New Michael Voris video and WDTPRS POLL

The latest from Michael Voris.

Watch this first.

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d11PpFwI8RY]

Then vote in the poll and….

… tell us about your vote in the combox!

{democracy:73}

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in POLLS and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

110 Responses to New Michael Voris video and WDTPRS POLL

  1. Dan G. says:

    I think it varies from diocese to diocese. Surely the U.S. bishops collectively have greatly improved over the past decade. But he is quite right that many nominally Catholic institutions and organizations are currently lost causes. But what we find if we visit a parish– what we see in the priests and the parishioners– can be as bad as he says in some places, but much better in others.

  2. Magpie says:

    I voted first option.

    Not only do the folks not want to offend their separated brethren, but I think a lot of them don’t even believe the Catholic teachings anyway.

  3. JohnW says:

    Mr. Voris is right in what he says about not offending any one. We as Catholics must stand up for the truths of our faith. But most of our faithful do not know or want to take the time to learn the faith. We have the greatest gift of the truth faith. I don’t understand most people.

  4. boredoftheworld says:

    Nailed it, nailed it, nailed it… like to the church door.

  5. Prof. Basto says:

    He nails it, and what he says can be applied to several other places, and not just the Church in America.

  6. Leonius says:

    Absolutely nailed it, its the same in the UK, the priest and Bishops just totally lost respect for the Church and sold us out.

  7. ies0716 says:

    I voted on the second option. There are places in the U.S. where things aren’t nearly this bad. Overall, though, he nails it right on the nose. When was the last time anyone heard a homily on the sinfulness of birth control, homosexuality, or cohabitation?

    Pope Paul VI took a very soft stance on dissident priests, bishops, and theologians because he wanted to avoid a schism, and Pope John Paul II largely followed his lead (although he did push the church in the right direction in a lot of more subtle ways). The result has been a de facto schism affecting 95% of Catholics in the western world. They may claim to be Catholic and show up to Mass most Sundays, but most American and European Catholics couldn’t tell you a thing about the Real Presence or the necessity of Confession. They contracept, abort, and divorce at the same rates as their Protestant brethren.

    In some dioceses (such as my own St. Paul-Minneapolis), things have improved dramatically in the past decade with vibrant, orthodox bishops and a growing crop of solid young priests. In other places (such as Cincinnati, where I lived from 2005-2007) the post-Vatican II liberal bishops have held on longer and the recovery is slower. As Fr. Z has stated several times, though, Pope John Paul II appointed many solid bishops and cardinals around the world and Pope Benedict XVI is following suit. Diocese by diocese, parish by parish, things are recovering and will continue to recover.

    While I typically agree with Mr. Voris’s messages, in this case he seems to be describing the US Bishops of 1980 or 1990 moreso than the bishops of 2010. We have an Opus Dei Archbishop in LA, for Heaven’s sake! :-)

  8. mormormax says:

    What he said is so true. As a convert I can speak about how protestant many of our Catholic churches are becoming. I attend a TLM on a regular basis but when we travel, which as retirees we do quite often, I am amazed and saddened by what I see. The saddest part is the fact that those attending have no idea what is wrong or what they are missing. They are there because they love God but they are being let down by those who should be teaching the true faith. I converted 41 years ago. I became Catholic about 10 years ago. I am still learning the faith and am most happy when a priest will teach from the pulpit without regard to political “correctness” or the fact that someone might be insulted or made uncomfortable by the truth. It is the truth after all and he’s supposed to worry about his congregations sanctity not whether or not he is comfortable and liked in this world. That said, I know that most priests are doing the best they can and getting a whole lot of grief for the effort. They are in my prayers daily.

  9. Cincinnati Priest says:

    Voted for 2nd option. But Voris needs to be nuanced. Currently, the real issue in many dioceses seems to me to be the dissonance between what many of the newly ordained priests stand for and what the (largely lay and self-styled “progressive”) members of the chanceries stand for.

    We are gradually advancing on a positive trajectory. At one time, solid men who were truly Catholic in every sense had a hard time getting through seminary at all. Now they are making it through, but they are being stymied by the weight of diocesan bureaucracies (sometimes supported by their bishops) who oppose them and what they stand for.

    Hopefully 10 to 15 years from now, bishops, chanceries and the priests will all be on the same page and working from the same unapologetically Catholic playbook.

    In many dioceses, I expect it will take at least that long to begin to get to that point.

  10. liongules says:

    Absolutely nailed it as far as my limited experience goes. My parish does strictly “folk” Masses, everything is so warm, fuzzy, and sugary sweet! I find it very, very hard to attend sometimes.

