Thu 24th Jul 2014 | Last updated: Wed 23rd Jul 2014 at 16:03pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo
Hot Topics

Comment & Blogs

Should there be a Guild of Catholic Bloggers? And would it be dominated by ‘Taliban Catholics’?

Yes, there should: but let’s knock this ‘Taliban’ stuff on the head

By on Wednesday, 13 April 2011

Blogger Michael Voris is the keynote speaker at The*Other* Rome Blognic

Blogger Michael Voris is the keynote speaker at The*Other* Rome Blognic

Two website pieces on “Catholic must-reads” caught my attention yesterday: they are not entirely unconnected, I think. The first was the suggestion by “a reluctant sinner” (I couldn’t find the author’s name on his blog) that there should be a guild of Catholic bloggers.

The first question that occurs to me is this: what would be such a blog’s general complexion? There have been, from “liberal” quarters (note the inverted commas) dark grumblings about the “Catholic blogosphere” as being irredeemably reactionary (incidentally, there’s a word that could do with a bit of reclaiming: what’s wrong with reacting against undesirable developments?).

The other piece (on the website Thoughts from an Oasis in French Catholicism) is a protest by its writer, Jane Mossendew, against such reactionaries calling themselves by the liberal insult “Taliban Catholic” (an illiberal term invented by the normally moderate and genuinely liberal commentator John L Allen of the National Catholic Distorter – sorry, Reporter).

This is how Miss or Mrs Mossendew (how I wish I were called “Mossendew” rather than “Oddie”) puts it: “Now stop it you lot! A joke’s a joke among friends, but you are using the phrase more than the people who coined it as a tasteless, even spiteful insult to orthodox Catholics. If we’re not careful ‘Taliban Catholic’ risks entry in a future Oxford Dictionary as follows: ‘American journalistic phrase coined circa 2010, descriptive of orthodox Catholics (defunct). One who supported the papacy of Benedict XVI. Accepted by traditional Catholics as an estimate of their rigid, repressive and inhumane position’.”

John Allen, to be fair, isn’t himself entirely happy about having invented the term. This is how he explains himself. At a university meeting in Dallas, he spoke of the existence of two polarities in Catholic opinion: “On the one extreme lies what my friend and colleague George Weigel correctly terms ‘Catholicism Lite,’ meaning a watered-down, sold-out form of secularised religiosity, Catholic in name only. On the other is what I call ‘Taliban Catholicism’, meaning a distorted, angry form of the faith that knows only how to excoriate, condemn, and smash the TV sets of the modern world.’

“Some in the audience chuckled, but others weren’t so amused. One younger faculty member rose during the Q&A period to offer a thoughtful, and heartfelt, challenge:

” ‘To say things with clarity is not to be the Catholic Taliban,’ she said, adding that she found the phrase ‘profoundly offensive.’

” ‘There are no suicide bombers in the Catholic church,’ she said, ‘but we have had an epidemic of Catholicism Lite for the last 30 years.’ Younger Catholics, she insisted, should not be dismissed as fanatics simply because they seek ‘fidelity and clarity’.”

Quite right, in my opinion. But how come the term became so quickly accepted as an apt and permissible jibe by anti-orthodox Catholics? I suspect that, ironically, it’s a kind of back-handed tribute; the Taliban, after all, is turning out to be pretty effective: all the military might of the American-led operation in Afghanistan hasn’t smashed it yet. The Taliban has kept up with modern tactics and armaments, just as it’s the orthodox counter-revolution in the Church, rather than its enemies, who have most effectively seized the opportunities of the blogosphere.

Which brings me back to the two pieces I began by discussing.

I was right about the probable complexion of the proposed new guild of Catholic bloggers: Thoughts from an Oasis in French Catholicism, which has now declared itself in support of the guild, describes itself as “An Oasis in French, English and Welsh Catholicism.… dedicated to the support of His Holiness Benedict XVI through prayer-based apostolic action. Traditional Roman Catholic and loyally obedient to his authority as Successor of Peter”; and according to “reluctant sinner” himself (or herself), the proposed guild now has the support of Fr Tim Finigan: enough said.

