Amppax Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I don't like Mark Shea. I think his positions are almost always wrong, and I don't like his style or tone. I feel he's too nice and tries to walk around the issue instead of just saying what it is. That doesn't mean I don't appreciate that he has brought a sizable amount of people to the Church, and that many people like his tone. Just because I don't like his tone, that doesn't mean I believe he does nothing good for the Church, and I don't hate him with a passion as a result. I don't begin seething and foaming at the mouth whenever someone on Phatmass mentions his name. The issue is, many of you begin seething and foaming at the mouth whenever Michael Voris is mentioned simply because you don't like his tone, and because of his tone you have grown to hate other things about him simply because of who he is. You neglect the fact that he has through both ChurchMilitant.TV and in his personal life converted many people to the Faith, including me. You forget (Or at least never bothered to learn) that he left a job where he was making half a million dollars a year to start an apostolate that is so expensive to run he barely breaks even. Your blind vehemence towards him has made you forget that, tone aside, he is a son of the same Church as you, and he is merely doing his best to try and bring as many people to the fullness of the Church as possible. He does what he does out of love, not out of hatred. And that is the issue I take with you and others on here who act like Michael Voris is Satan incarnate, and though I have no ties to Matt Walsh, it saddens me that your outlook on Voris extents to Walsh as well. It's uncharitable. Michael Voris and Matt Walsh are your brothers in Christ. We don't always like our family members or get along with them, but they are our family members nonetheless. People have different personalities and respond to different tones. I and many others respond very effectively to Michael Voris' blunt and straightforward tone, and we feel it is a breath of fresh air in this culture of tip-toeing around the issues. You don't like his tone. That's fine. Follow someone else. But that doesn't mean you get to brand Michael Voris as a terrible Catholic just because you don't happen to be one of the people that likes his tone. I think most people here's response to Voris is just about identical to your response to Shea. I can point out numerous posts where you completely dismiss something because it's an article by Shea. You're grossly exaggerating people's response to Voris, probably because you like him so much. I'd say your middle paragraph is a pretty good indicator of that. And when we express displeasure with Voris, Walsh, et al., it's because we don't think they're acting in a Christian/virtuous manner, and wish they would. I think both are poor representatives of our faith. This saddens me, but doesn't cause me to foam at the mouth. If anything, it causes me sadness, not anger. It's disappointment, not distress. You have a different opinion of that. Fine. We could both argue until we're blue in the face, but it probably won't change much. You brought Voris into this, as is often the case when he comes up. But if anyone's "foaming at the mouth" it's you in your defense of Voris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 If anyone is foaming at the mouth, they really should go see a doctor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Wednesday Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I've never read much of Mark Shea. I take bits and pieces from various authors, bloggers and vloggers but I prefer to stay arm's length about it. I think after years of seeing many well-known Catholics become associated with cults of personalities and subsequent downfalls, I tend to feel a bit wary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amppax Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 That's almost definitely for the best, Ash. Then again, the cult of the saints, that's a whole 'nother story. :like: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not The Philosopher Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 That's almost definitely for the best, Ash. Then again, the cult of the saints, that's a whole 'nother story. :like: http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/136033-favorite-saints-and-not-so-much/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted January 15, 2015 Author Share Posted January 15, 2015 No, I was being sarcastic because I find your treatment of both Matt Walsh and Michael Voris to be over-the-top and uncharitable. I was trying to make a point through sarcasm. I knew you wouldn't actually answer it. I was sarcastically making a point that she always talks about Michael Voris and Matt Walsh as if they are Satan incarnate, so I was pointing it out with a ludicrous question. This really isn't rocket science. Others seemed to know exactly what I meant, so I'm not sure why there is confusion. A couple of things: Saying that I foam at the mouth and compare them to Satan and "I don't get what the big deal is you must be stupid if you think this is offensive because someone else happened to understand me just fine" is pretty callous and displays a lack of an ability to fully comprehend how someone can see the world differently than you. Disagreeing with you, even if it's passionate disagreement, is not the same is being "uncharitable" or "misunderstanding." I don't believe anything I've said about Voris is worse that what or how he's said some things about certain people. I'm free to voice the opinion that he does far more harm than good in the Church, just like you're free to voice your opinion that he does a lot of good. I really DO understand why I really don't like Voris and Walsh, and I have good reasons for why I can get so passionate about why distaste for them. They get passionate themselves! These are passionate issues! I was trying to be nice by bringing up a Matt Walsh article that I thought was okay, one that I only saw because you posted it on facebook, to show that I can be a reasonable human being and despite my opinions about most of what Walsh (and even Voris) say, I'm happy to admit when they do something I agree with, and even bring it to other people's attention. You're the one who made this all about how much I (and others) despise these guys. Why can't you just be happy? This is why we can't have nice things! Quit comparing me to a lunatic. I've never compared you to a lunatic for liking Voris or Walsh. :) And if I have, quote it and I'll apologize. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amppax Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/136033-favorite-saints-and-not-so-much/ I forgot about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I am confused because I didn't see anyone referring to either of the two men as being Satan incarnate. I just didn't think it fair for you to try to fight people's perceived over-the-top commentary with sarcastic questions about comparisons to Satan and accusing someone of sinning. It doesn't come across as any more reasonable or charitable than what you're calling them out on. I don't mean to get up in your grill, I just think we should be careful about carelessly throwing around comparisons to Satan, even if just in jest. It's phrasing that shouldn't be used lightly. Peace. I'm not referring to this thread. I'm referring to past threads where the names of Michael Voris and Matt Walsh have brought on much gnashing of teeth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I think most people here's response to Voris is just about identical to your response to Shea. I can point out numerous posts where you completely dismiss something because it's an article by Shea. You're grossly exaggerating people's response to Voris, probably because you like him so much. I'd say your middle paragraph is a pretty good indicator of that. And when we express displeasure with Voris, Walsh, et al., it's because we don't think they're acting in a Christian/virtuous manner, and wish they would. I think both are poor representatives of our faith. This saddens me, but doesn't cause me to foam at the mouth. If anything, it causes me sadness, not anger. It's disappointment, not distress. You have a different opinion of that. Fine. We could both argue until we're blue in the face, but it probably won't change much. You brought Voris into this, as is often the case when he comes up. But if anyone's "foaming at the mouth" it's you in your defense of Voris. Who said I was angry in my response? I was actually quite cool while writing it. I've merely been very disappointed in the past by peoples' treatment towards Voris here. As for Mark Shea, I don't recall anyone ever posting an article by him, let alone me dismissing it. I've never dismissed an article by Mark Shea simply because it was Mark Shea. I could be wrong, but unless you give proof otherwise, we have to assume I am correct in that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Wednesday Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Who said I was angry in my response? I was actually quite cool while writing it. I've merely been very disappointed in the past by peoples' treatment towards Voris here. If you are as reasoned and cool as you claim to be, then you need to ease up on the over the top rhetoric and give others the same benefit of the doubt that they are also trying to respond reasonably, even if they don't share the same opinion as you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 A couple of things: Saying that I foam at the mouth and compare them to Satan and "I don't get what the big deal is you must be stupid if you think this is offensive because someone else happened to understand me just fine" is pretty callous and displays a lack of an ability to fully comprehend how someone can see the world differently than you. Disagreeing with you, even if it's passionate disagreement, is not the same is being "uncharitable" or "misunderstanding." I don't believe anything I've said about Voris is worse that what or how he's said some things about certain people. I'm free to voice the opinion that he does far more harm than good in the Church, just like you're free to voice your opinion that he does a lot of good. I really DO understand why I really don't like Voris and Walsh, and I have good reasons for why I can get so passionate about why distaste for them. They get passionate themselves! These are passionate issues! I was trying to be nice by bringing up a Matt Walsh article that I thought was okay, one that I only saw because you posted it on facebook, to show that I can be a reasonable human being and despite my opinions about most of what Walsh (and even Voris) say, I'm happy to admit when they do something I agree with, and even bring it to other people's attention. You're the one