11 June 2015

THE RIGHTNESS, VALIDITY AND BETTERMENT OF APOSTASIZING ACCORDING TO PETER STOCKLAND AND FRIENDS

To Indifferentism !
I have been reading the various oh! so woeful reactions to Michael Coren's apostasy by the Neo-Catholic commentariat (thank you, Lord, for this penance). Of course, like clockwork, they make sure to disassociate themselves from the (assumed) extraneous reactions by the Catholic riff raff on "social media". Thou doth protest too much and are too meanly, sayeth the Magic Circle dwellers.

Some samplings:

  • Olson / Catholic World Report: "It's a sad but undeniable fact that some of the criticism aimed at him has undoubtedly been harsh, personal, and even outrageous".[1]
  • Keating / Catholic Answers: "I have seen several calmly-written pieces (my own among them - good for you, Karl, so humble, you're awesome!) that took Coren to task for his lack of transparency. He doesn't allude to any of these. His column refers only to rude comments".[2]
  • Fr. de Sousa / National Post: "Coren, despite his aggressively polemical style in print, radio and TV, constantly complains that people say mean things on the Internet. That too does happen. Most columnists deal with it without public whingeing, as Coren puts it, about "the Church of Nasty".[3]
Read abovementioned columns and notice the "lack of bile", sanctimoniously says another Catholic Register columnist.

So, you see, only our enlightened critiques of Mr. Coren are acceptable and worthy of consideration and rumination, because we are civil and fair and level-headed and charitable and qualified... You can smell the smugness of these self-appointed legates as they attempt to take the high moral ground.

Let it be known: it was the Catholic riff raff on "social media" - bloggers, Facebook, Twitter, e-mails - that spent the last two years or so exposing and criticizing Coren's heteordoxy, challenging him to clarify or justify his shape-shifting views on sodomy and sodomites in the Catholic Church. During this same period, our darlings in the "official" Catholic press were silent as the vacuum of outer space. So far as can be recalled, not one challenge was posed by any "official" Catholic MSM outlet/columnist when Coren started to go pro homo in his commentaries.

Why no objections from Coren's enlightened peers? Was it Martini Hour? Certainly, questions to be pondered.

But now that Coren has publicly apostasized - note that never is the word "apostasy" used, so uncivilized you know (sip vodka martini, one olive, dirty, lemon twist) - these self-appointed legates have suddenly emerged from their plush-carpeted lairs to tell us that, yes, it is unfortunate that Coren "converted"!? to Anglicanism. We are "disappointed" at his duplicity, "hoping" he will once again return to the fold. But now it is safe to speak. After Coren's public admission, no longer are there overseer threats to incoming cash flow nor to club memberships nor to conference invites nor to TV interviews nor to bromances with bishops nor to other myriad forms of self-congratulatory backslapping. What a relief! No risks, no problem, me influential, have pen, get cheque - and it is only us who are entitled the credit, and who possess the accreditation, for weeding out and speaking out against the apostatic likes of Mr. Coren.

Yet during the interim, how many Catholic fans of Mr. Coren were led astray? How many of these people, Catholic or not, trusted his writings on Catholic matters? Perhaps making crucial decisions in their personal lives as an result? Like, maybe, converting to Catholicism? Is it not the responsibility of the "official" Catholic press to keep checks and balances on any influential Catholic personalities who have gone wayward?  Were not these wonderful, charming self-appointed legates - so much "informed" on the internal workings of the Catholic Church - supposed to report Coren's soul-endangering positions to the Catholic riff raff? Why did they not? Where were they? Who knows?


For example, why did the aforesaid Carl Olson, editor of the Neo-Catholic World Report, allow Coren to publish an article with the following nonchalant statement therein:
Of course, lesbian couples can have an obliging friend assist them in having a baby, and gay men can adopt or have some other obliging friend have one for them.[5]
Is this not a red flag? That was written in February 2013, over two years ago. In May 2015, Olson now - as if experiencing an influx of divine revelation - calls Coren a "mediocre theologian".[4] Two things here: First, why hire the guy to regularly write for CWR if he is only "mediocre"? Second, Coren is not a "theologian". He is a journalist. The reader should know that there are not a few writers in the Catholic MSM who, despite the proper education, regard themselves as "theologians", or "lay theologians", a post-Conciliar novelty that has become laughable. Obviously, Olson is concocting excuses after subjecting his readers to Coren's blatant dissent against Catholic teaching.

