Church Militant Attacks Archbishop Gregory

  • Thread starter Thread starter puer.dei
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
puer.dei said:
Sometimes a statement is so vile, that context doesn’t really matter.
Click to expand...
In this case, it is best not to make excuses for Voris. What he wrote was reprehensible and inexcusable.

Church Militant is completely useless. What good they could do is overshadowed by their immoral means. Slander, calumny, rash judgement, and now petty, racist name-calling have no place in any legitimate ministry. There are a paradigm of the Pharisees that Jesus called blind, needing to remove their own log before picking at beams.
 
Last edited:
I’m not defending the name calling, but I am struggling to find the racism in it?

‘African queen’. At best, you could say the word ‘queen’ was derogatory in the sense that it is suggesting he is gay, and I don’t know how gay people feel about being called queens but some may certainly find that to be a derogatory term for a gay person.

But calling him African is racist? Would it be racist to call him an African Archbishop too?
 
sloancaprice said:
Because African was used as an adjective for Queen, which was meant as an insult. So, then the implication was that his race is also a factor and part of the insult.
Click to expand...
Okay, perhaps you’re right.
sloancaprice said:
Now, why exactly is slander against the Archbishop okay on this CATHOLIC FORUM? Just because Michael Voris says it (and let’s face it; there’s something wrong with that fellow) doesn’t mean we should be giving it any weight whatever and it doesn’t belong here. It’s slander against a leader in the Church, along with Archbishop Vigano’s statements and yet they are allowed to be here. If I said what Michael Voris said about Archbishop Gregory, I would be in violation of the TOS. Letting others use Michael Voris’s crassness to insult the Archbishop by proxy should not be allowed here.
Click to expand...
I think this particular topic is allowed on the forum because nobody here is using a derogatory term for the archbishop. People are just discussing what a Catholic journalist (I know some probably don’t think he’s much of a journalist) said about the archbishop and in fact, from the replies I have seen, people on here are very much against it.
 
sloancaprice said:
Either that, or let those of us that agree with Pope Francis and Archbishop Gregory say what we really think of Michael Voris and Archbishop Vigano.
Click to expand...
People have been saying what they think of both for some time now.
 
sloancaprice said:
But Michael Voris is using a derogatory term and that is being discussed.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what the issue. Do you believe it is breaking the ‘do not incite animosity to anyone, particularly clergy’ rule or the one about not using crude language? If so, I don’t think anyone here is doing that.
 
mccarrick is not “long gone”. The fact that we think so only proves how Willing to forget we are. Lessons are not learned if we say it’s long gone. For many of us the abuse is current, and systemic (to borrow from the moment). If we chastise those who say racism is gone the same standard should be held for mccarrick and the Church. Can’t really argue with your main points, because I tend to agree, but that just rubbed me the wrong way. It does speak to how absolutely out of control the world is right now that such an earth shattering event is deemed ancient history. But it still rings relevant in today’s issues. Vigano, was instrumental in the mccarrick scandal, and he is saying things (true or not) right now. Much of this ties together.
 
I didn’t say the aftereffects of the abuse are gone.
However, McCarrick as a priest, church leader, or anything else but a doddering old man locked away somewhere is gone. That is a fact.
Archbishop Gregory didn’t call him up to consult with him about criticizing Trump, and isn’t in touch with him about how to run the diocese.
At some point the diocese has to move forward and we can’t be always bringing up McCarrick this and McCarrick that.
Whatever McCarrick did also doesn’t justify the Church Militant’s language regarding Archbishop Gregory.

Stepping off this thread now, have a nice day.
 
“ We love you very much” said Vigano, and gave Mc Carrick a prize…Yes, right in the middle of what he is denouncing.
And also asked our Pope to resign.
Selective memory.
I call that covering his own back, and running to hide …from nobody.Movie style.
 
Last edited:
Church Militant Attacks Archbishop Gregory
Click to expand...
They attacked the Church quite a lot, over the years. Maybe that’s why they call themselves “Church Militant”.
 
I know it is emotional. I really do see your side. But again, your choice of the term aftereffects. So often I hear, "that was in the 70s, that was in the early 2000s, those priests and bishops are gone and dead. But yet the horror still exists. We did not erradicate all abusers, all the cover ups and people who covered up are not all gone.

The prefix “after” is the troublesome part of your term to me.
But that is not really this thread’s subject. So we can move on.
 
Yeah, the problem with almost all whistle blowers is they were involved in the problem deep enough to have information.

See every mob movie ever.
 
sloancaprice said:
40.png
pnewton:
Its not. I do not think anyone has. M. Voris’ slander on his website is all, and there isn’t a lot of approval here.
Click to expand...
Then his slander shouldn’t be posted here.
Click to expand...
I can’t agree with that. That is like saying we should post where Jesus was accused of being in league with Beelzebub because it insults Jesus.
Mrchatsworth said:
mccarrick is not “long gone”. The fact that we think so only proves how Willing to forget we are.
Click to expand...
The word is “forgive” and yes, we are willing. Also, we do not hold the sins of one person over another based on race, creed, color, or gender. As the man left Washington 14 years ago, discussion as news really is not relevant. It is now history, not news, like the Bush administration. Bringing him up here is 100% irrelevant.

If you want yet another McCarrick thread, then please feel free to start one. Let us put this hijack behind us.
 
The higher up the spiritual hierarchy a person is, the higher the standard that person should follow. The Archbishop is almost as high up as you can go in the Church and his behavior has been therefore all the more disappointing.

Voris is a mere layman earning a living in sensational journalism. By that standard he is hardly disappointing at all.
 
sloancaprice said:
Then his slander shouldn’t be posted here.
Click to expand...
The way I see it, Mr. Voris already has influence over some here, and linking to the aforementioned article is a way to show those people that they made a mistake when they starting supporting him.

That being said, if I had been the one to start this thread (FWIW) I wouldn’t have prefaced it with “I don’t care how much you disagree with someone, this is going way too far” because that could possibly make some people think that Voris generally has good intentions, but merely got carried away in this instance.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top