Now: back to this apparently strange phenomenon, of some Catholic counter revolutionaries adopting the insult “Taliban Catholic” as a badge of honour. The trouble is that that would be taken as implying that we actually agree with the Taliban on some very nasty ideas, like forbidding the education of girls and the employment (and general liberation) of women. There are far too many aggressive secularist slurs against the Catholic Church for its supposed suppression of women for the joke to be even remotely funny: too many idiotic suggestions within the Church, too, that this is precisely what’s implied by an all-male priesthood.

If a liberal insult is to be adopted, I wouldn’t mind being called a “reactionary” because of its widespread use against people who, in Jane Mossendew’s formulation, are “loyally obedient to [Pope Benedict’s] authority as Successor of Peter” (it’s necessary to add that last pro-papal qualification, since not all those who would describe themselves as “traditional Roman Catholics” actually believe in being “loyally obedient to his authority”. And the trouble with that, I suppose, is that they’re more reactionary than I am: I just react against so-called liberals (and particularly against their illiberality); but some reactionaries react against papal authority as well. It’s all very confusing. What about distinguishing between single and double reactionaries? Alternatively, let’s call the whole thing off.

Meanwhile, the guild appears to be gathering support. It certainly has mine: there are great possibilities here. It’s already come up, I suggest, against one possible snag: that as so far conceived it seems, on the face of, it to go against the very nature of the blogosphere.

It all seems to be being conceived as a distinctly earth-bound and national rather than, like the blogosphere, operating supra-nationally in cyberspace: “The proposed Guild for Catholic Bloggers,” says “reluctant sinner”, “would need active members and a few officers – chair, secretary and treasurer – so would have to be limited to those bloggers from this country (UK), or those able to travel to Britain … The Guild might also wish to find a president, and a chaplain to celebrate its annual Mass”.

All that “chair, secretary and treasurer” stuff (not “chair”, please) seems a bit bureaucratic, maybe. Maybe not. I really don’t want to be unhelpful, I write tentatively: but couldn’t something be thought up so that the whole thing would operate essentially in cyberspace? Masses could be said internationally, in different countries: there could even be online meetings of a sort. As for officers, they could – if still thought necessary – be suggested and voted for online.

Don’t ask me how, I’m no nerd: but there must be Catholic nerds out there who could make sensible suggestions about how, technically, it might all be organised. I end uncertainly: this needs more thought, from as many people as possible. Thus, inconclusively, ends this post; not with a bang but with queries to which I have no answers.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Gregory-Brian-Sadler/100000075821793 Gregory Brian Sadler

    I would say get it started, and as it develops some reasonable and logical organizational structure will begin to emerge. You could even devote a standing discussion of the guild to that question

    I’m not sure why some say that it would need to be sited in the UK, or that members would need to be able to travel there — the whole point of web-based networks is to get beyond physical locations, and to promote communication, inquiry, community — sure, members couldn’t all participate in a mass together unless they were all to gather together, but aren’t we all (those of us in communion, that is) actually participating in the same body and blood, soul and divinity not only as everyone else in the world at the moment, but also the same throughout time past and future?

    I very much like this idea of a guild of Catholic bloggers — which could be a very useful resource for Catholics worldwide — and though I’m across the ocean from you, I’d be interested to join.

  • Anthony Ozimic

    One of the reasons why “Taliban” like me took up the Taliban moniker as an amusing badge of honour is that it exposes and ridicules the cliche-ridden Modernist mindset of the Tabletistas. (Btw William, “traditional Roman Catholics” do believe in being “loyally obedient to the Pope’s authority” – when that authority is exercised in conformity with the Faith.)

  • Anthony Ozimic

    And no, “Tabletista” is not itself a cliche, but an accurate description of the Leftism and liberation theology of Tablet supporters. I recall Clifford Longley in a column announcing triumphantly: “Here comes the Religious Left”.

  • W Oddie

    Yes, but the trouble is this: who are YOU to determine when that is? I think that’s for the pope to decide. Obedience is obedience.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t understand why people (both orthodox and un-orthodox Catholics) keep mentioning “Catholic Taliban”.

    It’s time to bury it.

  • Anonymous

    If you scrolled to the bottom of my blog, you’d see my name, Dylan Parry, and my email address, if you wish to contact me. (I am no professional writer, so don’t feel worthy enough to publish my name on every post). Also, I thought the Herald had linked to the post by my name not blog name?

