Michael Voris Tells His Story (Dr Taylor Marshall #194)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Divine3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
godisgood77 said:
How do we account for him being so angry, disrespectful and divisive?
Click to expand...
You cannot be asking this question in a serious manner. If one does not get angry about priests sexually assaulting adolescents and young adults AND bishops covering it up and ignoring it then something is wrong with that person’s sense of justice. The actions of these people do not deserve respect. Of course when some treat these men respectfully and some disrespectfully it will cause discord. Men, supposed to be representing The Lord, abused young people, covered it up, and often look the other way at ongoing grave sin, all systematically being allowed to continue and even fostered by promotions of like minded men. I do not necessarily agree with the way he conducts himself but absolutely cannot fathom why anyone would truly find it hard to account for Voris’ anger, disrespect, and divisiveness.
godisgood77 said:
I try to stay away from any news source where their Bishop forbids them from calling themselves Catholic.
Click to expand...
Only a true catholic would respect the office of a bishop enough to remove “catholic” from their name when they do not believe the man is a good bishop. This says more about Voris than that this bishop forbids them from using the name catholic.
 
EXdrinker said:
You cannot be asking this question in a serious manner. If one does not get angry about priests sexually assaulting adolescents and young adults AND bishops covering it up and ignoring it then something is wrong with that person’s sense of justice.
Click to expand...
There is a time to be angry. This is one of those times. However, I think the criticism is that one should not be angry most of the time. M. Voris is angry at a lot things that have nothing to do with the sex abuse scandals, but only because his version of traditionalism is not expressed everywhere in the Church. His criticism of being the “Church of nice” is one example. He gets mad just because others aren’t mad at the things he is mad at.
 
For whatever it’s worth, from what I saw of the video it is very interesting, and Mr. Voris comes across well. Mr. Voris comes across as kind, articulate, devout, well meaning, and even charismatic in this video. Like others have said, he has a powerful story, and he has suffered.

With that being said, he asked Pope Francis to resign. It will be very difficult to listen to much of what Mr. Voris says after that.

I also deeply struggle with his traditionalist views. In this same very long conversation, he discusses the liturgical “abuse” of receiving communion in the hand being introduced too early in the 1970s in parts of the U.S. as well as the very real child abuse by clergy. It seems to be all jumbled together in his mind, and this comes across as very confusing to me.
 
Last edited:
A lot of people who criticize Voris do so unaware that for as much as he attacks those he deems worthy of attacking, some in the Church have attacked him in a very hurtful and personal manner.

He has an amazing unique perspective and experience involving some issues that many of us will never have.
 
pnewton said:
His criticism of being the “Church of nice” is one example. He gets mad just because others aren’t mad at the things he is mad at.
Click to expand...
I dont think he gets mad. I watched him for many years and I’ve never seen him shout or get particularly emotional. The Church of nice is his catch phrase for the heresy of relivatism
 
Wow…the views expressed in this article seem eerily familiar to the debate here on CAF about Fr. Martin and Archbishop Chaput.
 
Unfortunately, it seems like many clergy give James Martin a wide berth and with the exception of some, turn a blind eye to his rhetoric. I don’t think Voris is on a crusade against homosexuality in general, but rather its constant influx within the Church and the scandals surrounding those within the clergy who have been caught in these acts.

The vortex episode above describes the situation perfectly. James Martin has never openly or directly refuted Church teaching, but he has never affirmed it either. He operates with ambiguity and a passive aggressive approach to spread his views.

Hopefully more clergy will speak out against him.
 
Last edited:
Maximus_Power said:
The Church of nice is his catch phrase for the heresy of relivatism
Click to expand...
Hmm. It is my opinion that he also uses that against legitimate pastoral concerns, as well as pretty much any ecumenical activity. No, he does not shout, if you define that as yelling, but his rhetoric toward the clergy who disagree with him, say those who are progressive, yet orthodox, and toward those who commit vile crimes is very similar. If he is mad about sex abuse scandal, then I think the same word would apply without yelling. I don’t know him. As far as I know he may not be actually angry at anything. It could all be an act. I can only judge by his words. It is not the language the Church uses to communicate disagreement, not that he need use that sort of language. He is not a Catholic apostolate after all.
 
