But. alas, much to the chagrin of Father Z, he cannot follow me around and block every IP address to which I have access. As a result, I still have ways to access his blog and read his diatribes against the establishment Catholic Church. And it has not been pretty.
First up is Father Z's defense of Michael Voris. Yes, Father Z is defending the same Michael Voris who makes his living criticizing and condemning Catholic Church hierarchy. In fact, Father Z feels that Voris "clearly loves the Church"! It is interesting to note that Father Z bans me - someone who consistently supports the hierarchy of the Catholic Church - and promotes Michael Voris, whose bishop prohibits him from even using the word "Catholic" to describe his organization.
Voris has recently been losing many of his supporters. Many have turned against him not because he spews hateful, venomous rhetoric against priests, bishops and cardinals of the Catholic Church and condemns anyone who does not agree with him. On the contrary, Voris supporters love the vile condemnation espoused by their fallen hero.
Voris has recently been losing many of his supporters. Many have turned against him not because he spews hateful, venomous rhetoric against priests, bishops and cardinals of the Catholic Church and condemns anyone who does not agree with him. On the contrary, Voris supporters love the vile condemnation espoused by their fallen hero.
Voris supporters first became upset with Mikey about a year and a half ago when he said he will not include the Pope in his public condemnation of church hierarchy. Here is just one statement from a former Voris cheerleader illustrating the common feeling among many disillusioned Vorisites:
The position of CMTV does not make sense. It is not, nor has it even been, part of the Magisterium. It is just plain absurd, and it becomes the more absurd the more Pope Dope (very charitably called, on this blog, The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church History, TMAHICH; and this, only because he is the Pope) goes on with his astonishingly drunken, or drugged, or otherwise, at this point, indisputably evil statements.
This absurd position has already put CMTV in a quandary, because the reality is now punching them in the face every day, and Francis does all he can to help with the punching. Even the slower witted start to understand, in greater and greater numbers, that you can’t condemn Nazism and forever refuse to criticise Hitler. The fish stinks from the head down. The buck stops at the Pope. The Pope is, also here indisputably, the man who praises to the skies (Kasper) or moves to position of great influence (Forte, Baldisseri) those who push an heretical agenda, as he removes the orthodox (say: Burke) and appoints the heterodox (say: Cupich) whenever he can. You can’t go on criticising Goebbels and Himmler forever, and say that you will “not engage in any criticism of Hitler. Period” anymore, or you credibility will be soon used to make pig fodder.
As you can see this former Voris cheerleader is quite upset with his hero, and also does not hold back in the least in his vile name calling when it comes to Pope Francis. This guy ended his post with the following:
As many of his supporters have noted, Voris has no problem privately condemning the Holy Father, so they are rightfully bewildered at his refusal to publicly spew the same vile rhetoric against Pope Francis that he uses on the rest of Catholic hierarchy.
Mr Voris has publicly slandered Mr Ferrara, Mr Vennari and Mr Verrecchio. I am sure I forget a couple, but these three are the ones that come to mind. It is now high time that a honest and public apology to these men, and to those treated like them, be made. Until this is done, this will be a second heavy stone weighing down the credibility of Church Militant TV, a Catholic outlet which in the end seems bent on defending the very worst (Francis) whilst it viciously attacks the very best (Mr Ferrara, Mr Vennari, Mr Verrecchio, and obviously the SSPX).Call the pope any vile name you can think of, but don't you say one negative word about these radical traditionalists who reject everything post-Vatican II in the Church.
As many of his supporters have noted, Voris has no problem privately condemning the Holy Father, so they are rightfully bewildered at his refusal to publicly spew the same vile rhetoric against Pope Francis that he uses on the rest of Catholic hierarchy.
This has, of course, backfired big time on Voris. But he is a stubborn egotist who refused to learn the lesson that his supporters will not countenance public support of the Holy Father. In his further attempts to distance himself from other traditionalists, and yet still retain his role as chief attacker of Catholic hierarchy,Voris has now begun a campaign against the SSPX, which I wrote about HERE.
This has resulted in even more Voris supporters walking away from him. And this is where Father Z comes in, riding to the rescue of his good friend and fellow "lover of the Church". Father Z entitled his post, "SSPX Not In Schism". Father Z is no dummy. He didn't take any chances on offending his many followers by plainly speaking out against the SSPX as Voris did. He wrote a brilliant post defending both Michael Voris and the SSPX. An amazing example of having your cake and eating it too.
Father Z informs us that, "Michael is pushing hard that the SSPX is schismatic." Father Z then states that he does not agree that the SSPX is schismatic. According to Father Z, the SSPX are "Canonically screwed up" but not schismatic. Hmmmm. There would seem be a profound disagreement between "Michael" and Father Z.
Not so fast.
Father Z then links us to a Voris article entitled, "Former canonist for Holy See confirms Society is in material schism". However, according to Father Z, the article would have been better entitled, "Former canonist for Holy See confirms Society is not in de iure schism."
