Skip to main content

Michael Voris - A Case of Traditional Catholic Arrested Development

+
JMJ

I first started watching Mr. Voris in 2010 when I switched from a dial-up to DSL internet connection.
Having witnessed people go through the phases of grief at realizing what was started in from Oct 11, 1962, didn't end in Dec 8, 1965, that was only the end of the beginning, I was interested to watch his development.


Sad to say, Mr. Voris has simply become a case of arrested development.

At some point he, figuratively hit a brick wall and started to contradict himself.  His recent attack on the position of the SSPX is an example of a position that he avouched in 2010 and now attacks as it is held by the SSPX.

Michael Voris, for whatever reason, has been convinced that one cannot criticise the Pope because (appraently) that will cause the person to run off to the SSPX.

I guess he hasn't realized that those who are left in their regular parishes, by an large don't have the same perspective on this crisis as he does. 

In other words, I doubt very much that the SSPX will suddenly see an influx of conservative Catholics.  I believe that they will mostly search out conservative priests in order to duck and cover. The only ones really at risk are those attending diocesan Tridentine Masses, that are likely to be gutted as the crisis experiences a compressor stall and flames out.

I digress ...

I think that the problem for Michael Voris is that he has an assumption that the Pope is personally protected from hurting the Church.  Basically, whatever the Pope does must be part of God's plan and therefore we must not interfere.

Of course this is only my theory, but when I read things from Mr. Voris' friend (Fr. Nicholson) like this:
... At the same time he must speak of those things that touch or attack the Church's unity. He must protect the Holy Father's reputation, since the visible head of the Church is divinely protected from teaching error.  ...
... I begin to wonder if I'm not too far off the mark.

This is, interestingly, related to the thought put forward by the Canon Lawyer that Voris interviewed. Specifically:

It is the more probable opinion among approved authors that refusal of obedience of a Catholic to the Pope which is not predicated upon a rejection of the principle of his authority as Roman Pontiff as Caput Romanae Ecclesiae constitutes material, not formal schism. However, if those lay faithful receiving the Sacraments from them at any one point in time also severed themselves entirely from, or refused submission in principle to, the Roman Pontiff and per can. 1330 of the Code of Canon Law manifested in word or in deed externally such actions, then they are presumed to have descended into formal schism.  (CMTV Interviews a Canon Lawyer)

So, if Michael Voris believes that disobeying the Pope constitutes material schism, this would definitely arrest his development as a Traditional Catholic.  Saying that the New Mass is dangerous to the Faith could be construed as disobedience.  So he is stuck attacking the Bishops ... which doens't seem to be making all that much headway as ... guess what ... the Pope selects the Cardinals who select the Bishops.

So from Michael's point of view, it seems that the Pope cannot be seen to be wrong, even when he is very wrong. 

The story of the Emperor's new clothes has been circulating a lot lately, and it seems to fit.

The SSPX is saying that the Emperor is naked (Voris talks about covering Noah's nakedness etc) and good Catholics are beginning to realize that yep, them duds aren't really opaque after all.  Those who don't want to admit that the Emperor is theologically naked, try to shush the child.  When the child won't shut up, they bring out the stick.

Speaking of stick, there is another recent case of arrested development that, I believe, is important to mention at this point in time: the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate (FFI).  Like a number of others, the FFI in studying the Documents of the Second Vatican Council was beginning to reach very similar conclusions as the SSPX.  I've read rumours that they were even in contact with the SSPX during the Pontificate of Benedict XVI.  

Sadly, their development was brutally arrested by Rome at the instigation of a small number of misguided souls.

I believe two elements prompted the assault upon the FFI:

  1. the broaching of two culture assumptions (Second Vatican Council and the New Mass)
  2. their vibrant community
While this is an interesting comparison (organizational to personal), there's a limit.  Simply put, the FFI just bowed down and accepted the rod of correction.  Voris and his minions apparently have been bit by a rabid liberal bishop.  The result is their attacks of the SSPX. I've noticed this same rabid attacks before, when someone's assumptions about the Church were challenged by the perspective of the SSPX.

The rod came out quickly in that case ...

Get ready for the flame out, it will be spectacular.

