Infiltration... Top selling catholic book on amazon

  • Thread starter Thread starter steph03
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Judging by his tweets he’s also a defender of Alex Jones.
Hmm do you have any quotes that he is a defender of Alex Jones? I have listened to Taylor Marshall for quite a while, was a member of the New St. Thomas Institute, and never heard him mention Alex Jones. He has a recent tweet about Alex Jones, that he retweeted from someone else. Could that be what you meant?
 
As I said, “judging by his tweets.”

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

This one is from early May when Jones was one of several booted off various forms of media:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Right. Ok. I see what you saw tweeted but I am not seeing where he says he supports Alex Jones or any other indication that he supports Alex Jones. He retweeted something against censorship that involved Alex Jones. Retweeting something about someone, even following someone on Twitter is not the same as being a defender or supporter of that person.

God bless.
 
Last edited:
I’m just starting to know and like him, so I don’t know every single position and point of view he defends, but these won’t make me change my opinions about him.
While I don’t stand 100% with him about women not working outside home, I don’t belive it will become a stumbling block, and about the last two comments… I’ll keep quiet, for I’m not ecumenical enough.
Judging by his tweets he’s also a defender of Alex Jones.
And?
I don’t understand why he should be chastised for supposedly supporting Alex Jones.
 
I’ve never heard him mention Alex Jones or whether he supports his views or not.

His views about Islam weren’t to suggest that every individual was evil but his views about the religion as a whole in regards to their teachings about non-believers he viewed as evil.
 
Jones is a conspiracy theory advocate who has claimed that the Sandy Hook shooting was faked – obviously doing untold damage in the process to the families who lost young children during that tragedy. Among his other claims: the government is creating gay people in an attempt to depopulate the planet, Obama is the devil (literally), Princess Diana was murdered to cover up the New World Order, 9/11 and the London bombings were inside jobs… It goes on and on. He’s known for wearing an actual tin foil hat in his programming. NO ONE of sound academic standing and worth can support Jones without losing all credibility.
 
I’ve never heard him mention Alex Jones or whether he supports his views or not.

His views about Islam weren’t to suggest that every individual was evil but his views about the religion as a whole in regards to their teachings about non-believers he viewed as evil.
He claims, as I said, that Islam is evil. This is not what the Church teaches.
 
Right. Ok. I see what you saw tweeted but I am not seeing where he says he supports Alex Jones or any other indication that he supports Alex Jones. He retweeted something against censorship that involved Alex Jones. Retweeting something about someone, even following someone on Twitter is not the same as being a defender or supporter of that person.

God bless.
He retweeted an article from infowars, which is Alex Jones’ web site. I don’t know how that doesn’t signify some level of defense. I truly hope I’m wrong – I like some of what Marshall produces, and I really enjoy his conversations with Timothy Gordon. But he seems predisposed to agree with conspiracy theories and that’s a red flag for me.
 
40.png
gracepoole:
He claims, as I said, that Islam is evil. This is not what the Church teaches.
Do you think Islam is evil or any of its teachings or doctrines?
I accept the Church’s teaching on Islam and Muslims. To do otherwise would make me a protestant.
 
I wonder how many who will read this book are familiar with all of Marshall’s views
My guess is that anyone from outside the conspiracy-theory-driven alt-right who starts reading the book with soon realize that it is just more conspiracy-theory-driven alt-right drivel and quit reading it after a few pages.

They are simply not in the target audience, which consists exclusively of conspiracy-theory-driven alt-right fanatics who already largely agree with the author’s views.
 
Last edited:
40.png
Crusader13:
40.png
gracepoole:
He claims, as I said, that Islam is evil. This is not what the Church teaches.
Do you think Islam is evil or any of its teachings or doctrines?
I accept the Church’s teaching on Islam and Muslims. To do otherwise would make me a protestant.
I see, well you didn’t answer the question which was do you, gracepeople, view any of the teachings or doctrines of Islam as evil?

I believe the Church, throughout her history, has condemned many of the practices and beliefs of Islam. Regardless of whatever, olive branch has been extended to them in modern times, for the hope of fostering ecumenical understanding.
 
Marshall has maintained that Islam must be destroyed. In toto. Does the Church teach this?