In the meantime, Coren's articles remained accessible at the Catholic Register website for a full month after publicly apostasizing in late April. And presently Lifesite News is reporting that he just published a pro-abortion article for the notoriously heretical Prairie Messenger, the "official" weekly for three Canadian dioceses out west: Saint Boniface, Regina and Saskatoon.[6] Indeed, now that he is on a roll, Coren is starting get in on the homofascist action on Twitter:



Well, you got your wish, princess. Faggotry triumphant in Ireland. Although I doubt St. Patrick is pleased with the outcome, that "nasty" legalist who insisted on the legality of the Sixth Commandment. Clearly, this wheeler-dealer has swiftly morphed into the classic "useful idiot" of the antinomian Left. Proof positive: The Walrus, that mostly unread magazine with the stupidest of names tailored specifically Canada's limousine liberals (you know, it has that homely, boring CBC feel to it) - just published an article by Coren entitled "Coming Out".[7] Here is the image accompanying the article:



How quaint - burning a sodomite "martyr" at the stake and two others holding hands under the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil. They must be squealing with glee over there. Glitter... glitter everywhere!

So wake up, Catholic riff raff. It's all one big joke. It is a manoeuvre by the Establishment Church to steal the limelight and the credit for disavowing one their own, one of their "friends", who went off the rails, was for a long time running off the rails, under their watch, ever boldly doing so in the public square. These self-appointed legates writing zero about it, not a peep, still letting Coren publish at their respective media outlets. However, it was you... you contemptible Catholic riff raff, with your loyalty to the Magisterium and your devotion to the Most Blessed Virgin and your steadfastness at facing raw, uncomfortable facts head-on, which was chiefly responsible for forcing Mr. Coren to finally show his cards - and do not let the linguistic acrobatics of these self-appointed legates of Nu-Church make you second guess yourselves. Never forget, Catholic riff raff, you have support and corroboration from the popes:

  • Pope Felix III: "Not to oppose error, is to approve it, and not to defend truth is to suppress it, and indeed to neglect to confound evil men, when we can do it, is no less a sin than to encourage them".
  • Pope St. Leo I the Great: "He that sees another in error, and endeavors not to correct it, testifies himself to be in error".
Amongst the menagerie of these responsions to Mr. Coren's apostasy, the one that really smacked of Neo-Catholic claptrap was the column by Peter Stockland, at Toronto's Catholic Register.[8] Behold the bileless pageantry of Indifferentism:
As a result, his decision to trade Rome for Canterbury has been denounced, especially on social media, as everything from hypocritical to traitorous and, perhaps most unkindly of all if entirely predictable, a betrayal by someone who was never a real Catholic anyway.
Consider the words - "denounced", "hypocritical", "traitorous", "betrayal". True, such words were wielded. Why not? They are true characterizations. For goodness sake, Coren penned a book entitled Why Catholics are Right. He made mucho money from writing, broadcasting and speechifying as a "Catholic apologist", for years, for Catholics. Except in the last 1+ years Coren never let the public know he jumped ship while at the same time leeching money from Catholics parishes and organizations. How else were his fans and followers to react? With smiles beaming sunshine, with offerings of daffodils and lollipops? But, you see, according to Mr. Stockland such phraseologies are "unkind". Really? Coren's schtick always has been fierce polemics, starting all the way back from his book Aesthete: The Frank Diaries to Michael Coren (1993), right up to his self-aggrandizing "Corenocopia" spots on The Arena, his TV show which thankfully ended earlier this year. Never read Mr. Stockland writing against this aspect of Coren's mode of presentation. Well, of course, not. Otherwise not anymore would he be invited for interviews on any one of Coren's TV shows (view here). Neither would his colleague Fr. de Sousa be interviewed (view here). Remember: you have to be one of the right people.