    Any Catholic who is, or who is resolved to be, faithful to the teachings of the Catholic Church is more than welcome to join any proposed Guild of Bloggers. The intention in setting it up is to form a society where those who blog could meet up in person, share ideas, organise workshops (on writing, etc) and attend an annual Mass together. If many join, then it might even be possible to invite bishops to address the members, or even hand out a peer-judged award to the best Catholic blog etc.

    It’s merely an embryonic idea – entirely dependent on God’s will.

  • http://spreadthyfragrance.blogspot.com/ Jackie Parkes

    I can’t see it working really as there are different approaches to blogging…we although faithful to the magisterium don’t all follow the same blogs!

  • Anonymous

    @ W Oddie

    Please forgive my manners… I forgot to thank you for your piece and your support. Your comments about bureaucracy have been noted – and I also tend to agree with your points, too.

    God bless.

  • http://therecusanthousemate.blogspot.com/ Mark Chatwood

    ‘Taliban’ this….’reactionary’ that…’liberal’ the other…all fascinating stuff, I’m sure. Yet we’ve all missed the most important point about this proposed guild – who will be it’s patron saint? St. Francis de Sales (patron of writers)? St. Therese of Lisieux – aren’t blogs kind of like diaries for the soul? How about Ven. Elisabeth Leseur, who’s diary converted her husband (assuming Venerables can be patrons of things)? Dare I suggest my own great hero, Bl. John Henry Newman, a prolific writer?

    Let’s start with the crucial stuff i.e. this, and take it from there.

  • reddog

    Would they all have to be catchers instead of pitchers, like priests?

  • Anonymous

    Wrong again. Our primary obedience is to the Faith. Obedience to all human beings must be subject to that scrutiny. And yet again I remind you of the Catholic position on this which is that no teaching which deviates to the right or to the left of the Traditional Faith as handed down to us from the apostles, repeated by Pontiffs down the centuries, whether part of the Ordinary or Extraordinary Magisterium, can command our obedience. That’s why we can rebuke the popes for their Assisi gatherings. Those events deviate, blatantly, from repeated exhortations by Popes in the matter of our separated brethren and non-Christians – all those outside the fold. Catholic doctrine, not to mention the First Commandment, and were the pope to command that we attend or otherwise embrace these scandals, he would be exceeding his authority.
    But he wouldn’t need to worry – the papolatrists would buy their plane tickets, in jig time.

    Which reminds me – are you going to Assisi III, William?

  • Anonymous

    Ma’am – with due respect – this Guild of Catholic Bloggers could be of crucial import, significance and worth for the Faith in this country.

    Don’t spoil this.

  • Anonymous

    St Isidore is the patron of the Internet – and technically a Guild for Catholic bloggers should have ‘All Saints’ [the unacknowledged members of the Church Triumphant] as its patrons – in a similar way all its work should be dedicated and offered up for the Souls in Purgatory.

    …but if it came to a single Patron I’d back St Francis de Sales all the way.

    Why?

    Introduction to the Devout Life surpasses ANY other spiritual guidebook for the Faithful – thousands have been written since and few have come anywhere near its beauty, its wonder, its call to Truth, Love and Life in Christ.

    St Francis’s missionary and evangelical zeal through a prophetical form of blogging – pamphleteering – not only returned hundreds of thousands of the poor,confused, alienated, lonely, dispossessed & disenfranchised to the Faith – they brought comfort, solace, reassurance and a demanding challenge for action and zeal among the faithful to rekindle the flame of Faith within the land.

    Michael Voris says this is a time for heroes.

    I think it’s quite poignant that we Catholics [especially in Britain] DO have a designated hero – we have a Papally declared ‘Defender of the Faith’ [Pius XII while Cardinal Pacelli in 1936]- someone who even more ironically composed poems called ‘The Last Hero’ and ‘The Secret People’.

    Is there anyone, apart from their Holinesses, who is more quoted in blogs than the Ultimate Lay Blog-Patron? Gilbert Keith Chesterton ?

    If we could even begin to emulate that great man’s work in this new Guild? We would not [could not!] go far wrong.