  11. MaryRoseM says:

    For the most part, he nailed it. The only part I was unsure about was at the very beginning, when he said that the young people were not in the Catholic Church because their parents, who are in their fifties and sixties, left the Catholic Church after Vatican II.

    First, a young person IMO would be within their twenties, in which case their parents are in their forties or fifties and were experiencing the “fresh renewal” of Vatican II during the sixties and seventies. I thought those were the people who stayed within the Catholic Church and helped “Protestantize” it.

    Other than that, I wholeheartedly agree that a milquetoast approach toward Catholicism isn’t going to attract anyone. I find it especially telling when I look around at my Traditional Latin Mass and see many young people. The more orthodox orders are attracting vocations (unlike the new-agey orders full of aging hippie liberals).

    If any of the Catholics who seem to love a Protestant approach think it’s such a great idea, they should consider Fr. Corapi and his bold and unapologetic Catholic teaching. Or your blog and articles, Fr. Zuhlsdorf. Why do people flock to strong and bold Catholic doctrine?

    I think it’s because we crave absolutism. Because we serve an absolute God. And the Catholic Church carries God’s absolute truth to a morally ambivalent world.

  12. beez says:

    If Voris is going to make such a severe attack on the Church and her leadership, he needs to cite specific examples. The only thing specific was his shot at the vocations program (which I will admit was lame!)

    His claim that “there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church” is not consistent with the teaching of the Magisterium he claims to honor. While I agree the best hope for salvation is within the Catholic Church, it is an attack on the Orthodox Churches that is simply uncalled for.

    I think that Voris went too far, painting all bishops and most priests with a broad brush. The use of the word “most” was weaselly, as I suspect he would credit only a small handful with any type of orthodoxy.

  13. MaryRoseM says:

    Hello Cincinnati Priest! Dayton was blessed when Archbishop Schnurr gave a parish to the F.S.S.P..

    My hometown is Cincinnati. I really like Sacred Heart Parish. A young priest there gave a great homily the last time I visited. God bless you!

  14. Jack Hughes says:

    Firstly I second Magpie, leonius and mormormax.

    Secondly – whilst we all hear wonderful news about vocations and good Bishops on WDTPRS Mr Voris reminds us of the sobering reality outside the blogosphere.

    Thridly – he is dead on about young people; as one of them I can tell you that its a miracle of grace that any young Catholic in the UK over the age of 18 still practises the faith (most of the young people I know are converts like myself)- it is however almost unthinkable for any of them (bar the converts) to even consider a vocation to the priesthood or religious life (as I am) with selfish parents trying to change their minds, downright awful examples of Priests and Sisters who won’t wear the Cassock/Habit in public, Catholic in name only schools and exposure (except in homeschool families) to immodesty galore it is a further miracle of grace that a young person should even consider a vocation let alone actually make it all the way through to Ordination/final profession of vows.

    Fourthly – you don’t need wacky advertising campaigns to promote vocations- simply send every parish 5 dozen copys of “Story of a Soul”, “Journal of a Soul” (Bl John XXIII)and a book about St. John Vianny, get good and faithfull religious to come into your Diocese and give a good example of Religious life, make sure that the liturgy is PROPERLY done, breath new life into old devotions and encourage Perpetual Adoration (+ Emeritus Magee of Cloyne and Bl. Mother Teresa testify to how Adoration increased the number of vocations in thier respective diocese/congregation).

    Fithly – SAY THE BLACK DO THE RED

  15. Agnes says:

    I’m going to get tarred and feathered. I voted option three. Where I sit, and in the trenches of a very stable parish, good things are happening. In general, things are swinging back to something resembling sanity.

    To placate the Latinists, here’s an attempt at Kum By Yah (everyone hold hands and sing!):

    Aliquid flet, Domine me: accede,
    Aliquid flet, Domine me: accede,
    Aliquid flet, Domine me: accede,
    O Domine, accede.

    Don’t worry, there are plenty of other issues to itch about. ;-)

  16. jlmorrell says:

    Dead on – and there will be no widespread renewal unless it comes from the top down.

    The recovery, if it comes, will take many decades if not 100-200 years. While many of the new bishops being appointed are much better (not outright heretics), most of them are what might be termed conservative Vatican II types. They are thoroughly liberal when compared to the preconciliar church. In my opinion even this type of conservative bishop does not represent true continuity with our past.

    Regarding the bit about vocations, any time we see marketing campaigns touting the priesthood it is a sure sign that there are major problems in that area. Apparently some people haven’t figured out yet that you don’t “sell” vocations to the priesthood like you do iphones.

