.

Now there’s the Conference of Bishops, where every bishop is equal, and it is strongly influenced by lay staffers. They work there full time, bishops fly in for a couple weeks a year.

The media is howling for more committees! This continues the miserable path of the last 60 years. A better solution is to restore the 1960 chain of command.

 

[commenter]

Are the laity responsible for the sexual abuse in seminaries and the laundering of money that belongs to the diocese?

In my Diocese, a lay diocesan administrator went to prison for this. It was lay psychologists who treated offenders, and cleared them for return to ministry.
Re: seminaries, since 1960 most are largely run by laity and sisters, with a few priests. The lay committees have done a wonderful job here.
People imagine that folks from CM, 1p5, LSN will be sitting on the diocesan committees, watching over Cupich, etc. It’s more likely people from Call to Action, National Catholic Reporter, LCWR will be there, reviewing all decisions of Chaput, Gomez, and Paprocki, with a direct pipeline to the media. Thus is what the Left has been pushing for. They want the committees to rule here, and don’t think it will be only about sex abuse.

 

[angel12]

As I understand it, they are proposing that those that know something incriminating come forward so that Church Militant may report it to the authorities themselves.

There’s no point in putting another layer between witness & law enforcement.

 

[Cruciferi]

No. It’s unnecessary and would only further complicate investigations.

Voris has basically become the Catholic version of Alex Jones.

 

[CurtisHouse]

I like the idea. I’m going to give it time before I donate to it though. Getting former law enforcement officials and others to do some private investigating is a pretty good idea. I just hope and pray everything stay on the up and up with no law breaking of any kind. We desperately need to get these deviants out of our dioceses. I’m in Fresno and there is a lot going on here. Coming into the Church in 2020.

 

[bassmansteiny]

I do agree I get upset with the move away from traditional Catholic values, like the Priest that is in support of gay marriage and ect. I am an old school Conservative Catholic Traditionalist. However I am obedient to the Catholic Church when it comes to my faith. At times I disagree with the Holy Father (not on proclaimed Teaching), but he is still the Pope.

Not saying I believe whole heartedly that CM is doing this. I just get this feeling that they are. From the videos I’ve seen, very few of them say anything good, most of them are negative towards the Chuch. Belief would mean I whole heartedly believe and it would be almost impossible to change my mind. For example I believe in Jesus Christ, His Church, the Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land. With CM, this is a gut feeling I get, not a belief.
That being said, we must stand against the liberal values intrusion into our Church, not saying liberal in the political sense, liberal in values.

I am open to having my mind changed on CM, just not have seen anything that has done it yet.

 

[commenter]

That being said, we must stand against the liberal values intrusion into our Church, not saying liberal in the political sense, liberal in values.

Since CM is taking some of the same positions advocated by Call to Action and National Catholic Reporter, it can be argued that CM is liberal, in a way. I would put in the same category all these groups that identify as Catholic, but are not connected to the Church.

I suspect some where there’s a secretary with two phones on her desk. If one phone rings she answers “Church Militant, how may I direct your anger”?
If the other phone rings she answers National Catholic Reporter…"

The same staff will follow up, either way.

 

[Pitcairn17]

bassmansteiny:

That being said, we must stand against the liberal values intrusion into our Church, not saying liberal in the political sense, liberal in values.

Since CM is taking some of the same positions advocated by Call to Action and National Catholic Reporter, it can be argued that CM is liberal, in a way. I would put in the same category all these groups that identify as Catholic, but are not connected to the Church.

I suspect some where there’s a secretary with two phones on her desk. If one phone rings she answers “Church Militant, how may I direct your anger”?
If the other phone rings she answers National Catholic Reporter…"

The same staff will follow up, either way.

I can’t imagine two organizations further apart in their view of contemporary Church issues than CM and the National Catholic Reporter. Are you sure you don’t mean the N.C. “Register?”

 

[commenter]

commenter:

bassmansteiny:

That being said, we must stand against the liberal values intrusion into our Church, not saying liberal in the political sense, liberal in values.

Since CM is taking some of the same positions advocated by Call to Action and National Catholic Reporter, it can be argued that CM is liberal, in a way. I would put in the same category all these groups that identify as Catholic, but are not connected to the Church.

I suspect some where there’s a secretary with two phones on her desk. If one phone rings she answers “Church Militant, how may I direct your anger”?
If the other phone rings she answers National Catholic Reporter…"

The same staff will follow up, either way.