  • Anonymous

    Ivereigh’s moved on in his use of dismissive derisory terminology – rather than being ‘Taliban’ he [together with any emulating lapdog] now refers to us as ‘Ultras’ .

  • Basil Loft@ss

    I’m against a guild. The strength of blogging is freedom. The web has challenged the hegemony of the traditional salons especially theological faculties which have become an irrelevance. It is significant that “The Tablet” does not launch a blog and prefers to pontificate from on high. At least William “Mossendew” Oddie is prepared to get his hands dirty.

  • Brian Kopp

    For heaven’s sake, John Allen didn’t invent the term! See this thread from 2002, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/680673/posts:

    Diocese Too Liberal, Book Says

    Excerpt:

    …Author Rose writes that David J. Brown, a clinical psychologist under contract with the Altoona-Johnstown diocese to screen candidates for the priesthood, has “gone out of his way to make the case that homosexuality is ‘perfectly normal’ and that ‘homosexuality is natural, not unnatural.’ ”

    He criticizes Brown for telling the school board in State College that they were wrong to exclude homosexual speakers from Penn State.

    “The fact that someone would pose such an argument is not news itself. But when such a man, whose views are publicly known, is contracted to screen applicants for the seminary, what is remarkable is the obvious incompatibility,” the book says.

    In a telephone interview form his State College office, Brown said he did testify in favor of non-discrimination and non-harassment of homosexuals.

    “I drew from the Bishop’s Pastoral Letter on the topic, and I expressed the opinion that Jesus would be appalled at such bigotry.”

    Rose is “trying to reconfigure the current sex scandal into an anti-homosexual crusade. It’s like anti-Semitism,” he said.

    “Part of Rose’s central thesis is that ultra-liberals and gays have taken over the process of becoming a priest, and that I only give liberals or gays a recommendation. That’s false and paranoid,” Brown said. “These people are pathologically homophobic, and the goal of local conservative Catholics is to have the bishop terminate my work.

    “They are the local Catholic Taliban. They insist on their point of view. They are relentless, mean-spirited and punitive,” he said.

    Catholic conservative George Foster strongly disagrees:

    “Dr. Brown’s attitude explains the current crisis in the Church today.”

  • Joel Pinheiro

    So long as the guild doesn’t fall for the same vice as its medieval predecessors did: that of banning all providers of their service who were not members of the guild, it seems a splendid idea.

    Many inidvidual bloggers naturally cluster together in guilds, which benefit everyone: each blogger gets more readers, each reader gets a larger host of authors to read from. Now, these things are usually done without “chair, secretary and treasurer”, though if substantial revenue started pouring in (say, from advertisings or subscription), some of that may become necessary.

  • Anonymous

    …and when does it NOT conform under Pope Benedict?

    Mr Ozimic: To even suggest otherwise is misleading.

    As one of the few personally chosen to be publicly condemned, dismissed and ridiculed by Ivereigh as both ‘Taliban’ and then ‘Taliban wannabee’ I think I have some right to express outrage at the term…but instead all I choose to say is that despite all John Allen’s and Austen Ivereigh’s renown[notoriety], tenure, media presence and bank balances – I hit my knees every night and thank God that I am not them!

  • http://therecusanthousemate.blogspot.com/ Mark Chatwood

    Ahh! I had wondered if there was a saint renowned for publishing tracts and pamphlets, thinking (like you) that this is the precursor to blogging. Doctor Caritatis it is then!

    Maybe the first campaign of the Guild could be for everyone to chip in for the cause for sainthood of GKC, and then it could add Blessed Gilbert of Battersea to its patrons.

  • Anonymous

    Sir, with all due respect, this Guild of Catholic Bloggers if it ever comes about (please God, no!) will be but an instrument, probably a stick, with which to beat traditional Catholics into submission. There’ll be rules and more rules about what we can say and not say (SSPX Mass attendees will be banned for starters) and all in all, I can’t work up any enthusiasm about it at all.

    In any case, I think you’ve replied to the wrong blogger; it was YOU not me, who deviated from the topic of the Guild… I was merely responding to what William Oddie said in response to YOU.

    Not for nothing, do I watch Columbo.

