B
Blenderx
Guest
I was referring not only to you, but to other people who have engaged in this behavior in this thread.
- Status
P
PRmerger
Guest
Present company excepted.
I understand that, and I don’t begrudge you your desire (or your right) to stand up for the man, your friend.
My feeling, though, is that any objection to him or his video is viewed as “bashing” him.
To wit:
Surely there must be room for someone to come to the forum and say, "I don’t like [fill in the blank] about Michael Voris or his videos or his apostolate…
without it being construed as “bashing”.
My own objections are as follows:
-he does not have the approval of his bishop in his apostolate. That’s a red flag for me.
-he was not permitted to speak, formally, at World Youth Day. That’s a red flag for me.
-he has never been a guest on our host apostolate, Catholic Answers Live, (as far as I know). That’s a red flag for me.
-none of his materials are available here on the Catholic Answers apostolate. That’s a red flag for me.
I am not impressed with the apologia provided for why these are not red flags.
When I voiced those views, which are, granted, negative towards him, I was accused of supporting Dignity. As if.
Is there not any room for someone to have a legitimate criticism of him without calling my own Catholicism into question?
That’s the problem with his apostolate, IMHO. His fan-base makes it seem as if support of him is the shibboleth of Catholicism. If you don’t like him, you’re not a true Catholic.
That’s the essence of why I am now more negative about MV than ever before.
Z
zab
Guest
I hadn’t planned on commenting further on this thread, but since I have been dragged into to this I want to respond. I did not enter that conversation until late in the thread. My first post was #168 Later when the acused denied the accusation, I commented that I was glad that the matter was clarified because I could not find the comment and it did not seem to me like something that the accused would say. But then, anyone can be antagonized to the point of saying things that they shouldn’t.
S
Sirach2
Guest
Well, now that my name is brought into this, there needs to be some clarification against the continual rash judgment of being a slanderer.
In Credo’s proselytizing defense of MV, she invited the readers to listen to MV’s conversion story. In that video, he admits he was “steeped in mortal sin.” He says, you know the story of St. Augustine? Well, fill in the blanks.
I did just that.
St. Augustine lived in Carthage, a hotbed of homosexuality that caused the demise of Rome when they conquered this city. It was a well known fact, like Sodom. He says on page 53 of his “Confessions” that “my soul and his soul were one soul in two bodies.” He grieved so much over his death that he was ready to commit suicide. That is not just a casual relationship between two male friends, IMO.
But what is so awful about “fessing up” as I encouraged him to do to help others?. St. Augustine did it in a book that has helped thousands (millions?) of people convert to a holy life. Who is to say, if they asked MV, whether he really WAS in a relationship of this sort prior to his conversion? Did they inquire? And if he was, so what? There was no hint that he is presently a “closet homosexual” whatsoever! Mary Magdalene is in the scriptures for zillions to see that she WAS a sinner. What does that prove if anyone would repeat it … that one is committing slander? Not at all. She became a saint, just as all of are invited to do - reform our lives and use our witness to help others.
Liza and Credo need to get a life and stop stalking every post that mentions his name. They really look foolish.
In Credo’s proselytizing defense of MV, she invited the readers to listen to MV’s conversion story. In that video, he admits he was “steeped in mortal sin.” He says, you know the story of St. Augustine? Well, fill in the blanks.
I did just that.
St. Augustine lived in Carthage, a hotbed of homosexuality that caused the demise of Rome when they conquered this city. It was a well known fact, like Sodom. He says on page 53 of his “Confessions” that “my soul and his soul were one soul in two bodies.” He grieved so much over his death that he was ready to commit suicide. That is not just a casual relationship between two male friends, IMO.
But what is so awful about “fessing up” as I encouraged him to do to help others?. St. Augustine did it in a book that has helped thousands (millions?) of people convert to a holy life. Who is to say, if they asked MV, whether he really WAS in a relationship of this sort prior to his conversion? Did they inquire? And if he was, so what? There was no hint that he is presently a “closet homosexual” whatsoever! Mary Magdalene is in the scriptures for zillions to see that she WAS a sinner. What does that prove if anyone would repeat it … that one is committing slander? Not at all. She became a saint, just as all of are invited to do - reform our lives and use our witness to help others.
Liza and Credo need to get a life and stop stalking every post that mentions his name. They really look foolish.
C
Credo111
Guest
The comment was #144, unless the moderators deleted it (which they really should have done immediately). Zab should have read it before assuming that it wasn’t said. And Sirach never clarified her comment; she just repeated her slander that Michael was possibly a closet homosexual. And she repeats it again in this thread.
Christine
C
Credo111
Guest
The name’s Christine.
And you repeat your vile accusations, to which there is not a HINT of truth.
St. Augustine was steeped in a life of sexual sin and he had a concubine–a FEMALE concubine, with whom he had a child. I have never heard this claim of yours that St. Augustine was a homosexual. That springs from your own fertile imagination–and you then connect dots to Michael that don’t exist.
There is not a shred of truth to your insinuations. Now that you know that, you can apologize, for this, and for every false claim you’ve ever made about Michael.
Christine
Z
zab
Guest
bait and wait. Why keep bringing it up and spreading it around and adding fuel to the fire?
H
Havard
Guest
My $0.02:
For people who don’t like Michael Voris’ publications: keep your criticism constructive and and limited to what’s relevant (i.e., don’t make it personal).
For people who feel they need to defend Michael Voris: don’t lump together personal attacks and constructive criticism. Take constructive criticism as it’s intended: constructively.
Oh yeah, and one last thing: In the words of Wyld Stallyns, be excellent to each other.
For people who don’t like Michael Voris’ publications: keep your criticism constructive and and limited to what’s relevant (i.e., don’t make it personal).
For people who feel they need to defend Michael Voris: don’t lump together personal attacks and constructive criticism. Take constructive criticism as it’s intended: constructively.
Oh yeah, and one last thing: In the words of Wyld Stallyns, be excellent to each other.
T
TrueLight
Guest
Why are these red flags?
The man is direct and is critical of Catholic clergy and organizations who are not upholding Catholic teaching. Is it any wonder he is not loved? Now you may not think it is prudent of him to name names, but is he telling the truth?
Why would a Bishop give approval to a lay person who is putting clergy “on blast”, even if he wanted to? Might not a Bishop get pressure from other Bishops to not approve the apostolate of a whistle blower? Any Bishop who approved Michael’s Apostolate would need to be a traditionalist who is willing to allow the truth to be preached at any cost.
Again, the question is not about whether one likes Michael Voris. Is he telling the truth?
If he is telling the truth, but you feel he should be more prudent or more charitable, then pray for him.
T
TrueLight
Guest
We cannot by any means infer that. Augustine would have confessed that sin too and he didn’t.
If we look at past history, male friendships were a lot more expressive than they are now. Men were not afraid to share their love for each other. One didn’t need to act all macho.
I’m really surprised that you would say something like that.
H
Havard
Guest
In response to the person who brought up Fr. Barron:
I cannot say enough good things about Fr. Barron. In my experience he has only been straightforward (no agenda, no theatrics) and 100% orthodox.
I cannot say enough good things about Fr. Barron. In my experience he has only been straightforward (no agenda, no theatrics) and 100% orthodox.
S
Sirach2
Guest
Hello, TrueLight,
FYI, try googling, and you’ll see that I am not alone in this opinion of St. Augustine, especially since Carthage is well-known for that sin. In Sodom, Lot was the only one spared God’s condemnation of the city. I suppose as long as we expose respectable sins, like fornication, it’s okay. But if we dare suggest someone had a tendency toward this other depravity, it is considered slander.
Read Mt. 26:13.
"Amen I say to you, wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, that also which she hath done, shall be told for a memory of her "
Jesus was not afraid to commit to writing that this woman was a sinner. Not so any longer, for He loved her and told the whole world about her conversion and love.
Matt Talbot, a confirmed alcoholic, has helped millions overcome through his 12-step program. Why are we so afraid to use our failings to help others?
THAT is what I am saying. It matters not what anyone did in their past prior to their conversion, but I encourage MV and others to share their testimony to strengthen their brethren. It is not a shameful thing for any of us to have been sinners … none excepted… provided we change our lives through grace and metanoia. I will confess here that I, like St. Paul, am a sinner, redeemed by Jesus Christ, restored, forgiven, loved.
Glory be to God!
Ya know, there’s something sinister about people who live to attribute evil motives to others’ intentions. That, too, is a serious sin of rash judgment, just as despicable in God’s eyes as any other sin. Credo and Liza are champions of accusing the brethren.
FYI, try googling, and you’ll see that I am not alone in this opinion of St. Augustine, especially since Carthage is well-known for that sin. In Sodom, Lot was the only one spared God’s condemnation of the city. I suppose as long as we expose respectable sins, like fornication, it’s okay. But if we dare suggest someone had a tendency toward this other depravity, it is considered slander.
Read Mt. 26:13.
"Amen I say to you, wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, that also which she hath done, shall be told for a memory of her "
Jesus was not afraid to commit to writing that this woman was a sinner. Not so any longer, for He loved her and told the whole world about her conversion and love.
Matt Talbot, a confirmed alcoholic, has helped millions overcome through his 12-step program. Why are we so afraid to use our failings to help others?
THAT is what I am saying. It matters not what anyone did in their past prior to their conversion, but I encourage MV and others to share their testimony to strengthen their brethren. It is not a shameful thing for any of us to have been sinners … none excepted… provided we change our lives through grace and metanoia. I will confess here that I, like St. Paul, am a sinner, redeemed by Jesus Christ, restored, forgiven, loved.
Glory be to God!
Ya know, there’s something sinister about people who live to attribute evil motives to others’ intentions. That, too, is a serious sin of rash judgment, just as despicable in God’s eyes as any other sin. Credo and Liza are champions of accusing the brethren.