What does this mean? Father Z explains;
Material schism is vague. Maybe they are in material schism. Maybe they aren’t. Formal schism, on the other hand, is not fuzzy. We should not throw “schism” around and about the heads of the SSPX, even though we also should not deny that they are in a decidedly bad canonical situation and confusion abounds about their status.Father Z is admitting that the word "schism" should not be "thrown around", but nonetheless, Father Z gleefully informs us that the Voris article spreads light on the true canonical situation of the SSPX. So, you see, all of you who thought that Voris was attacking the SSPX are wrong - he was not doing any such thing. In fact, Voris was just actually setting the record straight. Father Z goes so far as to thank Voris:
I thank Mr. Voris, because he laid out with this interview many of the issues that plague the sacramental life of followers of the SSPX and he explodes the claim that the SSPX is formally schismatic.Without actually saying it, Father Z is telling all of the Voris supporters that Mikey is actually doing a very good thing, and we should not be attacking him but thanking him. The money quote is actually found in a Father Z response to a comment:
 |
| The Maquis |
One day after the post supporting Michael Voris, Father Z complained about the positive press given to Pope Francis as he arrived in Cuba and the United States. As Father Z whines:
There is a lot of energy swirling around and about the Holy Father’s visit to Cuba and, soon, to these United States. I’ve already heard MSM hype about how Francis is the pretty much the first Pope who has ever smiled or kiss a baby. As a matter of fact, he is the first Pope who has ever thought about poor or who has been nice. He is the most wonderfulest fluffiest Pope ehvur. He’s not like mean old Benedict! He was harsh and Francis is humble!
This is going to get really tiresome.
 |
| Source |
Meanwhile, not everything is “Rah! Rah! Francis!”, even in the MSM. It is good to know what they are saying as well.
First, check out George Will at WaPo. All I can say is brutal. His piece seems to be a preemptive strike not just against Francis and what he might say to Congress and to the UN about environmentalism and capitalism, but against the lib dems who will try to coopt Francis for cynical political reasons. The libs will accuse Will of shilling for the GOP, but I don’t think that that is what he is doing.To be fair, Father Z is not blatantly saying he supports this "brutal" article by George Will. But other than one statement, "We don’t, by the way, have to accept Will’s simplification of the science and Gallileo issue or about medieval economies," neither does he condemn it. Father Z seems to have no problem with any of the "brutal" accusations made against Pope Francis.
Father Z then gives us another example of "brutal" press:
Next comes something from the Weekly Standard by Jonathan V. Last.
Pope Francis: Menace or Farce?
Once again, Father Z does nothing to defend the Holy Father against these attacks. In fact, his only follow-up statement to calling Pope Francis "Menace or Farce?" is to say:Back in 1999, The Weekly Standard ran one of my favorite cover lines ever: The New Europe: Menace or Farce? I often think of that question when I watch Pope Francis.
While this piece also indicts the Pope’s handlers, the bucks land on the Pontiff’s desk.If anything, Father Z only reinforces the terrible accusations made against the Holy Father.
Father Z's followers gratefully acknowledge this post with comments such as the following:
Synod Fatigue is sure to be setting in now, if it hasn’t already.
Just wait. It’ll get worse.This is coming from a Catholic priest who has made promises of loyalty to the Magesterium of the Catholic Church. Doesn't seem very loyal to me.
Father Z continues, telling us why it is important to feel afraid and anxious, not exactly marks of the Holy Spirit:
But you must stay focused. Don’t tune out Synod news.
“But Father! But Father!”, some will say, “It’s all too much! I just can’t take it any more. It’s too depressing. Besides, we can’t do anything about it and it just makes me sad and scared.”
Good. I want you to be sad and scared.
I want you to feel some anxiety. Use your apprehension to stay focused on the issues. You must be ready and willing to talk about them with clarity in your own spheres of influence, to set matters straight, to correct errors in MSM reports and in the catholic media, to encourage others. You must have some anxiety fuel going for you to sustain you in the onslaught of articles and books that will flood your consciousness.Father Z has no problem with his readers tuning out the Holy Father. But he wants them to stay tuned into the Synod, not so that they will be aware of what is happening as much as he wants them to fight the Synod. This is coming from a priest of Jesus Christ, Our Lord, who told us "Be not afraid." I guess Father Z doesn't agree with I Timothy 1:7 - "For God has not given us a spirit of fearfulness, but one of power, love, and sound judgment."
By urging his readers to use fear as a motivator, Father Z empowers himself so that they will be more willing to listen to him. Fear is always used to manipulate people. That is why it can never be a tool of the Holy Spirit.
My purpose in doing this post is not to condemn Father Z, but to alert anyone who is willing to listen that his message, like that of so many traditionalists, is not in conformity with the Magesterium of the Church. The problem with traditionalists is that they are completely convinced of their own righteousness and infallibility. They believe they know exactly how the Church must proceed in this world, and anyone who does not agree with them - be it priest, bishop or pope - must be rejected. That is the message coming through strong and clear from Father Z.
The message of Father John Zuhlsdorf and the majority of Traditionlists is "My way or the highway." That is NOT the message of the Gospel. As Jesus Christ said, "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light". I pray for the day when I will hear this message from Father Zuhlsdorf and the rest of the traditionalists, but sadly, I'm not holding my breath.