  • Anonymous

    er…Dr Oddie hasn’t responded to me but to Ozzy.
    AND
    What you don’t understand is that the basic network in the Catholic blogosphere IS devout,orthodox and one of the strongest weapons we have against the sins,weaknesses and failings of our ‘establishment’

    [maybe not according to your stultified, donatistic view where the cold is God's way of telling us to burn more protestants, homosexuals, atheists and any Catholic who disagrees with your detractive, inhumane pharisaism - But it is Catholic with a sincerity and authenticity your rigoristic muck-raking legalism lost ages ago]

    If you’re such an ingrate as to write against the Holy Father, it’s hardly surprising that you’d turn on your friends and potentially your best allies in the blogosphere – which is why I’m begging you to stop being such a damned fool and wake up! Realise that this Guild can be one of the best forces for good South of the Border – a group which will actually defend and promote the Faith where those ordained with the apostolic and sacerdotal mandate to do so fail so miserably.

    Your griping [and possibly printed posturing] against it can lead to certain unwelcome outcomes – one of them being the more devout and orthodox being reticent to join – thus leaving the Guild open to being hijacked by the professional metropolitan elite ‘in crowd’ who flaunt round Westminster. Do you want a guild built by Ordinary Catholic bloggers? Or the network elitist nepotistic hangers-on employed in the quangoes – Catholic Voices types? If you want to play into +Vin’s and Opus Dei’s and Ivereigh’s hands – You keep on condemning the ordinary bloggers until they become despondent and think the exercise is futile against the odds of a massive leviathan which is Westminster incorporated with its vast spider’s web of in-fighting and one-upmanship and jobs for the boys….

    You are not helping!

    Columbo? Ma’am you haven’t got past the detective capabilities of Enid Blyton’s Secret Seven!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_754KCWR4G4GJ4NQRXDQ4SSZ2NM John

    It would be nice to see a single web site where instead of the errant views,outside Traditional Catholic tradition and all the attachments thereof that those who are such could read and enhance the Love of the Catholic Church.

    A Guild would be much like the web, an open forum and those who seek opinions, those who seek Traditional Catholic may seek and find the truth. The sites I view are often full of the spirit but short of facts on Catholicism.

    If we do further erode in those values, the loss of our faith will be imminent and we find ourselves on the edges of our society, if not already because the sins on men we supported and their deprivation of spirit we were unaware. I think without knowing Mr Michael Voris is a man I would think a Catholic in every sense. The ideas, and if you read Evangelical exhortations, I have, they state disdain for Catholicism and they are on the march. It is this simple we need more Mr Voris’s and fewer apologists in Catholicism. In short we need to stand up for not only our faith but for ourselves.

    If anyone thinks not, I suggest a dollar download of God’s War, in Foreign Affairs Magazine; September/October 2006 and see for yourself. They choose not to live in any community and believe they have a position of political, we have seen; and moral values, yet the Catholic Church was the first and most adamant on abortion, on social justice and this clown who now had his wife decide the AIDS in Africa was a disgrace…it was those of the Catholic faith who labored in Africa for years that brought this to the attention of America. We need more voices that stand against the apostasy of the “know nothings” amongst us again.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_754KCWR4G4GJ4NQRXDQ4SSZ2NM John

    It would be nice to see a single web site where instead of the errant views,outside Traditional Catholic tradition and all the attachments thereof that those who are such could read and enhance the Love of the Catholic Church.

    A Guild would be much like the web, an open forum and those who seek opinions, those who seek Traditional Catholic may seek and find the truth. The sites I view are often full of the spirit but short of facts on Catholicism.

    If we do further erode in those values, the loss of our faith will be imminent and we find ourselves on the edges of our society, if not already because the sins on men we supported and their deprivation of spirit we were unaware. I think without knowing Mr Michael Voris is a man I would think a Catholic in every sense. The ideas, and if you read Evangelical exhortations, I have, they state disdain for Catholicism and they are on the march. It is this simple we need more Mr Voris’s and fewer apologists in Catholicism. In short we need to stand up for not only our faith but for ourselves.

    If anyone thinks not, I suggest a dollar download of God’s War, in Foreign Affairs Magazine; September/October 2006 and see for yourself. They choose not to live in any community and believe they have a position of political, we have seen; and moral values, yet the Catholic Church was the first and most adamant on abortion, on social justice and this clown who now had his wife decide the AIDS in Africa was a disgrace…it was those of the Catholic faith who labored in Africa for years that brought this to the attention of America. We need more voices that stand against the apostasy of the “know nothings” amongst us again.