Could such a set up as be characterized as hypocritical, incestuous, opportunistic?

You betchya.

Catholics absolutely should be indignant at Coren's apostasy, rightfully they are indignant, and indignation is an expression of zeal. Zeal, say St. Thomas, "arises from the intensity of love".[9] It seeks and wants the good of "the other", and the intensity of opposition to the soul that has gone errant is a direct function of the good desired for "the other". Yes, it is called "love", tough love. Therefore it is not unreasonable to suppose that our newspaper man deems Coren's "critics" on "social media" to be "unkind" because, contrarily, he considers Coren's apostasy not as a tragedy, not as a real loss, where an immortal soul is at stake. It is more of a pragmatic thing, considered principally in a secular context, not theological, definitely not moral. Instead, what we get is this smug "entirely predictable" ascription applied to Catholics on "social media". Yes, we know, just a bunch of  dim-witted vulgarians.

Although they would never admit it, what these self-appointed legates do - by insinuation - is to equate zeal (so-called unkindness, hate, etc.) into fanaticism, psychological instability, uneducated oafs, unqualified buffoons, "Church of Nasty", take your pick. Lounging around high atop their Ivory Towers whilst Rome burns below, this is a standard tactic used by an insulated, disconnected elite that endeavours to wholly dismiss the legitimate protests of normal, everyday Catholics, powerless, dejected by the abysmal state of the Post-Conciliar Church, yet many of whom have an acute sensus fidei. Basically, scoring everything off as a manifestation of the mob mentality. It is important for them to maintain this calumniating narrative because in one swipe it renders any opposing views as irrelevant. Problem is, with the contemporary arrival of those once suppressed Catholic voices on the internet, coupled with the free availability of the Deposit of the Faith online, these self-appointed legates of Nu-Church are less capable at sustaining this narrative. They are being challenged, and they do not like it. "How dare you?", they condescendingly think. "Shoo, shoo away" (sip vodka martini).

Now watch as apostasy begins to be warranted:

What his critics either fail to see, or refuse to accept, is the validity of his statement that the decision was a Christ-centred choice: that he had to move away from the political distractions in which he was enmeshed in the Catholic Church in order to stay in the presence of Christ personally.
Coren made a "Christ-centred choice"? To be specific, this means Christ minus the Catholic Church. That is, a Protestantized choice, which is heresy.
  • Corollary 1: sola fide, sola scriptura.
  • Corollary 2: private judgement, individualism, no objective authority, no Real Presence, self-determination without the external referent of Tradition/Magisterium.
  • Corollary 3: "A personal relationship with Jesus", "Here I stand", and so forth.
It was not a "choice" for Christ so much as a rejection of the Catholic Church (which is Christ's bride) and its two thousand year teaching against the abomination of sodomy, one of the sins that cries out to Heaven for vengeance. Coren explicitly stated so himself: "The change [i.e. apostasy] was to a large extent triggered by the gay issue. I couldn't accept that homosexual relationships were, as the Roman Catholic Church insists on proclaiming, disordered and sinful. Once a single brick in the wall was removed the entire structure began to fall... I felt a hypocrite being part of a church that described homosexual relations as being disordered and sinful. I just couldn't be part of it anymore. I could not do that".[10] Our newspaper man, apparently a Roman Catholic, considers Coren's newly advocated Protestant attitude as having "validity", that (really) his pro-sodomitic views are of no real consequence. That is what is actually being relayed to the reader, and it is atrocious.

Coren apostasized from the Catholic Church because he refuted the Church's teaching on sodomy, a subject bearing on morality. What our newspaper man seems to be doing here is to transform the issue into a "political distraction". Is this to infer that Catholic morality and secular politics are separate? That issues regarding homo "marriage" and its perverted correlates should be left to be decided upon in the public square, in a "democracy", without any input, protest or prevention whatsoever from Catholics? Sure seems like it. No surprise here. This relegation of Church teaching to a partitioned, distant construct relates directly to those precious neo-Catholic (yet non-Catholic) concepts of "religious freedom" and the separation of Church and State. Begone Social Reign of Christ the King. All hail Fr. John Courtney Murray!