  17. robtbrown says:

    Pope Paul VI took a very soft stance on dissident priests, bishops, and theologians because he wanted to avoid a schism, and Pope John Paul II largely followed his lead (although he did push the church in the right direction in a lot of more subtle ways).
    Comment by ies0716

    It had nothing to do with wanting to avoid a schism. If PVI wanted to avoid a schism, he would not have been so hard on the SSPX. PVI wanted to move the Church to the left for political reasons, so the Church could deal with secular govts. JPII was also interested in international politics. Both were what the Italians call papa politico.

    IMHO, Voris is right referring to the problems but not so right in attributing them to the present hierarchy, most of whom inherited the mess.

  18. The video is another good message from the RCTv folks. Although they are stand alone, a lot of the videos build off of one another, and so some of the complaints that a few commentators have had (beez, maryrosem, et al) are addressed in other Vortexes.

    That being said, there is also a lot of “Detroit Flavor” in this video. Voris is someone that saw the tepid vocational waters that existed under Cardinal Maida. Detroit is odd in that it is one of the centers of the usus antiquior, and yet the outlying and suburban parishes are often modernist havens for liturgical abuse, “innovation” and of course birth-home to CTA [barf].

    Voris tries every day to spend around 5 minutes driving a message home. I don’t want to slip into an argument for consequentialism or “ends that justify the means” type of argumentation, but at the end of the day he is doing a lot of good, and his message is heading in the right direction.

    The “Try It On” campaign was awful. I heard people on multiple occaisions make funof it. Although Abp. Vigneron seems to be an Authentic and Stalwart defender of the Faith, the interior infrastructure of the Archdiocese, like many Dioceses around the country, still contain bishops, priests, and lay leaders that espouse a heretical theo-philosophical base. Until that infestation is erradicated, we will continue to have the problems Voris presents.

    Where I currently live, the Archdiocese of Anchorage, things are even more stale, in terms of vocations… because as Voris says, the authenticity of the Church is absent. Even those that support modernism, wouldn’t want to become a priest in such a church because it brings all of the “work” and none of the “glory” [not my words.]

  19. torch621 says:

    I picked option two – tons more work needs to be done, but I think we’ve been put on the right track by our beloved Holy Father.

  20. robtbrown says:

    Hopefully 10 to 15 years from now, bishops, chanceries and the priests will all be on the same page and working from the same unapologetically Catholic playbook.

    In many dioceses, I expect it will take at least that long to begin to get to that point.
    Comment by Cincinnati Priest

    You’re probably right, but since converting in 1970, I have spent too much time waiting for renewal. We were led to believe that JPII would lead the way, but he was mostly interested in sexual morals and in seeing Poland in NATO.

  21. EXCHIEF says:

    He is right on the money. The vast majority of Bishops/Priests seem more concerned about their popularity than whether they teach true Catholicism. When is the last time you heard a Priest talk about mortal sin? My gosh that might offend someone or appear judgmental. Until the Church goes back to what is truely about it will be unsuccessful in gaining new members or, for that matter, keeping the ones it has.

  22. Warren says:

    I voted for the second option. I agree entirely with his points concerning timidity. I do not agree with comments that portray the Church as protestant. I would agree that attempts to “make relevant” the Faith have certainly resulted in a dumbing down of the Faith as it is presented. And, I’m confident that any honest person who reads this forum on a regular basis would agree that there are far too many examples of liturgical abuse to count. To my ears, Voris’ comments at times amounted to the irrational frothing of a wacko sedevacantist.

    It would be unfortunate, however, if he were to stop. The Church needs his plainspokenness. He just needs to tighten up the content. A tête-à-tête with +Chaput would do the trick.

    I give the video an A-

  23. THREEHEARTS says:

    Let me upset you all and very deliberately. JP2 swept too much under the mat. Poor Benedict has to pick up the pieces and he will. Why will he look at the comments, think about them and there is only one conclusion and that is If he does not then what will happen?

  24. cblanch says:

    I think he nailed it. I grew up in the Archdiocese of Detroit and thought things were pretty bad…until I moved to Northwest Ohio. I feel trapped in the Catholic 80′s down here…and we all remember how much fun THAT was…not.

  25. momravet says:

    I voted for the first option, mostly based on attending Mass when travelling in the South (US). Currently my home parish is very orthodox with a TLM on Sunday afternoon, mixed use of English and Latin during the rest of the Masses, P.A. Monday am through Saturday am, a very healthy attendance at Confession, and many teaching sermons.

    My old parish in Montgomery, AL has improved significantly tho’ – no longer a crowd of kids on the altar during the Consecration and less of the Jan & Paul Crouch testifying. The parishes around Niceville, FL are improving as well (slowly). No TLMs there and the band in one parish keeps inching closer and closer to the altar.

    NO Masses started in 68/69 – the parishoners (military parish in San Antonio, TX) were asked to stand up one Sunday and that was it. At this same parish the priest told people that they didn’t or shouldn’t say the Rosary! anymore. My brother looked at my mom and asked her if she was still going to say her Rosary and she said yes (Irish Catholic).

    If we are going to bring back our Roman Catholic identity – we should do it now. Lets quit fooling around with the NO Mass and return to the TLM.

  26. lizfromFL says:

    I voted the second option. My main disagreement was what he said about mass being protestantized. There are parts, certainly, but I have been in Protestant churches and a Mass is still very different from one of their services. I get what he is saying though.

    I was born in 1975 and don’t know about the “old ways.” But I can tell you this, no matter how protestantized we become, many of them still hate us. Basically we are selling out for nothing in return. They offend me all the time. I know many protestants who are very nice but have no problem letting me know I am not saved. !?!? The people that I know have NO CLUE what we actually believe or how we worship. They get their ideas from tv and confused ex-catholics. And as my grandma says, “there’s no worse catholic than an ex-catholic.” So why do we bother?

    The worst part is you have many “actual” catholics who are unclear on basic things like the Real Presence (?!?!) the sacraments, the role of Mary and the saints, etc. We need to stop casting such a wide net and start properly teaching our own. We are not unitarians who take in any old belief. We need to start getting strict! :)

  27. Rob Cartusciello says:

    I believe he is slightly off target when he talks about the ‘hersey of protestantism’.

    The issue is more that both mainline Protestants and substantial portions of those who exercise teaching authority in the Church adopted modernism in the form of liberal Christianity.

    We have taught ourselves to be stupid.

  28. robtbrown says:

    I believe he is slightly off target when he talks about the ‘hersey of protestantism’.

    The issue is more that both mainline Protestants and substantial portions of those who exercise teaching authority in the Church adopted modernism in the form of liberal Christianity.
    Comment by Rob Cartusciello

    You seem not to see the link between Protestantism and Modernism.

  29. eulogos says:

    I logged in to say basically what robtbrown says above. It is an insult to real Protestantism to say that what goes on in the liberal parts of the Catholic Church is Protestant. I am in touch with real Protestantism because my husband attends a parish of the Anglican Church of North America and I often attend with him (as well as going to mass). Real Protestantism preaches that human beings are sinners, that Christ took on our sins and died for us, that He rose from the dead, that He sent the Holy Spirit to strengthen and sanctify us, that He will come again in glory. It also teaches some things that are false. But real Protestantism does teach Christianity.
    While what liberal Catholic parishes teach and do may in some superficial ways seem Protestant, such as the meal emphasis in the Eucharist, most of what they do is preach an attenuated liberal I’m OK, you’re OK Christianity.
    I know Newman said that the seeds of liberalism are inherent in Protestantism, but that is a subtle point, and real Protestants are fighting liberalism with everything they have got. It is liberalism , the doctrine that there is no truth at all in religion, but only emotion and sentiment and personal feelings, and yours are as good as mine, which has sapped the vitality of Catholicism, as it sapped the vitality of the mainline Protestant churches.

  30. wchoag says:

    I voted option one, although I would really prefer somewhere between options one and two.

    Voris overgeneralises in broadly painting the root of this crisis with the word “protestantism”. The American church, and this is the one in question, has had a very soiled history due to the influence of jansenism and a native version of ecclesiastical gallicanism since its founding days under John Carroll. Many of these latent tendencies came to predominate after the Second World War and absolutely exploded following Vatican II.

    So much of what contemporary Catholics have suffered under has parallels in the past. For example, democratisation in regard to the constitutional church of france at the end of the eighteenth century and resistance efforts towards romanisation during the nineteenth century, especially in regard to liturgy.

    Voris’ general argument is correct. It a nuancing and development that a 5-minute video cannot provide.

  31. Clinton says:

    I chose the second option, only because my experience is that too many ‘Church professionals’ aren’t concerned about not offending
    protestants so much as they are embarrassed by Christ and His Church. Such people don’t pass over the truths of the Faith
    because they wish to spare the feelings of our separated brothers and sisters, they pass over the truths because they think that
    those truths are stupid. Probably the only thing that elicits more pitying contempt from those cynics than unvarnished Catholicism
    is a sincerely believing protestant.

