Is Church Militant Schismatic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 1Tim4-12
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Church Militant itself is owned by a for-profit company.
 
Last edited:
whatistrue said:
40.png
CatholicSooner:
Thanks. I guess I don’t see how that applies to the jews of today.
Click to expand...
Well let me help since I don’t understand how you could have read the sections and not get that:

839 "Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways."325
The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People,326 "the first to hear the Word of God."327 The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God’s revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews “belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ”,328 "for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable."329

840 And when one considers the future, God’s People of the Old Covenant and the new People of God tend towards similar goals: expectation of the coming (or the return) of the Messiah. But one awaits the return of the Messiah who died and rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and Son of God; the other awaits the coming of a Messiah, whose features remain hidden till the end of time; and the latter waiting is accompanied by the drama of not knowing or of misunderstanding Christ Jesus.

(emphasis mine)
Click to expand...
While I get your point, I don’t read those passages are relating to jews of today but judaism in general
 
I gave you the citation – St. John Paul II’s speech at the Great Wall, April 14, 1986.
 
www.catholicnewsagency.com

The devil is in the details for the militant Michael Voris

“Church Militant” – a producer of online videos – has people scratching their heads this month. Again. The self-proclaimed defender of Catholic Orthodoxy has – in the space of a few days – attacked a seminary for promoting modesty, and married couples for using NFP. For the well-informed...
www.catholicnewsagency.com www.catholicnewsagency.com
 
EWTN is not noted for doing ‘slur’ pieces. Unlike the subject of the article.
 
As usual, its Plato v. Aristotle in here.

Pro Church Militant: “what were they wrong about? quote something. Make the argument. Schism requires certain factual criteria”
(each person can rationally assess whether they are or not = Aristotlean)

Anti-Church Militant: “Bishops said so” (appeal to authority = Platonist)
 
They fought against pagans who were forcing them to commit mortal sins. There is no comparison. I would hope that Mr. Voris has no such delusion of grandeur.
 
Did you read it? They checked the State of Michigan non-profit registrations.
 
They are not schematic. They might not be healthy for your spiritual life, but they are not schematic.

Calling Church Militant schimatic is as equally troubling as Church Militant’s jaded tone.
 
Yes. That’s how it works —they do the research. They report on the research. The source would be the State of Michigan.
 
Last edited:
They were ordered to drop the “Catholic” part of their name by at least two bishops of their diocese. They have ignored the bishops’ orders.
 
Would you show me this in the CCC or other official Doctrinal Document?

I know, force can be many things, any of which will. Coerced acts are not mortally sinful.

Could you point me to the people who asked the Bishop to baptized them and were refused?
 
They did cite it: “A quick search of the Michigan Secretary of State’s website”

This wasn’t a white paper – they are not on for providing references as if it’s a scholarly treatise. They did the research, they stated where they did it. That is actually all they are on for in this kind of article.
 
I follow Church Militant, and have done for years. I am not a believer and have a fairly neutral response to their reporting. What I observe is:
  • They have a very strong intent in sex and money abuse allegations in the Church. Money and sex reporting are typically used in media to build ratings because they have a wide attraction for people. Similarly, they report disproportionately on Catholic ‘celebrities’: such reporting is another hallmark of tabloid, ratings chasing reporting.
  • Micheal Voris is a skilled writer and broadcaster. However as his empire has grown and prospered his professional mark is on less and less of the output. Standards of writing and thought are declining.
  • Within its reporting on sex and money there is a strong editorial effort to conflate child abuse with homosexuality. This technique is essentially propaganda rather than anything to do with mainstream journalism. The coining of new words such as ‘homosexuals’ is a part of this.
  • In recent years Church Militant has been at pains not to offend, but attract, Trump supporters and the right wing US audience in general. This is reflected in the framing of its targets as ‘left’, based on a conflation of all it dislikes and avoiding criticism of right wing politicians.
  • While aligning strongly with traditionalists with the Church it has marked out its territory by (occasionally) attacking the SSPX although without the venom with which it attacks some in full communion with the Church. I believe this is recognition of the very small and fragmented audience to be gained on the extreme traditionalist wing.
  • There are signs that Church Militant is growing financially but it seems to have no very large backers. It is sustaining slow growth but clearly lacks resources to pay enough people enough money for long enough to professionalise its whole operation. Mr Voris’ undoubted skills are devoted to making a little go a long way. I have no doubt they pray every day that supporters will, when they die, leave them cash to grow further. Such bequests are the lifeblood of donation-dependent organisations. As it is, Mr Voris has successfully built a small income stream by monetising his site with paywalls. Behind them, however, is more of the same and without more and more skilled staff this part of the business will grow only slowly.
  • On his risk register, which I don’t doubt as a professional Mr Voris has, his own health will loom large. Church Militant is a solo act. None of those he has been able to recruit match Mr Voris in professional skill.
  • Church Militant is in part driven it seems to me should re-read the sections of the catechism about detection and calumny. Many of its allegations are based on hearsay, rumour, and prejudice.
  • Conspiracy theories are becoming more common on the site.
  • The image of the Church communicated by Church Militant is one of a dissolute, corrupt, lying, cheating, communist-infiltrated, headed-for-destruction yet divinely protected organisation. It’s a very hard sell to non-Catholics.
That’s enough time on Church Militant for a while!
 
Because they were ordered to not advertise themselves as a Catholic Publication, which they no longer say they are.

This is in their mission statement NCR is a religious news source."

They’re a news source, not a publication put out by the Catholic Church
 
Last edited:
From what I’ve found, they were ordered not to advertise themselves as a “Catholic Publication.” The title had nothing to do with it. They’re a news source
 
JimR-OCDS said:
From what I’ve found, they were ordered not to advertise themselves as a “Catholic Publication.” The title had nothing to do with it. They’re a news source
Click to expand...
Yes. That requires them to change their name, which they are not willing to do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top