Continuing down the rabbit hole:

Seen in the light of rooted faith in Christ, Coren was right to leave the Catholic Church if staying meant attending at Mass with his heart and mind full of the buzz of worldly argument rather than the peace of Our Lord. It is devoutly to be hoped that the peripatetic pilgrim will find his way home to Rome again. In the interim, it's better that his focus is fixed where it should be.
How can it be "right" (inferring true) that someone apostasizes from the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church? How can a Catholic claim it is "valid" to have a "rooted faith in Christ" alone, i.e. Protestantism? Does not our newspaper man believe that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church? Evidently not. His justification, utterly bizarre, is that Coren was so much overcome by the secular world's talk and promotion of sodomy, euphemized by "worldly argument". As such, it became an unmanageable hindrance to belief - personal belief, that is, which otherwise licenses "me" to rationalize whatever "I" want to do and whatever "I" want to think as "true".

How many Catholics out there have been daily, monthly, yearly bombarded by the "worldly argument" of Sodomite Propaganda from the culture without, or even from within the Church via, say, the slick and unyielding Jesuit faggotry of Fr. James Martin, but nonetheless remain in the Church and believe what it teaches on this abomination? This, despite family members estranged as a result, ostracization by friends, mockery at the office, opportunities lost, or whatever suffering. Yes, there are Catholics out there with those very experiences, you adorable self-appointed legates of Nu-Church. How many Catholics, who for whatever reason may feel certain moral teachings are difficult (usually out of ignorance), but still believe all that the Church teaches, by trust, by faith, and because they actually assent to the following: "Thou art Peter, and it is upon this rock that I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; and I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:18-19).

It is not as if Coren joined that "old time religion" of whatever Protestant sect existent prior to the Lambeth Conference of 1920. Before then, Anglicanism proscribed contraception, abortion and sodomy. Rather, he has enthusiastically shacked up with the newfangled hyper-liberalized version of an ever changing, currently imploding, Anglicanism, with its recent acquiescence to whatever sexual perversion. Let alone its stellar cast of lesbians pretending to be "priests" and, now, "bishops". To say it is "right" to apostasize from Catholicism, whatever the cause, still assumes Indifferentism, which is heresy. To say it is "valid" to dispose of Catholicism for a "Christ-centred" Protestantism, assumes Indifferentism, which is heresy.

Why, then, is such an apathetic viewpoint advocated? Because there is a hushed, unspoken and underlying conviction, deep, deep, way down deep - again, a Neo-Catholic thing - that the immortal soul of a baptized Catholic, latterly apostasized, is not reeeaaallllly in danger of going to Hell (wink wink, nudge nudge). That is an old fashioned notion belonging to the "Dark Ages", long before the shackles of oppression were broken at Vatican II, to which only the contemptible Catholic riff raff on "social media" subscribe. Don't worry about it. Nearly everyone makes it to Heaven, squawk the von Balthasar fanboys. It's the Nouvelle Théologie, bebe. Coren will be fine in some other denomination. He is just a "peripatetic pilgrim" (give me a break) galavanting his whimsical way through the travails of life, just selecting another course of choice fare on the menu of religion. Oh well, let's have another martini and wish him well.


It is so un-Catholic, pathetic, lukewarm, flat, blasé. There's nothing there.

Stockland goes beyond a disguised Indifferentism, however, when he writes that "it's better that his focus is fixed where it should be". Really? It is "better" that Coren "should be" a Protestant promoting sodomy (and now abortion) rather than be a Catholic and witness against it? This is no longer a subtle nod, not an enigmatic wink of approval. No, this is public affirmation, even an encouragement to apostasy. And that this garbage passes off as Catholic journalism is an injustice to those poor pewsitters who think the Catholic Register (funded by them) is an authentic source of Catholic news and views.