who made this all about how much I (and others) despise these guys. Why can't you just be happy? This is why we can't have nice things! Quit comparing me to a lunatic. I've never compared you to a lunatic for liking Voris or Walsh. :) And if I have, quote it and I'll apologize. :) I never said anyone was stupid. I was confused because some people didn't understand what I meant, when I and a few others felt it quite obvious. Anyway, I've seen very mean words towards Voris here. I've seen him called a bad Catholic, an unfaithful Catholic, and I've seen people get angry just by mentioning his name. I feel that sort of heated response just to the name of someone who isn't Satan is uncalled for, and it gets tiresome. Michael Voris has meant a lot to me in my spiritual life. I have expressed that many times, and I have felt people never respected that and went on bashing him anyway. As I'm sure you can imagine, that bothers me in a very personal way, because it's like telling me the person who made me into a Catholic that actually cares about Catholicism is in fact a no-good unfaithful Catholic who accomplishes nothing good. I'm sure you can understand why that is bothersome to me, and I would appreciate it if people would respect that more. I'm not pointing the finger at you, as I'm sure I've done the same thing to others. I recall one time when I wasn't very charitable about the charismatic movement, and a poster got upset because the charismatic movement helped her become serious about the faith. Now, even though I disagree with much of the charismatic movement, I make sure to be as charitable as possible, because it has done good things for people. I merely ask that people do the same thing with Voris. I apologize if at any time you felt I was trying to trap you into sin or was being uncharitable. None of those things were my intention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franciscanheart Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I never said anyone was stupid. I was confused because some people didn't understand what I meant, when I and a few others felt it quite obvious. You always reference "others" when you post, as if having a posse makes you right and others wrong. This is especially ridiculous when these "others" rarely come out of the woodwork to defend your antics. You put out a rather aggressive question, accused someone of potential sin, and then denied any culpability because "someone else" understood? I mean, do you see how ludicrous all of that is? Do you see where, even if you haven't committed some grave error, your behavior is obnoxious at best? As I'm sure you can imagine, that bothers me in a very personal way, because it's like telling me the person who made me into a Catholic that actually cares about Catholicism is in fact a no-good unfaithful Catholic who accomplishes nothing good. Perhaps these responses require a re-read? I am confident I read that people (OP included) were able to recognize some good. Stating that someone may do more harm than good does not equate to saying they do no good. I'm sure that if anyone intended to call him the spawn of Satan, they would just come right out and say it. All of that said, how did this even happen? Nobody went on a tirade, you just kind of threw it out there. And then you get defensive and angry when people call you on it. You see no fault of your own, only excuses and guiltlessness. It's always someone else's fault with you. If you had a problem with it, you should have mentioned it at the time. You could also have started your own thread. This is the equivalent of complaining about dirty laundry when somebody asks you if you want to sandwich. It makes no sense and is totally uncalled for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 You always reference "others" when you post, as if having a posse makes you right and others wrong. This is especially ridiculous when these "others" rarely come out of the woodwork to defend your antics. You put out a rather aggressive question, accused someone of potential sin, and then denied any culpability because "someone else" understood? I mean, do you see how ludicrous all of that is? Do you see where, even if you haven't committed some grave error, your behavior is obnoxious at best? Perhaps these responses require a re-read? I am confident I read that people (OP included) were able to recognize some good. Stating that someone may do more harm than good does not equate to saying they do no good. I'm sure that if anyone intended to call him the spawn of Satan, they would just come right out and say it. All of that said, how did this even happen? Nobody went on a tirade, you just kind of threw it out there. And then you get defensive and angry when people call you on it. You see no fault of your own, only excuses and guiltlessness. It's always someone else's fault with you. If you had a problem with it, you should have mentioned it at the time. You could also have started your own thread. This is the equivalent of complaining about dirty laundry when somebody asks you if you want to sandwich. It makes no sense and is totally uncalled for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 (edited) Really, we're are making an attempt at peace and understanding. Stop continuing the fight when it's over. Edited January 16, 2015 by PhuturePriest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Era Might Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts