My mistake, it was St. Anthony of Padua who was known as “Hammer of Heretics”.
Calm down–I wasn’t making any personal accusations, even if you chose to take it that way.
Another common theme in Voris threads seems to be the tendency to try to make broad characterizations about his critics. I’ve yet to see any such characterization that I could honestly say describes me.
Did you miss my previous post? As this is a thread about one specific video and as I am not familiar with the full body of Voris’ work, I think it unnecessary to produce a list of every error he has ever made. I’m not in a position to do that and it would just take the thread off topic.
I’m certainly in no position to judge him as a person. But I can take evaluate what he is saying – which includes also how he is saying it – and determine whether or not I agree with what he is putting forth.I was speaking in general terms. As a rule, generalities do not encompass every single person. There are other reasons people criticize Voris–e.g., they prefer more overall gentleness or subtlety, whereas he tends to come on like gangbusters. Some of us like the latter and think it is needed, whereas there are plenty of Catholic personalities out there who display the former attributes. Perhaps they are more to your liking, and if so, then my suggestion is: don’t listen to Voris.Another common theme in Voris threads seems to be the tendency to try to make broad characterizations about his critics. I’ve yet to see any such characterization that I could honestly say describes me.
There is nothing “dishonest” about Voris’s analysis. He has had many dealings with the establishment media, who have written off his consistent warnings about the influence of the gay lobby in the Church and ridiculed him for taking such things seriously. He is now somewhat vindicated in the fact that the Pope himself acknowledges the existence of this dangerous and harmful group of men who work to undermine the Church from within.
A problem can’t be diagnosed and treated until it is acknowledged in the first place. Too many Catholics have ignored these problems in the Church, either ignorant that they exist or contemptuously writing them off. This is why, for instance, the CCHD has been allowed to do its scandalous work for decades, giving grants to pro-gay, pro-contraception, pro-abortion groups, all under the patronage of the USCCB–until some groups were courageous enough to shine the light on their practices (including Voris). What did they get in return? Vilification, excoriation by high-ranking prelates, and continued refusal to reform. The CCHD has only gotten worse each year–but the good news is that more and more faithful bishops are beginning to recognize the problem and are refusing to take up donations for the CCHD until serious reforms are put in place.
Yep. In the words of Fr. Zuhlsdorf:Just for the record, I also do not wish this discussion to be about Voris, the man. I’m sure he’s a great guy with great devotion to our Lord and who would be great fun at parties.
If it bothers you, I will try and avoid “fan”. I readily admit that I am a huge fan of Bl. JPII, but I do understand why you might not like the connotation. Perhaps I should get with the time I and go with an upward thumb or a “like”. I meant no disrespect to Mr. Voris, John Corapi, or any other well-known Catholic speaker. If you have a better term, I am always striving to be more accurate.
I just found this quote. I never meant cult of personality to apply just to Mr. Voris, or imply what is commonly meant by cult. It is a sociological phenomena that affects all. It is a danger that the “personality” must be aware of to limit it, but not something they are responsible for. And yes, Mother Angelica along with most of the people on EWTN have this same issue to be aware of. In my opinion, the posters here that listen regularly to Mr. Voris (see how I went around the word “fan”
) have not shown any problem with putting personality over principles.Let me clarify, since you think this was done in jest. The question I asked as to these things, which obviously do not exist, demonstrate that the term “gay lobby” is not to be taken as an actual organization. Some media may have standards of just sticking to the facts. There is nothing wrong with editorializing, but it is not what all news media does as a matter of course. Thus, the criticism of Mr. Voris can be seen as these other media do not report the way I report, ergo they must be in it for the money, career, etc.
I have no doubts. Lizaanne posts here and I believe her husband works for Voris. I’ve always liked her posts and feel self-conscious posting in these threads for that reason.Yep. In the words of Fr. Zuhlsdorf:
"Kidding aside, Michael is one of the nicest guys you’ll ever meet and his coworkers are outstanding."
wdtprs.com/blog/2013/06/acton-u-2013-day-1/
I don’t want to tear the guy down. I’m sure I agree with him on many things. Just not everything.I agree with you here. We are full of sickness and disease. I just see the treatment as different. I see little to be accomplished by those sitting in the waiting room arguing over which of their neighbors is the most diseased.
Nice guys don’t get on youtube and tear down legitimate successors to the apostles, throw unfounded accusations around, and cause divisions in Christ’s body.I have no doubts. Lizaanne posts here and I believe her husband works for Voris. I’ve always liked her posts and feel self-conscious posting in these threads for that reason.
I believe that some do, just as they followed Jesus for the wrong reasons. I do not believe in the case of someone like Mr. Voris it is a majority. He doesn’t raise people from the dead. If by canard you mean that it is not a rule, I would agree. Likewise, I would not agree to the broad statement that he is devoid of people that are attracted more to his personality and style than the message.
Perhaps. I definitely wouldn’t say the Church is “full of disease”. It’s not that I don’t see any problems nor that I underestimate their seriousness. I am just extremely hopeful that things are improving in wonderful ways for the Church. I know the gates of hell won’t prevail, so I’d rather “be of good cheer”.
I have not seen this in the media, not that I doubt you. I would be distressed and appalled at such an attack, if it were directed at him personally. If he does get into a media flame war with someone, I would like to think that they would be falling over each other to be the one to turn the other cheek. Maybe they did, since I haven’t heard of it. I can see why he would be a little ticked off by such a thing. It doesn’t seem right for one Catholic to attack another just for being different.