Now the reader should understand that this stealth Indifferentism (with the heresy of Universal Salvation looming in the background) is not particular to our newspaper man. It spans throughout the unhallowed halls of CanChurch. They're everywhere. Again, we have Coren for confirmation: "I obviously don't blame the Catholic Church as such for all this, especially as there are myriad good and kind people within its ranks, many of whom sent me delightful letters and were extremely upset and ashamed about what went on".[11] So, it is not just writers for diocesan newspapers. You can include whatever form of Professional Catholic that now plague the Post-Conciliar Church - chanceries office personnel, teacher union members, professors, publishers, so-called liturgists and catechists, including that very high percentage of homo priests and bishops.


Why did they send Coren "delightful letters"? Obviously, they condone his apostasy and, correlatively, support his pro-homo promulgations. What else could it be? Why do you think there are so many faggots and dykes working inside the gamut of Catholic institutions? Why are these Nu-Church darlings "extremely upset and ashamed"? Well, it demonstrates a disdain for orthodox Catholics, particularly those on "social media" and, correlatively, the doctrines of the Church, especially those appertaining to morality. What else could it be? Yes, Catholic riff raff, these people do not like you, to put it mildly. However, they do indeed like their power and influence over the laity. But don't you dare test or provoke them, else the dogs will be sent after you personally - out of the public eye, that is.

It cannot be emphasized enough: within the bubble world of Nu-Church, it's all about personal relationships, emotional attachments, opportunities, administration, maintaining face in the public square - all of these overriding principles of the Faith, despite the unmistakeable fact that the Catholic Church is currently undergoing an unprecedented crisis. For them, it is not a battle for souls, not an endeavor to uphold the truths of dogma, but of maintaining respectability, even loyalty to those who are publicly known heretics, despite the damage these heretics have done, for decades. It is abhorrent to them to even think of "betraying" one of their own. Yet this attitude is so damaging to an already exhausted laity and, yes, to their immortal souls as well. Why? These sins of omission, by remaining silent about their heretic colleagues, these enemies within, they are doing even worse damage to the faithful in that they are effectively licensing the perpetuation of error and, therefore, further loss of faith, more apostasy. Judging by what is now published everyday by whatever "official" Catholic agency, there is absolutely no sign of abatement to the pattern outlined just above.

It is the lesson of Catholic history: when it comes down to the crunch, as in the recent ramping up of Christian persecution (as a prime example), these Nu-Church darlings, these innovators and rebels, will be nowhere to be seen. Gone. Vanished. Unless someone blogs about it. But this invariably occurs after the fact, after the exposition, after someone is caught red handed, just like Coren.


Do not trust these people. Keep your distance. Remain vigilant and pray that God will soon end this scourge.


NOTES / REFERENCES

1. C. Olson, "Michael Coren goes Anglican, denounces Catholic moral teaching", Catholic World Report, May 2, 2015.
 

2. K. Keating, "Michael Coren sidesteps the real issue in his change of religion", Catholic Answers, May 18, 2015.
 

3. Fr. R.J. de Sousa, "Michael Coren converts, Michael Coren complains", National Post, May 20, 2015.
 

4. C. Olson, op. cit.
 

5. M. Coren, "Great Britain and Gay Marriage", Catholic World Report, February 26, 2013.
 

6. P. Baklinkski, "'Official' Catholic newspaper defends running pro-abortion piece by Michael Coren", Lifesite News, May 26, 2015. See article M. Coren, "Seamless Garment", Prairie Messenger, May 20, 2015.
 

7. M. Coren, "Coming Out", The Walrus, May 21, 2015.
 

8. P. Stockland, "Cold days in hell", The Catholic Register, May 14, 2016.
 

9. Sum. theol. i-ii, q. 28, art. 5.
 

10. M. Coren, "How a change of heart led to a backlash from the 'Church of Nasty'", Toronto Star, May 16, 2015; J. Brean, " 'I felt a hypocrite': Author Michael Coren on why he left the Catholic Church for Anglicanism", National Post, May 1, 2015.
 