  • Quareitur

    I suppose you don’t see it working because it wouldn’t be centered around you or the Birmingham Oratory and limited to discussing how wonderful your children are.

  • Catholic Joe

    Stop calling Catholics Taliban Catholics! Have charity! Great–just great! People who observe the magesterium of the Church and all its teachings are now Taliban Catholics…

    The labeling has to stop!

  • http://spreadthyfragrance.blogspot.com/ Jackie Parkes

    My recent blog posts:
    40 days for life; Muslim demographics; natural family planning; contraception leading to abortion; Pope JP 2; Cardinal newman apps for I Phone; Blessed virgin Mary & priests; The Hiding Place; Catholic education & Archbishop Bernard Longley; Divine Mercy Apps & Devotion; Pioneer Total Abstinence association & Alcoholism; AA & Al -Anon recoverey programmes; St Therese by Pope Benedict; Mental health through Will training & my doctor daughter’s wedding.

  • Jacob S

    I’m getting the feeling that the Taliban Catholic thing is along the lines of the Americans singing “Yankee Doodle” towards the end of the revolutionary war. We still occasionally here it today, sung with pride, despite the fact that the lyrics could be summed up by “I’m an unsophisticated moron.”

    To those of you talking about when to obey the pope: you need to reread Paul’s letters, St Ignatius, and nearly every other holy person on obedience. We are to obey are bishops, especially the bishop of Rome. Exceptions would be if we are ordered to do something obviously sinful, BUT we are hardly ordered to do much of anything positive and the stuff your quibbling about doesn’t count as obvious.

    For the non-obvious, the bishops are accountable. If there are problems in how bishops apply that terrible thing known as “the spirit of Vatican II,” that’s on the bishops. What we can’t do is start ignoring our bishops because we think they’re wrong or, worse yet, pull a Luther and separate from the Church Christ founded.

    A guild would be awesome (complaints that SSPX people wouldn’t be allowed in are somewhat silly – they are very purposefully not in communion with the Church, so why pretend to be? If you’re gonna be a schismatic, at least admit it, even if the circumstances by which the schism occurred were unfortunate and avoidable with a little more sense on both sides (how else could they be?). But even so, I imagine that you can get yourself heard). I am a Catholic nerd, but not of the computer variety, so unfortunately my nerdiness cannot be applied here.

  • http://exlaodicea.wordpress.com/ berenike

    What would the Guild be *for*?

  • http://exlaodicea.wordpress.com/ berenike

    Dear me, ressentiment.

  • Anonymous

    What a nasty, nasty post.

    I refuse to indulge in similar nasty personal attacks against you. I respond here merely to assure you that I won’t be joining your Guild of “Catholic” Bloggers, should it come to be, so fear not that I will spoil your cosy little “basic network.”

    Any truly “devout” and “orthodox” Catholic could not possibly object to my comments which are aimed at correcting errors and defending authentic Catholic teaching. However, if the Catholic Herald thinks I fit your horrendous description above, I’d like them to tell me so directly and without delay, and I will refrain from posting further comments on their blogs. Should they fail to do so, I won’t, if you don’t mind, allow you to drive me away. I will not, however, respond to any more of your posts for reasons that should be obvious to you. And I would appreciate it if you would refrain from commenting on anything that I say. I’m really not interested in your views.
    Thank you.

  • W Oddie

    I, on the contrary am very interested in them. As for accusing paulpriest of having written a “nasty, nasty” post, do you ever read your own after you have sent them? Many are certainly no less nasty.

  • Anthony Murphy

    Will, I invented the term. I am the one you must blame. I have considered it at length, and I stand by it. There is the reality of the Catholic Taliban in the blogosphere.
    1) There is a hyper-reactionary element which infests your own blog, and you do little to nothing to stop it.
    2) You will not be acknowledged as a guild until you convince a Bishop you are on the right path; that is, you are good for the Church.
    3) What the hell is a “liberal” when it comes to being Catholic?
    You tell me Will, am I a liberal? What exactly have I said that is not Catholic? Are you not close? Close to using your dog whistle again?
    I am being as fair as I can, show me you are genuine; go after the Taliban you have encouraged too much.