P^3

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"Father, Should I Attend That Mass?" Advice on Attending Non-SSPX Latin Masses

 + JMJ I see that the 'resistors' are in a tizzy because Fr. Robinson used them as an example instead of the sedevacantists. What is interesting is that you can apply the exact same reasons against going to a sede mass as that of the 'resistors'. Namely: On the other extreme are those situations where an SSPX priest knows that a certain non-SSPX traditionalist venue is a grave danger to the faith . Frankly, most, if not all, of the Resistance Masses would fall into this category. In many cases, the behavior of these priests has been and continues to be scandalous, by their (A) spirit, their (B) preaching, and their indiscriminate conferral of the (C) priesthood and (D) episcopacy. To attend a Mass with such ongoing scandals poses a serious danger to the souls of the faithful. Yep, looking at A,B,C and D the shoe fits. On this basis the "resistors" = "sedevacantists". P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.org   A companion article to a recent "Questions with ...

Correcting Caricatures of the SSPX

 + JMJ Introduction First, a little background on the FSSP St. John Vianney Chapel in Mission Hill Kansas.  After the 1988 consecrations and the foundation of the FSSP there was a consistent trend of Dioceses allowing the SSPX to run chapels and churches near SSPX locations. As with any 'organizational change' there were those who didn't agree with the change and no longer sought the sacraments from the SSPX. I heard from friends that in that era there was a lot of anger and tension (on both sides) between the St. Mary's SSPX and Mission Hill FSSP.  Second, there have been caricatures of the SSPX position (some are evident below) in which personal opinions of SSPX priests and laity are taken as the official position or conflated with those of sedevacantists or 'resistance'. Recent Perspectives of the SSPX Position In the shadow of the consecrations a fever pitch accusations and opinions how surfaced - many of which include caricatures of the SSPX positions, of w...

SSPX: Why Is the SSPX So Criticized?

 + JMJ As long as you are ok with what happens in other Catholic Churches, Traditional Catholics will be left 'alone'.  This is a paraphrase of words spoken by an Archbishop to Traditional Catholics (with a sprinkling of SSPX) who had requested the Traditional Latin Mass under Summorum Pontificum. This reflects that attitude of the Church towards anyone who takes issue with some of the ambiguities of Vatican II and the post-conciliar magisterium.  If you reject the papacy but are ok with V2, the New Mass, and what Rome has stated since 1965 - then you are welcome. Question some of the more abiguous statements and ask for Rome to realise that a circle is not a square - then you are in for a world of hurt. This is where the SSPX exists and has existed from almost its very first moments. Pointing out contradictions with previous magisterium is not acceptable - under any condition. Why? Because it will cause the whole V2 house of cards to fall. I guess only when the contradic...

Stories: Early Days of Tradition Part 8 - Convention Centre Chapel

 + JMJ I came to Tradition a few years after they had bought a chapel. My wife told me of the earlier years when Fr. Normandin would come to town and Mass would be held in a room at the convention centre.  He'd start by blessing the room and then proceed with Mass. This went on for a while before the one of the faithful found a small hall that would suit just fine. They pooled their money and bought the building.  Then came the work as the retiree's refinished the floor, setup the sactuary. Oh, did I mention that I heard that the hall had been used by a motorcycle gang? The floor needed a lot of work.  I remember seeing pictures of the founders working to make the hall into a fitting place for the Sacrifice of the Mass. That little chapel would be a refuge like many others serviced by Fr. Normandin.  From Thunderbay, Ontrario to Nanaimo, British Columbia - the SSPX chapels are all the results of Fr. Normandin's missionary work in those desperate times. Without h...

How many more must die for the throne? or How to combat FUD!

 + JMJ How many more must die for the throne? (Movie Quote: Prince Caspian) The Spread of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt I've seen a lot of FUD spreading across the intergnat on various stats etc.   So let's put this in context ... especially the perspective of those people in positions of authority who need to make decisions to protect the lives of their citizens. Yep, this is going to be that type of post.  Like it or not the leaders of our governments have their authority from God.  So, as Catholics should know, you need to have a very good reason to deliberately disobey the orders of their superiors. This is basic St. Thomas Aquinas ... so don't blame me for discussing things from a Catholic perspective. The leaders of our countries have taken action to protect the vulnerable of our countries.   As much as the young and not-so-young may whine and complain - I have to ask how many more of our elderly have to die? What the armchair virologists and ec...