11. Ibid.

Share/Bookmark

26 comments:

John Laws said...

E. Michael Jones claimed that the CIA controls Amchurch. Both are certainly exploitive and cultish organizations. Does this seem familiar: http://anolen.com/2014/10/06/great-users-of-people/

Vox Cantoris said...

Coren had almost a singular preoccupation with homosexuals in the priesthood. He would personally call me many times to say "is this one gay, what about that one." This Sunday, (June 14* he is delivering the sermon at the Metropolitan Community Church invited by Mr. Brent Hawkes. He is digging a hole for himself and is now painting the Catholics he made money from as the bad boys. What a hypocrite! But who am I too judge, I am just a "right-wing Catholic blogger."

RufusChoate said...

I had very limited exposure to Coren and found him a bit bracing and vigorous compared to most commentators in my limited exposure and I was surprised by his bizarre rationale for apostasy until I read his history. Coren loves the focus to be on Coren.


Coren like most heretics and apostates believes in being liked and admired by a certain cultural identity. He sensed that the winds were changing with the seeming weak and indifferent moral theology of Bergoglio aka Pope Francis and decided that time was ripe for a break ahead of the game. He did it because he loves Michael Coren more than our Lord just like Henry Tudor, Zwingli, Calvin and Luther or Pelagius and Arias.


Nothing new.


p.s. I like and admire most of the commentators you find fault with but I suspect that they maintain a certain detached emotionless personae in their written works that sounds weak when they are trying to be charitable to an old colleague.

Barona Barona said...

http://torontocatholicwitness.blogspot.ca/2014/05/the-convenient-catholicism-of-michael.html Written last may on our blog. EVERYBODY knew about Coren, except those who deliberately did not want to know.

marylise said...

Speaking of the scourge from which we pray to be delivered, there are three aspects of the false modernist church (superimposed on the Catholic Church against the will of the faithful), which are particularly relevant to the Strange Case of Michael Coren. First, fear. The next time you see Michael Coren, look at his face. It is plastered with fear. His eyes are fixed in a frozen expression of panic. This means he has lost control of his life, which is what happens to all of us when we snuggle up to Satan. Second, hatred. Apostasy is always tragic and often malicious, but the apostasy of Michael Coren is unusually hateful. He paints himself as being too moral, righteous and kind to tolerate the cruelty of the Catholic Church against homosexuals. Think of what he is saying! Third, falsehood. Among other lies, the false modernist church, as Heresy Hunter says, promotes the concept of "lay theologian." So lay persons get the idea they can advertise themselves as official public representatives of the Catholic Church. This is what Michael Coren did and nobody stopped him.

AndyEMalone said...

I know people who have worked for the CIA for decades and they have trouble imagining how to control their personnel records let alone anything of value. Government but especially big government is about turf and funding but little else. Conspiracies are fantasy because evil is always uniform in its wickedness but seldom able to conspire except in the most general manner of acquiescence and agreement.

Boniface said...

Thanks for the article TH2. It is always the highlight of my day when I see you posted something new. Thank God for us on "social media"

Dorothy said...

Actually, I said "free from bile" because MC was harping on how nasty everyone was being, and I was googling him as much as he was, and I didn't see anything as nasty as he claimed. I wasn't being sanctimonious; I was contradicting the man.

Meanwhile, anything MC says about his private correspondence, and whether people are as nasty or delightful to him as he claims, we can all choose to believe or disbelieve as we like. I'm amazed that people--including you--choose to believe him. Not only is his credibility in the toilet after his remark about how we dummies had just figured out "I've been an Anglican for a year" remark (which in itself was untrue since nobody knew how long he'd been attached to the ACC until he wrote that), he had wailed in the CR about the abuse he supposedly got from Mary Wagner's mother, whose remarks were pretty mild when you consider what he wrote about Mary.

I didn't agree with Stockland's take, but I had bigger fish to fry in my next column. Meanwhile, nobody called bloggers or Catholics on social media "riff-raff." Nobody I know and like in Catholic journalism thinks bloggers and Catholics on social media are "riff-raff." Catholic bloggers and Catholics who spread breaking news through social media are incredibly helpful, as a matter of fact.