  • http://spreadthyfragrance.blogspot.com/ Jackie Parkes

    I’m concerned re Editor CT since she/he doesn’t think the Fatima consecration has been done & keeps harping about NOT following our Popes..I find the postings a very strange mix of extremism..

  • http://spreadthyfragrance.blogspot.com/ Jackie Parkes

    My kids call me “extra!”..& talk about “taking things to the next level!”..all a compliment really!

  • Anonymous

    William,

    Quote any post of mine that comes close to the nastiness of that (and other) posts of paulpriest – his hatred of me has manifested itself on this blog many times, except I recognise it for what it is, not really personal animosity towards me (I’m just th “messenger”) but hatred towards the authentic teaching of the Church, which I promote. Which is why I always try to ignore his jibes. This time is different, through, as it’s a sustained personal attack on my integrity and could mislead people into belieiving that I am spouting extremism.

    I do my utmost to avoid being personal and do so only in jest. If I am wrong about this, please quote me and if you are right, I will apologise without reservation. I genuinely try not to be personal except in jest, and I am never deliberately or knowingly nasty. I would welcome correction if you can provide instances and, in fact, it would be a charity on your part to correct me. Thanks.

  • Anthony Murphy

    Jacob, you Sir are misguided. You think we Catholics like to hear the fringe elements tell us an Ecumenical Council was “trash”? You think we want to see the moderator not even have the slightest of temerity to even correct this point? Guild? You make me laugh Sir! You are not worthy of being a guild! That includes you Will Oddie, that includes you Karl Keating. You have nowhere near earned it. Improve your game, I shall review it in 12 months.

  • Anthony Murphy

    Get stuffed! Anyone who calls an ecumenical cnoucil “trash” is taliban. Dont tell me what to think… I am Catholic down to my cotton socks.

  • Anonymous

    Visit http://www.fatima.org and note the Fatima experts who will be addressing the forthcoming conference under the title “Consecration Now!”

    Anyone who thinks that we are enjoying the promised period of peace that Our Lady said would follow the Consecration of Russia as she prescribed it, must think again.

  • http://anglocath.blogspot.com Hilary White

    Jeepers! Why are you being so mean? Paul, if this is the kind of attitude that is going to guide this guild, then no thanks.

    You might think of yourself as the Righteous, the defender of the pope from the terrible forces of Evil, disobedient and meanspirited Traditionalists, but EditorCT didn’t smack you down with a string of insults, he didn’t call you a heretic, a Donatist, a pharisee, or a damned fool, and he didn’t say you wanted to burn people. It seems to me he brought up some serious reservations about the idea of a guild of Catholic bloggers. And in response got a spew of vitriol. Nice.

    Honestly, you’re not coming over very convincing in your claim of the moral high ground here.

    As to the substance of the issue, people who think the blogger guild idea is a bad on (me) simply know how blogs work. There are a number of people in the hierarchy in the UK, the US and Canada who are desperate to put a lid on them. To reign them in and start issuing decrees on how they are allowed to work, what they are allowed to say. No blogger is going to go for this. The nature of the thing is that it is an open field. People who start blogging just start, they say what’s on their minds. If other people like what they say, the blogger gets readership. If they keep it up long enough, that readership grows.

    As long as it is possible for someone to just start a blog one day and keep it up as long as the internet lasts, it is going to be impossible to regulate it from the outside. Fortunately, it is a naturally self-regulating system. People who can’t write, who have nothing interesting to say, who are sedes or heretics or just plain mean and nasty, humourless or pedantic, won’t get read.

    If it amuses y’all, then fill your boots and get a guild started. But its power to coerce compliance from bloggers is going to be nil, as is the power of any Official Hierarchical intervention. Until you can control the net itself (as some politicians have begun to wonder) it is going to be an un-policable free speech free-for-all and we’re just going to have to deal with it on its own terms.

    I realise that it is deep in the Anglo psyche to try to control and regulate and make everyone play the same way. But there are some things that just don’t work that way.

  • Petrus

    I cannot believe the nastiness in this post. Shocking.

