Is it ok to listen to Dr Taylor Marshall?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Moniabay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Joe_5859 said:
but it doesn’t strike me the same way with popes, or even saints. I will often refer to saints by their first name without any titles
Click to expand...
Good point. I have noticed over the years that most people say “Padre Pio” and not “Saint Padre Pio”. Some times you will hear and nicely, not in any bad way, someone say “John Paul II” and not always hear “Pope John Paul II” or even “Saint Pope John Paul II”. Same with other popes also. In other words, it is not uncommon to say a pope’s name without the title Pope.
 
I wonder if future generations will have an easier time calling him “St. Pio”. 🙂 It’s the same for me with Mother Teresa. When I was familiar with them before they were canonized, it can be hard to get used to calling them something different.
 
In his newer book, he all but canonized Archbishop Lefebvre. The founder of Catholics United for the Faith, H. Lyman Stebbins, was a strong admirer of him in the early 1970s. He broke with him partly because the Archbishop referred to the then pope a few times as “Montini”.

Ok, just a little discourtesy, but points to some thing deeper.

The Trad websites, like the National Catholic Reporter and its imitators a few decades ago, compete with each other to be the most Edgy. Moderation, respect, objectivity win you no points at all in the Tough Guy Contest.
 
Last edited:
MagdalenaRita said:
40.png
commenter:
Trad websites, like the National Catholic Reporter and its imitators a few decades ago, compete with each other to be the most Edgy.
Click to expand...
I’m confused. Is National Catholic Reporter a Trad website?
Click to expand...
No, it isn’t. And I apologize for lapsing into terms such as “Trad”.

A better way to describe the situation:

In the late 1960s some media such as The National Catholic Reporter began what they called independent Catholic media. In defiance of principles set originally by Pope St Pius X in “Pascendi”, they refused any approval process by their bishop ordinary so they could be “objective”.

Other “Catholic” sites (on the Left) took the same route, all of them giving hugely disproportionate coverage to problems of Bishops authority, and choosing to omit other sources of evil besides the hierarchy.

In recent years other “Catholic” media, often associated with the Right, have followed a similar path. Theoretically the opposite of Call to Action, Catholics for Choice, etc, they actually follow a parallel path:
not affiliating with their bishop (defying St Pius X, who they otherwise applaud), blame hierarchy for almost all evil, etc.

They also imply they are Catholic, and their supporters call them Catholic.
 
Last edited:
If you look at the context (where Taylor calls the Pope simply as Francis) I would think it was deliberate disrespect
 
Although he says he prays for Pope his actions and relentless attacks of Pope tell us a different story
 
Well that is frustrating. I had a long post written out and the site froze and it was all lost.

I’m about done with DTM. The good he does is not worth the bad that comes with it. His attacks are uncharitable and divisive. He could be a driving force for the Church. I pray he realizes his errors and how he is leading people to sin.

Just about every post or tweet is meant to divide people now. He takes a lot of liberties in his criticisms. He takes words out of context. The one that did it for me was his attacks a couple days ago on PF and saying he doesn’t believe in the immaculate conception because Francis said Mary wasn’t born a saint and had to work at it. It was clear in context what PF was saying.

Anyways, my initial post was a lot better but I am just about done with him. I may listen to a few podcasts that are more catechesis and less divisive but I’m pretty turned off on him. It is all in how he presents. He could get the same point and info across without being so uncharitable and it would be fine. But he seems to be too arrogant and prideful to see this. He wants to be a martyr so bad that he creates these situations in his head
 
Taras_Bulba said:
You know what’s in his head?
Click to expand...
I do not.
Does TM know what is in PF’s head?

I do see the fruits of TM work though and it isn’t pretty. Instead of creating change, it is creating uncharitable dialogue and bitterness. I think he will evenutally see this. Atleast I pray he does.
 
Is “he wants to be a martyr so bad” part of the uncharitable dialog you mention?
 
Taras_Bulba said:
Is “he wants to be a martyr so bad” part of the uncharitable dialog you mention?
Click to expand...
That is my interpretation from listeningn to him.
In today’s society, it seems that people long for conflict and to feel oppressed. I’m not sure where this comes from. But I see this trait in Dr. Marshall. I see it in myself as well. But this faux martyrdom isn’t of God. Its a selfish pride
 
abinjoy said:
If you look at the context (where Taylor calls the Pope simply as Francis) I would think it was deliberate disrespect
Click to expand...
You could be right. Not sure what video you mean and where he said it and I do think some of his videos you can see the anger and frustration in TM over what is happening in the Church, which I have to say, it seems like every day you read something else so crazy it is hard not to get angry or frustrated, though I agree we should still always respect the Pope and the office of the Papacy even when we disagree with what the Pope is saying (we don’t have to agree with everything he says) and what is happening in the Church.
 
Last edited:
Sometimes I think Mr. Marshall does use titles to draw viewers, such as with this video. Watched it and it is actually very good. Both he and Mr. Sammons discuss what the Pope has said about evangelization and prostelytism and how the meaning of the words and efforts have changed throughout time. I think they are pretty respectful of the Pope despite their disagreeing with some of what he has said, so the title is a little misleading.

 
Last edited:
Trent Horn said it best when he said something like- apologetics used to be about defending against Fundamentalist Protestants then it moved into defending against the New Atheists. Today, apologetics work is now about defending Catholicism from the radical traditionalists (which I would include Taylor Marshall in that camp).

It’s hard to recommend listening to him because of his conspiratorial mindset which I know a lot of people subscribe to. However, I listen to him, but not because I agree with him and champion his cause. I listen to know what this group thinks so I can be better equipped to defend the Catholic faith- all of it- including the teachings of Vatican 2.
 
Last edited:
MarkRome said:
Trent Horn said it best when he said something like- apologetics used to be about defending against Fundamentalist Protestants then it moved into defending against the New Atheists. Today, apologetics work is now about defending Catholicism from the radical traditionalists (which I would include Taylor Marshall in that camp).
Click to expand...
Wow, he said that. I’ve actually been bothered by some things Trent Horn has said lately but that really bothers me. It is almost as if he is saying he feels more united to protestants and atheists, non-believers, than fellow Catholics.
 
Last edited:
MagdalenaRita said:
Wow, he said that. I’ve actually been bothered by some things Trent Horn has said lately but that really bothers me. It is almost as if he is saying he feels more united to protestants and atheists, non-believers, than fellow Catholics.
Click to expand...
I understood Mark to mean that Trent Horn said the first part about apologetics shifting from being geared towards Protestants to being geared towards New Atheists. I think it was Mark who was positing the second shift.

But I could be wrong.

Either way, I do kind of agree. I don’t think the point is that he feels “more united” to Protestants and atheists. It is rather a recognition that we now spend more time and energy addressing the audience of traditional Catholics and the issues they are raising. I know I feel like I spend a lot more time posting on such topics than I did even a few years ago.

A lot of it is about Pope Francis. “Traditionalists” were not speaking negatively about Pope Benedict, so there was no time being spent having conversations like the ones that are taking place on this very thread and many similar threads.
 
Using click bait /misleading titles is morally wrong and I would think it is a sin too
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top