Probably nothing will convince you that the Canadian and American Catholic media (and Churches) are not all one big back-slapping club, so I won't even attempt to explain how it isn't. But anybody who wants can write letters to an editor or offer him/her a well-written 700 word op ed on why Mr Stockland is clearly wrong. Mostly Catholic editors are looking for Catholics who can write coherently. They're constantly looking for "new voices."



You don't mention that MC has been let go or has resigned as a columnist/presenter from all the Catholic and Protestant heritage media organizations he worked with: the Interim (pre-revelations, too), the CR, CWR, Crossroads Television Network and now even the Prairie Messenger. There is tolerance in Catholic media for a wide range of opinion but not for deception.

Dorothy said...

Thank you.

Dorothy said...

Nobody knew about Coren except, presumably, Anglicans. We just wondered why he was changing his mind on things and starting to attack old allies or people he would normally have defended. Nobody in the Catholic media (or at the Interim) knew that Coren was planning to jump to the ACC; we didn't find out for days afterwards. If an ordinary Catholic reader hadn't had an Anglican pal who told him, who knows how long before we would have known?

Barona Barona said...

My point is his sad and tragic departure from Catholic doctrine on moral issues was well know for well over a year. In fact, a few far seeing persons knew something was unfolding for several years.... as to his formal apostasy - of course, that was his own private drama.

TH2 said...

Bishop Athanasius Schneider agrees with you: "Thanks be to God the internet exists".

TH2 said...

..."nobody stopped him". Thank you, marylise, for re-stating that which these self-appointed legates failed to do and do not want to speak about. All the signs were there for the last couple of years.

TH2 said...

To says "conspiracies are fantasy" is a blanket statement. A lot of bogus conspiracy theories, true, but not all. One need only refer to the collaboration of the philosophes, German Illuminists and French Freemasons in relation to the French Revolution.

Barona Barona said...

'Professional Catholic" a terrible, but too true term. Especially evil in our age - a replay of the second century in Rome. I wonder how many "professionals" they had? Probably some - history does not record them. Only the martyrs; especially the virgin-girl martyrs who could stare down the evil Roman Empire. My point is by last Spring this poor man, though not a formal apostate, was writing in a manner that was openly unCatholic. That was when the plug should have been pulled. The heat was already boiling when he articulated his position while writing for the very unconservative SUN media. It was always a mystery to me why EWTN gave him a few shows. I recall writing to a friend last year that it will end in disaster. I was proven right. Simply because I read this tragic man and took him at his word.

marylise said...

This is a pattern we are seeing in a number of contexts. People who use the Church for money do not react to scandal until forced to do so. This was true of the homosexual epidemic among priests, individual monsters like Weakland (homosexuality fueling financial crime) and the Strange Case of John Corapi ("unfit for ministry"), to name a few. In all these cases, people in the Catholic media must have known what was going on long before the story broke. (If they did not know, they should have known. There is such a thing as due diligence.)Back to Michael Coren, we have to hand him credit for brazenness. How many apostates claim with a straight face that they are leaving the Catholic Church because they are holier than the Catholic Church?

marylise said...

Your observation is extraordinarily interesting. It makes you wonder if Michael Coren might be suffering from what exorcists call "demonic obsession." These are cases in which God permits the devil to torture a person with repetitive thoughts that the person cannot control. Another possibility is something in his personal life that has created cognitive dissonance. For example, if he had a relative who revealed an addiction to sodomy, Michael Coren might not have the intellectual capacity to understand that the teaching of the Church is mercy and grace for that person. In this case, his whole apostasy would be a misguided attempt to protect himself from the knowledge that someone he loves is on the way to hell.

