Taylor Marshall's Twitter feed has disappeared

  • Thread starter Thread starter gracepoole
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I like that Marshall said “I’m not making any accusations” and that he would just like Vatican to look into it. I thought that was a pretty measured response.
Agreed.
I don’t doubt that Marshall’s wiki was vandalized.
People keep using the word “hacked” to describe what’s happened. But that isn’t really accurate since Wikipedia is an open platform that invites edits. Maybe vandalism is indeed a better characterization.
I still want to know how we can be sure the IP really came from the Vatican at all, let alone the Secretariat of State. I assume that is going to take something more thorough than Twitter-sleuthing. Something along the lines of what Dr. Marshall is requesting of the Vatican which I highly doubt will be honored, not because the Holy See is complicit in this but because in the grand scheme of things for a sovereign state a Wikipedia edit war is really not worth the trouble.
This is my question, as well. People misuse servers all the time.
It looks like same Vatican IP address was taken offline today at exact time that Marshall edits were reported. See Marshall’s twitter feed where he links to the various Vatican IT pages showing “offline”. Again, not conclusive but definitely fishy.
Yes, but fishy in the same way that it was fishy that Marshall’s entire history of tweets was erased at the same time that idols were “disposed of” in Rome. I’m not sure such coincidences are truly meaningful.
 
Nope. He is also not an Eastern Catholic. I prefer writers who utilize Aristotelian, Augustinian, Thomistic, Rationalistic, etc. proofs and logic for cogent arguments. Armstrong and Edward Feser are among the few that do.
 
Last edited:
Yes, but fishy in the same way that it was fishy that Marshall’s entire history of tweets was erased at the same time that idols were “disposed of” in Rome. I’m not sure such coincidences are truly meaningful.
Did he ever address why he deleted tweets?
 
Last edited:
He writes on a plethora of topics. Biblical Evidence for Catholicism - Catholic biblical apologetics

Marshall’s community attacked Dave once he addressed the inherent problems with Marshall’s book. Obviously, Dave is going to respond and address accusations and new occurrences in the community. That’s the purpose of a blog.

P.S. Marshall has stated that Dave’s books are part of the reason why he became Catholic. I want to say that Dave even wrote a liner note or something on one of Marshall’s early works. I can’t remember. I own a myriad of books.
 
Last edited:
This article is a great observation. I listened to the whole podcast and was a bit disturbed by it. Not only the subject matter but TnT’s excitement over the recordings.
 
In Marshall’s most recent video with Michael Voris, Voris acknowledges that there’s a difference between the reporting that Church Militant does and the commentary in programs like The Vortex. I think it’s the same with Marshall. If I have a basic catechetical question or want to know more about the origin of ember days, I don’t hesitate to look for a Marshall video. But there’s a difference between these videos and those in which he’s providing personal opinion about the Church, prelates, politics, etc.
 
I’m sure he was perturbed once he provided cogent arguments on why Marshall’s work is flawed… for only Marshall to reply… I’m paraphrasing… he’s only doing it for the clicks. I find the fallacious response from Marshall amusing considering he prides himself on Aquinas, etc. Marshall has never addressed Armstrong’s arguments or those from others. And it’s not just Armstrong who has been critical. Also –

Fr. Dwight Longenecker


Jennifer Roback Morse


Dr. Jeff Mirus

 
Last edited:
I find this rant fascinating considering you’re invoking several fallacies yourself. No one has asked if it’s a sin to listen to anyone, etc.

I’m just providing context as to why (as someone has previously mentioned) why Marshall is considered a “Catholic Reactionary” or, as Marshall calls it “Radical Traditionalist”… in which he is now a member. I invite everyone who wishes to read those articles… and to form their own opinion. Personally, I find Armstrong’s arguments to be valid and sound. Best wishes.
 
Last edited:
If I have a basic catechetical question or want to know more about the origin of ember days, I don’t hesitate to look for a Marshall video. But there’s a difference between these videos and those in which he’s providing personal opinion about the Church, prelates, politics, etc.
I do tend to feel the same way. Taylor Marshall has great knowledge on Catholic teaching, Tradition and history. He is usually one of my first go to websites for Catholic knowledge. The videos on what’s going with the Church right now are just not quite the same. Maybe especially with them being live, the opinions and comments just kind of fly, lose focus and once they are out there, they are out there to stay.
 