    The majority of “Catholic” bloggers are orthodox? Don’t make me laugh. Truly orthodox bloggers are immediately pounced upon and denounced as “extremists” or “bigots”. Those who find the need to label themselves as a “Traditionalist Catholic” or an”Orthodox Catholic” are usually anything but. Truly they are Modernists, who will defend the Church’s teaching one minute, contradict it the next. Dangerous. Those of us who are truly “traditional/orthodox” are content to be known as Catholic. Either you are Catholic, accepting all the Church’s teachings, or you are not. If we deny one doctrine we place ourselves outside the Church.

  • Petrus

    Why don’t you provide some evidence to back up your sweeping statement, William? Again, a typical tactic of a Modernist – ignore the facts and go for slurs and insults. Sad, but not surprising.

  • Petrus

    “”Enlighten especially the people whose consecration and entrusting You are awaiting from us.”

    Pope John Paul II, 25th March, 1984.

    Enough said.

  • Quareitur

    In other words: the same usual stuff

  • W Oddie

    I am not a modernist. I shan’t be entering into discussion in the future with editor CT: after that, i shall be ignoring your posts too. You people seem to think that mindless taunts of this kind will automatically be responded to. In future, not by me

  • Vendeen

    …”Any truly “devout” and “orthodox” Catholic could not possibly object to my comments”,
    That’s a matter of opinion as are all your comments which often lack “orthodoxy”.

    …”And I would appreciate it if you would refrain from commenting on anything that I say. I’m really not interested in your views.”
    Yes and the rest of the world does not care what you have to say either but it does not stop you ramming your warped ideas down everyone elses throat. And don’t pretend the So-called CTS don’t endlessly harass and “expose” people.

  • W Oddie

    Look, I’ve had enough of these endless punch and judy quarrels. You describe your posts as “aimed at correcting errors and defending authentic Catholic teaching”. Even when it’s the pope himself you’re correcting, because of course you are the faithful Catholic and he’s not, just a modernist like all the others. Your arrogance is astonishing: you behave as though you were eaten up by the sin of pride. IT’s NOT YOUR JOB to be “correcting errors and defending authentic Catholic teaching”. That’s the job of the CDF. It used to horrify me that people like Kung and Schillebeeckx described themselves as the “alternative magisterium”. But that’s just what you are claiming for yourself. You need to take a good long hard look at yourself. But I shall not be responding any further to your provocations.

  • W Oddie

    I agree. Strange and deeply repugnant. I’m sick of this endless “more orthodox than thou” exhibitionism.

  • Horace Zagreus

    How about St Jerome, or St John Chrysostom? Intemperate, bitchy, constantly at daggers-drawn with their contemporaries, often holding to odd extra-magisterial opinions (at least in Jerome’s case)…

  • http://catholiclane.com Mary Kochan — Catholic Lane

    “Taliban ” — it’s the new “Nazi.” (One really must keep up with fashion…)

  • Anonymous

    Petrus – please tell me one major UK Catholic blogger who hasn’t been denounced as bigotted and extremist? Usually at least a few times a week?

    ..and I think you’ll find Modernism takes two forms – the general normative form of which we’re all acquainted and the reverse-pharisaical modernism found in such rags as Catholic Truth Scotland – where they declare themselves more Catholic than the Pope and rewrite Catholic teaching to conform to their donatistic jansenistic narrow viewpoint and attack anyone who disagrees ; with little consideration to the truth in their eviscerating hatchet-jobs or the consequences of the sins of calumny and detraction. Let’s face it: They’re sedevacantists without the resolve to publicly declare it.

    Please provide some evidence to substantiate your claim that the UK Catholic blogosphere is modernist ? [apart from those hardly read on the periphery - generally youngsters of the Allen Hall/Heythrop/Eco-yoof/diocesan-linked ilk]

    You might regard this as another post of ‘nastiness’ – well if ‘Catholic’ ‘Truth’ Scotland can’t stand the heat when it gets a little bit of what it constantly dishes out against all-comers; maybe they should have a long sit-down and a rethink of what they are truly supposed to be about?

    Copies of the EditorCT’s publication are readily available online for perusal – and I can honestly say I have never found anything remotely akin to it in either tone or venom among the UK Catholic bloggers…