John Laws said...

a.nolen doesn't fit the profile of a conspiracy theorist. She is a financial analyst who does things like map out capital flows between companies in an industry and determining which companiles share directors. She has also worked as a think tank analyst under/alongside many senior CIA personel. In additional to her direct experience of the culture in the intelligence community, she has thoroughly analysed much of the official literature on CIA history and declassified documents obtained throuh FOIA requests. She gives a bit of her background here: http://anolen.com/2014/06/20/the_thinking_disease/ and here: http://anolen.com/2013/10/02/closing-minds/


I've pointed TH2 to her because her analysis of the secular world of media and publishing parallels what TH2 has done with the Catholic scene. Coren and his crowd fit so neatly into her scenarios that one has to wonder if we're looking at the same phenomenon. Is TH2's "Magic Circle" a component of the CIA's managed opposition? Is E. Michael Jones onto something?

TH2 said...

Readers: be advised that there is in these com boxes multiple comments by a member of the Catholic press doing her routine damage control. I would also advise commenters not too engage too much, for you will reparteed with an endless vortex of excuses and diversions to defend her fellow journalists. It's a dead end.

TH2 said...

Very good points, Mr. Laws. Quite interesting. I am going to explore more.

Dorothy said...

Aw. I wouldn't call it damage control. I think of it as engaging the critics. If my fellow Catholics are good and mad at the Catholic media, then I respect that and I want to read what they have to say. Of course, I feel it my duty to clear up whichever misconceptions with some clarifying inside knowledge (regarding my own words, for example).


I'm amused that you used the word "vortex", for I once (ONCE) had lunch in Rome with Michael Voris, who paid for everyone at the table, which was very handsome of him. I suspect that on this occasion there may actually have been Pellegrino.

Boniface said...

I met Mike Voris in West Virginia once and I can corroborate that he was extremely gracious, humble and charitable in person.

Pater Ignotus said...

Another insightful commentary on what in polite circles will be referred to as an imbroglio. Yes, in addition to letters of praise and commendation for a decision to apostatize one hears only the sound of silence from those who should speak unequivocally on matters such as these. There are two issues to consider: zeal and collusion.

As you rightly indicate, zeal ought to inform any response to this act of apostasy and all the other tragedies that constitute the lamentable litany of errors condoned that characterise the life of CanChurch. Zeal however, like piety is a sign of mental illness for those who govern and sit atop the rubble of a once vibrant Church in our country. This is why the desecration of the Blessed Sacrament is met with shrugs and indifference. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re72di5phM0

Collusion. If the likes of Mr. Coren could become de facto spokesmen, I mean spokespersons for the establishment church, it is because the shepherds are silent. If they are silent, it is because they are in collusion with all that is wrong with this culture. For a time Mr. Coren was free to fulminate and pontificate on matters that any priest would be excoriated for mentioning in a Sunday sermon. He was as it were a "fidei defensor" in the manner of Henry VIII, without the papal honorific; though we can assume that at some episcopal level, the title was implied. His personal "journey" has taken him elsewhere just as Henry's journey took him elsewhere.... It seems that Mr. Coren has now begun to defend the indefensible and so motivated by zeal, we poor members of the "Church of Nasty" will pray for the salvation of his immortal soul; in the hope that he will see the error of his ways.

Pray we must and vigilant we must be. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re72di5phM0

TH2 said...

Boniface, the the word "vortex" was mentioned with no association to The Vortex program. The journalist introduced the word and her Roma lunch with Voris to grandstand, so as to give credibility her being a Traditional Catholic. In fact, she regularly defends heretics, or anyone across the progressive-to-conservative board for that matter (cf. last two paras. of this post). She's all over the place, and therefore is not to be trusted.

I'm sure Mr. Voris is as you say in person. However, this does not negate the fact that CMTV's news blackout on Francis and their vilification of the SSPX (incl. those Traditionalist Catholics, non-SSPX, who support them) is effectively the same modus operandi as what the Neo-Catholics have done for years.

kaufman316 said...

Straight from the playbook of Johnny Cochrane (R.I.P.) :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense

LionelAndrades said...

Sedevacantists and traditionalists should check the websites they follow and ask where is B an exception to A

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/07/sedevacantists-and-traditionalists.html

Post a Comment