    I’ve had just such a ‘Church professional’ tell me that no one who works for the Church ever need worry about being unemployed.
    Cynical, but true. There is still prestige in working for the Church, at least among Catholics. And if such cynical professionals
    find themselves sneered at by the world, they can always assure them with a wink that they don’t actually believe all that malarkey,
    they’re just staying to effect change from within. Appeals to the truths of the Faith from higher up will be met with a roll of the eyes,
    judicious lip service, and some truly expert foot-dragging. And they needn’t worry about being judged on job performance, it seems.
    When have you ever heard of a DRE being replaced because the children of a parish were found to be ignorant of the basics of the
    Faith? Will anyone in any chancery damage their career if they don’t attract a certain quota of 20 and 30-year-olds back to the Church?

    The parish of my 20′s was run by a once-proud order formerly known for its evangelization and liturgical orthodoxy. In my time there, it
    was a parish after the heart of the National Catholic Reporter, and stuffed with just the sort of jaded professionals I described above.
    Any encouragement in the faith I received was from fellow pewmeat, not parish staff. The order had been brought in and the parish
    founded to minister to the thousands of students of the nearby university, but by the time I arrived the parish had washed its hands of the students by founding a Catholic Student Center in a nearby building but severing any financial and staffing responsibilities for it.
    Existing mainly on donations from students, the Center limped along. (Many of us avoided it, for it was even more heterodox than the
    nearby parish.) Students and their meagre donations were still accepted in the pews, but if we approached the three priests, on-staff
    liturgist or DRE with a request to help organize a class, student group or service, we were firmly directed down the block to the Center.
    Was this parish concerned about attracting and retaining 20 and 30-year-old Catholics? It is to laugh. I remain a Catholic in spite of
    that parish, not because of it.

  32. talonh says:

    While I agree with most of what he says about why people leave/have left, I disagree that it’s “Protestantism”. It’s modernist by Catholic or Protestant definition. Classic Protestantism is VASTLY preferable to the nonsense of modern liberal catholicism/protestantism.

  33. Kent says:

    He got it right. The Protestant Church is a rejection of Catholic teaching on the Real Presence, the authority of the papacy, Marian devotion, Church tradtion, etc. I wonder what the English martyrs would have to say about today’s Catholic Church and its whimpy stand on the tenets of the faith supposedly under the guise of tolerance for our Protestant brethren and so as not to offend the faithful. Its time to live up to what we profess and declare the truths of the Catholic faith. The surest road to heaven, though not the easiest, is the Catholic Church.

  34. Dave N. says:

    Had some good things to say. Still can’t get past annoying graphics, the silly pencil and “S.T.B.”

  35. Dead on target. We gave up providing Protestants with a clear choice between what they have now and what they could have if they became Catholic.

  36. jucundushomo says:

    I am a convert to the Catholic faith. I was born and baptized a Methodist, and later attended a charismatic nondenominational church with my parents. I know what Protestants look like and how they talk.

    It gives me grave concern when I see any Catholics, particularly ‘cradle’ Catholics, behaving in a Protestantized way. Whether we are talking about worship, the sacraments, devotion and prayer, etc., I always make a point to speak (charitably). “I’ve been there. I’ve done that. You do not want to go down that road.”

    Because the simple fact of the matter is that when one turns away from the authentic teaching and truth of the Catholic Church, it is a first step toward indifference, confusion, and finally chaos. I did not come to the Catholic Church to “try it on,” so to speak. I came to it because it is Truth, and when that Truth was laid before me in an unremitting, unapologizing fashion I could not help but recognize and distinguish it from a world gone mad.

    I largely agree with Michael Voris.

  37. markomalley says:

    My only criticism of what he said was that he should have acknowledged the shepherds out there who are doing their job. And they do exist, although admittedly they are in the minority.

  38. spesalvi23 says:

    Perfect summary of the state of the Church in Germany. Only it seems that nobody in the hierachy is interested in getting anybody back.
    We are well on the way of becoming some type of national German church of Catholic origin – sounds very familiar, eh? Just ask Mr. Luther. As if the country wasn’t already full enough of empty protestant churches.
    On the other hand… many appontments by B16 have been encouraging – but it will be a while until the scales are tipped.

    The war is on – the facts and programs have been stated – the Church is mercilessly outnumbered – it WILL prevail, even if it takes years and years of battle!

  39. duhvinci says:

    The impression I had of the Church when I returned after a 30 years’ absence of attending protestant churches, was exactly what Mr. Voris said…that the Church had succumbed to protestantism. I was shocked. The difference between the Church of pre-Vatican II and post-Vatican II were enormous, as far as I was concerned. I do think things are getting better, but it is a long way back. Mr. Voris is right on.