Last edited:
A good article on that topic:


I know Spanish and some Portuguese… but my friends who are fluent listened to it and heard the same – Our Lady of the Amazon.

Three thoughts come to mind:
  1. It is amazing how individuals will read an opinionated news article and not do the proper “research.”
  2. Individuals should probably take art classes which discuss physiognomy and culture.
  3. The hysteria around this brought back, to my mind, stories surrounding the hysteria displayed during the Protestant Iconoclasm movement.
Having said that, art is subjective and I didn’t personally enjoy/like it.
 
Last edited:
Did the Vatican change and say it was an image of Our Lady because last I heard they said it was not?
 
I find this rant fascinating considering you’re invoking several fallacies yourself.
I don’t see how as I’ve made no arguments in this thread. I entered lamenting the state of discourse here and proceeded to ask questions. I’m open to correction though.
No one has asked if it’s a sin to listen to anyone, etc.
I was referring to other threads on this forum as of late not posts within this particular thread. I haven’t been very active recently so I’m not sure if they’re still open but you shouldn’t have any trouble finding them after a quick perusal.
I’m just providing context as to why (as someone has previously mentioned) why Marshall is considered a “Catholic Reactionary” or, as Marshall calls it “Radical Traditionalist”… in which he is now a member. I invite everyone who wishes to read those articles… and to form their own opinion. Personally, I find Armstrong’s arguments to be valid and sound.
Fair enough. I might read them myself, though at this point it’ll probably be preaching to the choir. I agree with Dr. Marshall on a lot of things, but his thesis of Freemasonic infiltration is not one of them.
Best wishes.
You as well. God bless!
 
To my knowledge, the Vatican has not released any official statement. The article discusses the translation… provides links to the video evidence… and analyzes the widely diverse opinions on the subject. The conclusion (paraphrasing): It wasn’t pagan. The art uses a style that is prominent in the culture. The art wasn’t aesthetically pleasing.
 
Last edited:
Just to reiterate, any tweenager who has wanted to watch USA Netflix from another country (or vice versa) would know how to spoof an IP address from any country and edit a Wikipedia article. It’s really easy to do.

Also, the IP address your phone or tablet has is not fixed; it will change depending on what network you are connected to.

It is more likely IMO that no one in the Vatican knows or cares about Taylor Marshall and this was done by an American, in America, using a VPN. And surely Taylor Marshall knows that.
 
To my knowledge, the Vatican has not released any official statement. The article discusses the translation… provides links to the video evidence… and analyzes the widely diverse opinions on the subject. The conclusion (paraphrasing): It wasn’t pagan. The art uses a style that is prominent in the culture. The art wasn’t aesthetically pleasing.
Dr. Paolo Ruffini, Prefect of the Vatican Dicastery for Communication, responded to a journalist’s question at the Monday press briefing for the Synod, in the Holy See Press Office.

“We have already repeated several times here that those statues represented life, fertility, mother earth."

So…fertility statues. Aka pagan.
 
‘Fertility’ is not a pagan concept. It underpins the Gospel so deeply and is infused into the majority of the parables. It’s much more pagan to make our bodies idols of infertility as is so rampant in western Catholics than to recognise the divine character of fertility in tribal culture.
 
‘Fertility’ is not a pagan concept. It underpins the Gospel so deeply and is infused into the majority of the parables. It’s much more pagan to make our bodies idols of infertility as is so rampant in western Catholics than to recognise the divine character of fertility in tribal culture.
Catholics don’t worship Mother Earth and Catholics don’t worship fertility statues. Those concepts are patently pagan when compared with Church teaching.
 
‘Fertility’ is not a pagan concept.
Catholics do not pay dulia to concepts. We do so to God’s Saints who are real people, in Heaven, who are icons of Jesus Christ, who in turn is the very icon of divinity. We do not prostrate ourselves, burn incense to, or dance around “peace”, “love”, “fraternity”, “fertility”, “Mother Earth”, or any other concept because such behaviors are at the very least a form of dulia.

Those wood carvings were idols.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top