I can’t imagine two organizations further apart in their view of contemporary Church issues than CM and the National Catholic Reporter. Are you sure you don’t mean the N.C. “Register?”

No, the “good” NCR is in union with the Church. It may push the envelope at times, especially Edward Pentin, but it has approval of the local bishop.

The “bad” NCR has no approval, even boasts of its independence. It, and CTA, have pushed for years for laity and sisters control over seminaries and Dioceses. They did succeed at many seminaries and other institutions, and they would love to sit in review over Tobin, etc.

A steady reading of the “Catholic” Left leaves the same impression about the bishops, and hierarchy, as reading CM. They may different motives, but lead to the same place.

 

[po18guy]

Frankly, I choose not to waste what little time I have left exploring the actions of the relentlessly unhappy and love-starved. I watched a couple of his videos a few years back. Not saying they were sinful, but they mimicked sin in that watching them initially felt good, but then left me with an empty feeling. I see no love expressed in the man.

 

[commenter]

can’t imagine two organizations further apart in their view of contemporary Church

Actually the old Left to Right spectrum is less applicable nowadays, regards Christianity. We think of both Continuing Anglicans and fundamentalists as “conservative”, but fundamentalists are wildly different in their attitude towards hierarchy.
Forget Liberal/Conservative.

On one side, I would group fundamentalists, along with people from Bayside/Conyers, NETWORK, CTA, 1P5, the Bad NCR, and possibly CM. They all spread distrust of hierarchy (and not distrust of much else).

On the other side, I would put Eastern Orthodoxy, Continuing Anglicans, and mainstream Catholic ministries, with a relationship with their bishop. They don’t regard the hierarchy as perfect (laity sure aren’t perfect either) but they are in union with it.

 

[JoeShlabotnik]

Church militant. Spiritual gestapo? I am not a fan.

 

[Maxirad]

Do any CAF members know of an organization known as The Roman Catholic Faithful? A certain Stephen Brady serves as president of the organization. I can’t say it doesn’t bother me that the website for The Roman Catholic Faithful contains links to websites for organizations (including Church Militant) that Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong considers “radical Catholic reactionary.” Mr. Brady is interviewed by Michael Voris in this video.

 

[GordonP]

Do any CAF members know of an organization known as The Roman Catholic Faithful?

Stephen G. Brady is a minor figure in the Catholic alt-right. Rabidly homophobic and thinks the Church is “too modern”. Hates Cardinal Cupich for a whole laundry-list of reasons. Standard alt-Cath fare. Recently given a soapbox by Church Militant and other alt-Cath outlets.

Styles himself as the president of the Roman Catholic Faithful. Whether the group has any members besides himself cannot be determined. It has no significance outside of the alt-Cath scene.

In the old days, we used to call this type of organization “a man and a fax machine”. Perhaps update that to “a man and a laptop”.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

Is there a reason to mention him?

 

[EXdrinker]

I think you are using “alt-right” in a different way than most of the rest of the world. Most define this term as having a strong connection to white supremists. You may want to stop using it to identify groups that are not racist because most take it in that light.

 

[otjm]

Mr. Voris hopefully has a really, really good attorney available. Should someone report something to him, he runs a danger of finding himself in court defending a charge of either slander or libel, or both, and may have difficulty defending.

I have no idea what his relationship with his bishop amounts to, although I suspect it was his bishop who told him to quit indicating he was a Catholic site. And presumably with his reach nationwide, he might find himself dealing with a different bishop in a different location.

There is absolutely no need for CM to interject itself between a victim and any authorities be that civil, criminal, or ecclesiastical. Other than stirring the pot, which seems to be the focus of their programs, they accomplish little or nothing, with the possible exception of raising viewers’ blood pressure.

And actually, one might be better off going to the local district attorney than the police if one is the victim, as not all sexual abuse is criminal - but obfuscating it can be fodder for the DA’s office.

There also seem to be presumptions in this thread that a victim going to the diocesan office with a complaint is going to find them nearly hounded out of the Church. Given the number of dioceses which have been bankrupted by sexual abuse, I don’t think any bishop or those within the diocesan offices are going to mishandle a claim, let alone attempt to hound the victim. There may be poor managers within the clergy ranks, but most of them are not deaf, blind and stupid. In fact, I doubt any are. This has been going on for decades, with the cleanup starting in the late 1990’s. 2 decades have been more than enough for the consequences to be made widely known. And that without the assistance of Mr Voris.