  40. chironomo says:

    Very definitely stating the obvious. The sad thing is that a great many Catholic leaders – clergy, Bishops and even the current Holy Father are well aware of this, and yet we have to turn to a webcast commentator to hear it. The day that we can once again say that there is a CLEAR right and wrong and make it equally clear where one finds the “right” is the day that the turn-around will truly begin.

    Jesus preached in parables, doing his best to appeal to a variety of beliefs and bring them to the truth. Then at one point, he spoke the clear truth: “I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you”. He was done with the drawing in, and instead gave his followers a choice – believe, or leave. Some left and he didn’t try to stop them. Those who stayed and believed inherited the kingdom. At some point, that choice will have to be enunciated clearly by the Catholic Church- believe or leave. Nobody likes this choice to be certain, but it is so obvious as to be inevitable.

    I think he is dead on in talking about those who “call themselves Catholics”. I look at the current attitude toward the LCWR, various smackdowns of “Catholic” media by Bishops, the renewed prominence of the word “excommunication” in the popular lexicon and see that things are changing. But how long can it take before it will become obvious that the truth has to be clearly and decisively stated? What will be the event that will be the “turning point”?

  41. Thomas in MD says:

    He nailed it. I realize the extent of the abandonment of Catholic identity varies from diocese to diocese and even parish to parish, but here in the Premier See the ship has gone so far off course, that it will take decades to right. Even now that we have a solid man in Archbishop O’Brien, the call back to our identiy as Catholics is being resisted so vehemently,it is really unnerving. Priests here have been in open rebellion since the 60s and they aren’t going quietly…

  42. Templar says:

    I voted “dead on target”.

    I was reduced to “Church Shopping” like a Protestant to find a Parish with an Orthodox Catholic Pastor, fully loyal to the Pope and the Magisterial teachings of Holy Mother Church, without being in an organization which is not “in full communion” with Rome. But this Parish is clearly not the norm, and even it moves very slowly when it comes to stripping away many of the trappings of the past 40 years. That pace; in this Parish, in this Diocese, in this Country, and in the World; needs to be greatly accelerated if we are to come back from the brink of irrelevancy. We need to stop worrying about the effects and preach truth period, because as Mr. Voris correctly points out, we are not called to “win”, that is Our Lord and Lady’s job; we are called to fight and if necessary die, as martyrs if need be. If members of the Church are not willing to die for her, guess what, they too are Catholic in name only.

  43. thouart says:

    If 1/10 of our priests had the fortitude, faith and intelligence of Michael Voris, the Church would be saved!

    He is the ONLY person in media today accurately describing the Catholic Church.

  44. Henry Edwards says:

    I have said in recent posts that I think the Church is finally beginning to turn the corner, partly because of the young priests and seminarians I know who say and think much the same as Michael Voris. I am waiting to hear bishops say these things publicly, partly because I think public confession is prerequisite to public redemption.

  45. jm says:

    He is busy condemning Protestantism instead of Modernism. Very, very wrong-headed right now, and makes him seem in a blind Catholic ghetto. Eulogos nailed it: “While what liberal Catholic parishes teach and do may in some superficial ways seem Protestant, such as the meal emphasis in the Eucharist, most of what they do is preach an attenuated liberal I’m OK, you’re OK Christianity.
    I know Newman said that the seeds of liberalism are inherent in Protestantism, but that is a subtle point, and real Protestants are fighting liberalism with everything they have got. It is liberalism , the doctrine that there is no truth at all in religion, but only emotion and sentiment and personal feelings, and yours are as good as mine, which has sapped the vitality of Catholicism, as it sapped the vitality of the mainline Protestant churches.”

  46. worm says:

    From the voting and comments, it sounds like I may be fortunate, but in my experience, the Church is not as bad off as Mr. Voris portrays it. The one concrete example (Detroit vocations campaign) was bad, but that is just one concrete example. My life is full of good examples. Again, I might be in the minority here. The few times I’ve encountered a Protestant parish, I found a new parish the following week. It’s usually not too difficult to find a good one by taking a look at the bulletin which these days you can usually do online.

    When I think of recent campaigns, I think of Catholics Come Home and Fishers of Men. Not sure if “the leadership” was responsible for these, but I would say both of them are more Catholic than Protestant, especially the latter. I got teary eyed watching Fishers of Men. And while recent pronouncements by USCCB about abortion or marriage may not have been as effective as we would have liked they have certainly been a step in the right direction. As more older bishops retire, I think things will only improve. So while his assessment may have been much closer to the truth say 10-15 years ago, I’m not sure I agree with it today. Plus I’d rather focus on the good and encourage our new leaders to continue making changes to bring us closer to authentic Catholicism.

  47. robtbrown says:

    He is busy condemning Protestantism instead of Modernism. Very, very wrong-headed right now, and makes him seem in a blind Catholic ghetto.