C
Credo111
Guest
It’s an honor to be calumniated alongside Michael. Thank you for this gift.
More links to his talks:
Torture Tour in Romania: youtube.com/watch?v=Fce1tyELVNk&feature=plcp
Romanian Catholic Martyrs: youtube.com/watch?v=EWp9plnwD9E&feature=plcp
Defending Galileo: youtube.com/watch?v=-xpVueJyjwc&feature=plcp
Disinvite Obama: youtube.com/watch?v=OWetzuhtf_Y&feature=plcp
I ask that everyone sign this petition requesting that Cdl. Dolan disinvite Obama from this Al Smith fundraising dinner:
ipetitions.com/petition/cdl_dolan_disinvite_obama/
P
PRmerger
Guest
PRmerger likes.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Well, with respect to Catholic Answers, I respect whomever they respect, essentially.
And the fact that they do not have any of his materials, nor have him on the speaker’s list, means, essentially, that they don’t advocate what he says.
So if they don’t like him, I wonder why. That’s a red flag to me. Because I respect the Catholic Answers apostolate implicitly.
Z
zab
Guest
Getting back to the topic of the thread, I would really think twice about posting Michael Voris videos. Fr. Robert Barron has been brought up several times and I agree. Check out his website:
wordonfire.org/
wordonfire.org/
R
Rhuarc
Guest
Sometimes you have to be blunt. I am the kind of person who doesn’t like sugar coated things when you can just say what you have to say.
S
Sirach2
Guest
I agree 100%, Zab.
There’s another priest that often inspires me. He is not on EWTN as one might expect, but is on two other religious channels that are usually hosting nonCatholic preachers. Fr. Cedric Pisegna is a Passionist priest, and his show is “Live with Passion.” I look forward to it at 9 PM on Saturday evenings and again on Sunday, not sure of the time.
There’s another priest that often inspires me. He is not on EWTN as one might expect, but is on two other religious channels that are usually hosting nonCatholic preachers. Fr. Cedric Pisegna is a Passionist priest, and his show is “Live with Passion.” I look forward to it at 9 PM on Saturday evenings and again on Sunday, not sure of the time.
H
Havard
Guest
I haven’t seen anyone ask for, nor recommend, a “sugar-coating” type of Catholic show here. Perhaps you’re not understanding the nature of the criticism. People aren’t even decrying bluntness, when it’s appropriate.
L
lizaanne
Guest
Well thank you, I appreciate that.Present company excepted.
Absolutely!! And I say all the time, Michael is not trying to be all things to all people. The Vortex is not everyone’s cup of tea, I totally get that, and I don’t have a problem in the world with someone saying that they are just not crazy about the style. BUT when someone uses style as a reason to reject content, then that is a problem.
Ok - I take them one at a time:
- Clarification: he does not NEED approval of his bishop in order to speak about the faith. Every Catholic is allowed to do this. What was not “approved” was the use of the name Catholic. That is now resolved, and to my knowledge, the AOD has said or done nothing further on the matter. So that’s been resolved and no longer an issue.
- That is not correct. The statement was ONLY that MV was not on their list of approved speakers. That does NOT mean that he was UN-approved. It simply states to those attending that he was not affiliated with the WYD events. Nothing more. And he was not alone. There were MANY of private events that occurred at WYD, but they did not make press releases about them. Not sure why that was the case, but it is what it is. But be careful to understand what actually happened. The apostolate NEVER ASKED to be part of WYD - they were just there, like all the other pilgrims, taking part in the festivities.
- This really cracks me up!!! Since when is Catholic Answers the litmus test of all things Catholic? Did it possibly occur to you that MV is just fine on his own without being affiliated with other apostolates? Catholic Answers, just like EWTN, does an outstanding job of doing what they do. They don’t need MV, nor does he need them. The world of Catholicism is plenty big to accommodate more than just voice. And as I said previously, not all things to all people — so let Catholic Answers be what they are to those who like that cup of tea, and EWTN to others, and MV to others.
I did not do that, nor do I think it was appropriate. It did not lend anything productive to the discussion. I’m sorry that happened.
Of course. But we need to get away from issues of style and presentation, and focus on content. Because the style/presentation is the “cup of tea” part - the content is the credibility part. And when a man’s credibility is questioned, then it’s really quite serious. But in no way should reflect on your personal faith.
I hope that I personally have never come across that way, because I don’t believe that is the case. I may question someone’s intent and motive - but I do not question anyone’s faith. All of us here love the Church, love our Faith, and only want souls to get to heaven. But when people start to become down right hateful and slanderous, you better believe it’s going to get ugly. Wouldn’t that just be how anyone would react if their own were attacked?
I’m really sorry if I have in any way been a part of that. I hope you will reconsider, based on your OWN opinion of what the apostolate produces, and not what anyone here on an internet forum has said.
God bless,
~Liza
- Status