As for my own beliefs, it’s strange to consider my views as being separate from those of the Church. Would you ask whether I personally am for birth control even though I abide by and accept the Church’s teachings on the topic of ABC?
 
Last edited:
They are simply not in the target audience, which consists exclusively of conspiracy-theory-driven alt-right fanatics who already largely agree with the author’s views.
Alt right fanatics huh. :roll_eyes: As opposed to fair unbiased individuals such as yourself, with the ability to discern truth from fiction,
 
As for my own beliefs, it’s strange to consider my views as being separate from those of the Church. Would you ask whether I personally am for birth control even though I abide by and accept the Church’s teachings on the topic of ABC?
Well of course. That isn’t an unfair question to ask. Especially if two people are discussing the topic of abortion.

Merely accepting the authority of the Church on a topic, doesn’t mean one agrees with or finds those statements to be completely clear. The Church has consistently refuted and condemned heresy and misguided views that sought to undermine and draw people away from the Church and salvation. Yet, to call out error and falsehoods, wasn’t to imply that the individuals were themselves evil.

Is abortion evil, absolutely. Are the women who undergo an abortion evil, of course not. Are all Muslims evil, no. Are their certain teachings and beliefs that could be classified as evil, yes. Is it wrong to claim such? No.
 
My views should be the Church’s views.

And again, does the Church teach that Islam should be destroyed?
 
If you’re using destroyed, in the militaristic warfare sense, no of course not. Does the Church want every Muslim to convert and embrace the Catholic Church and Jesus Christ as necessary for salvation. Absolutely.

In an ideal setting, if every Muslim did convert and the Islamic religion ceases to exist, would that be bad? Or do you cling to the belief that God wills for Islam to exist as the non-privileged route to salvation?
 
Last edited:
It also offers egregiously ridiculous, liberal interpretations of certain documents like Vatican II and Amoris Laetitia (the CDF has already clarified concerns over AL)
I’m interested in this clarification in light of the dubia and other direct, unanswered requests for papal comment - do you mean Cardinal Müller’s comments or did the CDF issue something on this?
 
Last edited:
When I wrote this, I was probably thinking of Cardinal Muller’s clarifications back when he was prefect for the CDF.
I should clarify. It is not only the usual questions about divorced and remarried people receiving communion, but what I found egregious was the treatment of a phrase, “no one can be condemned forever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel” as meaning eternally, as though it were denying Hell. However, the immediate context makes it clear it is speaking of how the Church treats others on Earth. Here is a more full quote.

The Synod addressed various situations of weakness or imperfection. Here I would like to reiterate something I sought to make clear to the whole Church, lest we take the wrong path: “There are two ways of thinking which recur throughout the Church’s history: casting off and reinstating. The Church’s way, from the time of the Council of Jerusalem, has always always been the way of Jesus, the way of mercy and reinstatement…The way of the Church is not to condemn anyone for ever; it is to pour out the balm of God’s mercy on all those who ask for it with a sincere heart…For true charity is always unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous”. Consequently, there is a need “to avoid judgements which do not take into account the complexity of various situations” and “to be attentive, by necessity, to how people experience distress because of their condition”.
It is a matter of reaching out to everyone, of needing to help each person find his or her proper way of participating in the ecclesial community and thus to experience being touched by an “unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous” mercy. No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel! Here I am not speaking only of the divorced and remarried, but of everyone, in whatever situation they find themselves. Naturally, if someone flaunts an objective sin as if it were part of the Christian ideal, or wants to impose something other than what the Church teaches, he or she can in no way presume to teach or preach to others; this is a case of something which separates from the community (cf. Mt 18:17). Such a person needs to listen once more to the Gospel message and its call to conversion. Yet even for that person there can be some way of taking part in the life of community, whether in social service, prayer meetings or another way that his or her own initiative, together with the discernment of the parish priest, may suggest. As for the way of dealing with different “irregular” situations, the Synod Fathers reached a general consensus, which I support: “In considering a pastoral approach towards people who have contracted a civil marriage, who are divorced and remarried, or simply living together, the Church has the responsibility of helping them understand the divine pedagogy of grace in their lives and offering them assistance so they can reach the fullness of God’s plan for them”, something which is always possible by the power of the Holy Spirit.”
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top