Last edited:
Crusader13 said:
James Martin has never openly or directly refuted Church teaching, but he has never affirmed it either.
Click to expand...
Yes he has affirmed Church teaching. Earlier this week, he wrote:
One of the reasons that I don’t focus on same-sex relations and same-sex marriage, which I know are both impermissible (and immoral) under church teaching, is that LGBT Catholics have heard this repeatedly.
Click to expand...
I agree with Chaput with the problems of Fr. Martin’s approach, at least with how it affects some people, and would say the same of Michael Voris. We should not confirm people in any sin: homosexuality, wrath, disobedience, etc. However, I think the same positive might be applied to both. If they help the people they actually are targeting to grow in faith, that should be considered before they are dismissed. As neither speak to me, I can’t hold an opinion on that. Those who follow Fr. Martin should examine themselves and ask if they are growing in holiness. Those who follow Michael Voris should do likewise, and ask if they are growing in charity.
 
pnewton said:
40.png
Crusader13:
James Martin has never openly or directly refuted Church teaching, but he has never affirmed it either.
Click to expand...
Yes he has affirmed Church teaching. Earlier this week, he wrote:
One of the reasons that I don’t focus on same-sex relations and same-sex marriage, which I know are both impermissible (and immoral) under church teaching, is that LGBT Catholics have heard this repeatedly.
Click to expand...
I agree with Chaput with the problems of Fr. Martin’s approach, at least with how it affects some people, and would say the same of Michael Voris. We should not confirm people in any sin: homosexuality, wrath, disobedience, etc. However, I think the same positive might be applied to both. If they help the people they actually are targeting to grow in faith, that should be considered before they are dismissed. As neither speak to me, I can’t hold an opinion on that. Those who follow Fr. Martin should examine themselves and ask if they are growing in holiness. Those who follow Michael Voris should do likewise, and ask if they are growing in charity.
Click to expand...
Even the devil knows what the church teaches. No one is questioning Fr. Martin’s knowledge of church teaching. The question is whether or not he believes in it and wants to make sure it’s enforced.
 
pnewton said:
It is not the language the Church uses to communicate disagreement, not that he need use that sort of language. He is not a Catholic apostolate after all.
Click to expand...
It’s the same language. It’s just a different tone.
The soft language of the church is already saturated with apostolates like EWTN. The logical language is by in large represented by Bishop Baron. In times of uncertainty slot of people myself included appreciate the binary language of the Church. Just plain old right and wrong. The Father of Mercy have tapped into this, but Vorris does it best.
 
Last edited:
It is more of a case that he was not approved to use the name. For a ministry to use the name “Catholic”, they have to have approval from the bishop, thus granting some oversight of the Church in the community to the bishop, even for independent lay organizations. What is often left unsaid is the Mr. Voris then voluntarily changed the name instead of being disobedient in this.

Think of it as a sort of brand name protection.
 
Thank you. From the post I was responding to though it almost sounded like the bishop told Mr. Voris not to call himself Catholic, and that’s what surprised me.
 
I think as long as Voris uncovers the corruption among members of the church, who cares about his tone. I think he does great work and he should keep going.
 
I’d go back to Church Militant if Vorris would issue a public apology to Pope Francis regarding the demand of resignation.
 
I respect his desire for seeking the truth. But I can’t be a regular viewer of his work because he is a little too strong for me. But continue to view some of his views etc. There are undercurrents of division in our Church regarding our Pope Francis and most likely you won’t get an apology from Vorris . But only God knows----anyone can have a new view on people, places and things.
 
Voris and his staff fail to include positive comments about bishops because they want to focus on the negative.
Click to expand...
This is not true. The Church Militant has several champions of the faith in the church today. They interview and spotlight the brave bishops and priests. Some are great courageous bishops and some are priests and religious. The Catholic Church is not a homosexual men’s club. I have had personal experiences in the seminary and I know others who gave up the pursuit of the priesthood because of homosexual advances. This is a very serious problem. It is not appropriate for the Catholic Church to accommodate these qualities. They have no right. The Church belongs to Jesus.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top