    Not wrong-headed to anyone who understands what happened 40 years ago.

    Eulogos nailed it: “While what liberal Catholic parishes teach and do may in some superficial ways seem Protestant, such as the meal emphasis in the Eucharist, most of what they do is preach an attenuated liberal I’m OK, you’re OK Christianity.

    Even without the I’m OK, You’re OK thing, there is still the influence of Protestantism.

    BTW, Cardinal Ratzinger said that Vat II was influenced by Protestantism.

    I know Newman said that the seeds of liberalism are inherent in Protestantism, but that is a subtle point, and real Protestants are fighting liberalism with everything they have got.

    What is a Real Protestant?

    It is liberalism , the doctrine that there is no truth at all in religion, but only emotion and sentiment and personal feelings, and yours are as good as mine, which has sapped the vitality of Catholicism, as it sapped the vitality of the mainline Protestant churches.”
    Comment by jm

    It sapped the vitality of mainline Protestant churches because it is inherent in Protestantism.

  48. jfk03 says:

    I do not think Michael’s comments were directed at the Eastern Catholic churches, most of which are very orthodox in their proclamation of the Gospel and service of the Liturgy.

  49. Tom Ryan says:

    I got the video too and the one on the Latin Mass, but am awaiting the reaction to this one:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jt0Dp00wSZg

  50. robtbrown says:

    His claim that “there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church” is not consistent with the teaching of the Magisterium he claims to honor. While I agree the best hope for salvation is within the Catholic Church, it is an attack on the Orthodox Churches that is simply uncalled for.
    Comment by beez

    Non est salus extra ecclesiam is considered de fide, but one must have a concept of the Church that is not merely temporal.

  51. Central Valley says:

    As usual, Michael is dead on. NEVER would this be broadcast on the television station of the diocese of Fresno, where local programs talk about diologue with other religions, the Holy faith not defended but discussed. Michael speaks for the silent majority of Catholics.

  52. He nailed it. And ditto what Templar said. While there are a few places of Orthodoxy in Oklahoma and they get a lot of press (Clear Creek Abbey, the new FSSP Parish, the Shrine of the Infant Jesus of Prague) they are VERY few and far between. We drive an hour and a half to assist at Mass. We have gone to every parish within 60 miles of our home and the liturgy and theology is watered-down. I can count about 8 good, solid orthodox priests in the Oklahoma City Archdiocese. The others subscribe to a false social justice-type theology and their liturgies reflect it.

  53. lizfromFL says:

    @chironomo, you got it right. Believe, or leave. I love that from John 6. The one thing that should make the sola scriptura folks believe without a doubt, yet they completely disregard it. They can pull out a vague verse and make an entire theory about the rapture, but John 6 they ignore. Go figure.

    The problem is that no one wants to say “believe or leave.” It doesn’t sound very christian, does it? So instead we not only let you believe whatever you want and stay, but we will also let you spread your beliefs within our churrch to others, causing confusion and even heresy. You all know there are catholics who believe communion is a symbol, think differently from the church on a myriad of social issues. This is not a protestant problem, it’s a catholic problem. We need to teach the truth, and then once the teaching is done, “believe or leave.”

  54. JonM says:

    First option, he nailed it dead on.

    I think people are getting unnecessarily snagged in the umbrella term ‘Protestantism.’ Protestantism is so vast, especially in modern days, that you are almost certain to find within a distinct sect some heresy directly addressed centuries ago. Instead of getting into the minutiae of ‘Arianism’ and ‘Pelagianism’ and ‘Manichaeism’ and ‘Nestorianism’ etc. etc., I think the short hand is acceptable.

    Let’s remember, Protestantism errupted when a certain priest decided he could pick and choose what to believe based on his own illumination, so I think there it is inherently contradictory to use a phrase ‘orthodox Protestant’ or something similar.

    As Father Z has written, young people need to be shocked into the Church. Well, more than just young people, but they especially need an inspiring experience. I remember nearly two years ago Christmas Eve, the Mass (Novus Ordo) was mesmorizing. Incense, kneeling, traditional music, this ineffable rite called the Eucharist. It was stunning.

    Making Church comfortable and like ‘everyday society’ will never work because 1) most people on some level appreciate how difficult life is (and so, why just add some other committment?) and 2) those who love the ways of the world will not change their ways when presented the contradiction of ‘affirming’ Catholicism and advice to really change behavior.

    Now, I should point out that this does not mean the message is one of vinegar. Rather, it is the most hopeful message imaginable: delivery from this world, which can be very painful, and the reward of eternal happiness with the Creator of the universe.

    So, it is important for us not to get uncharitable or develop a superiority complex over others. Conversion is a process. I think of it like a great challenge (running a distance, climbing a mountain): it won’t be easy and will hurt! But we need our guides to lead us up the paths in order to get there.

  55. rssalazar says:

    “The Catholic Church’s teachings are offensive by their very nature” is so true because they are so counter-cultural.

    There may come a day when our bishops need to give up their cocktail parties and limos associated with their office and preach the Gospel in the trenches with us. We need our bishops supporting Catholic orthodoxy, not being accomodationalists.

    Michael did a great job, as he usually does. His videos are a Catholic version of Bill O’Reilly’s “No Spin Zone.” While O’Reilly spins his pen in a downward direction, Voris spins his pencil in an upward direction. I like Voris’ way better.

  56. Glen M says:

    Yes he nailed it like a treatise on the church door.

    Born in raised during the height of the ‘spirit of Vatican II’ and having discovered the UA three years ago I feel as though I’ve converted. The Church I grew up in is very different from the one I belong to now. Thank God for websites like this one as my soul was in danger of eternal fire.

    Thank you Father Z for being a defender of the Truth.

  57. Jaybirdnbham says:

    I voted option 1, but at the same time I see my Baptist co-worker who is living the Beatitudes better than I do most days! I believe God levels the playing field with our Protestant brothers and sisters, for the simple reason that God’s justice is perfect. They don’t have the fullness of grace and the Sacraments that we have, but they so often do more with the little they’ve got. Of course God will reward that! And it’s not up to us to try to figure out who is or is not saved. That’s God’s business.

    We as Catholics must be true to who and what we are, no matter how politically incorrect that may be. We can only draw others in if we do that. Protestantizing the Mass as we’ve done is a huge mistake, just as Mr. Voris states.

    It may also be the case that if/when we return to our core roots as a Church, and really embrace the whole truths of our Faith, we may shrink to a remnant. But it will be a Faithful Remnant of true Roman Catholics. And that small remnant will have more power to convert than this huge mess of half-Protestant Catholics that many of us are at this time.

  58. Janine says:

    I voted for #2, he got a few things wrong, but overall I agree. But is it really Protestantism? or more liberalism? We simply cannot back down from tradition, or offer some watered down version. Perhaps that is what caused the confusion to begin with.

  59. Right on. Watered down faith full of errors and crowd-pleasers attracts no one. Look at the religious Orders who follow all the Church teaching and wear a habit – they are growing. All the others are dying.

  60. St. Louis IX says:

    I voted for the 1st spot. I am in the Springfield Massachusett Diocese.
    We do not have one TLM offered. We Have Church Closings everywhere.
    We Have the Sisters of St Joseph telling parents that one day their daughters may become Priests.
    We Have a priest calling for the Resignation of The Pope from the Pulpit
    and the list goes on.
    Being a Catholic and adhering to all Her teachings is not well received here, But We do have MUSIC Ministries for the youth,We have Liturgical Dance for Church anniversaries during Mass. Plenty of Charismatic get together and all the Field trips to Medjugorje you could hope for.
    We have new Churches go up with the Tabernacle outside the Main Body of the Church, (separate room from the Main Altar)
    I know there are many Good Diocese with Faithful Bishops, but that is not the story here!
    Please Pray for us

  61. Hans says:

    If this were thirty years ago, I would agree more, but for the most part our Weaklands have become Dolans. Things are generally going in the right direction, but it will take time to turn everything around. Most young priests are enthusiastic about their faith, whatever form of the Mass they celebrate, but there remains a generation of priests whose formation was twisted in the “implementation” of Vatican II, by the so-called “Spirit of Vatican II” that is nothing of the sort. I see many signs of hope and revival. Certainly many problems remain, but I don’t think that things are as bad everywhere as Mr. Voris suggests, though I can’t speak to the situation in Detroit.

    Also, parts of his presentation about ‘no salvation outside the Church’ smack of Feeneyism, which also problematic. In moving away from Protestant heresy, he comes too near the heresy of the sedevacantists for my tastes.

  62. Vincenzo says:

    St. Louis IX:“Please Pray for us”
    Praying.

  63. Templar says:

    Our Weaklands Have become Dolans?

    Would that be Archbishop Dolan of New York? The same one who a few weeks ago rededicated an openly Homosexual Parish and cheered and applauded when the Pastor introduced the Parish LGBT Group to him. This Parish marches in the NYC Gay Pride parade, and it’s parishioners have been interviewed on CNN about how welcome they and their partners are at this Parish.

    I am saddened and to use the correct term scandalized by his actions, and for the life of me can not understand why a man with the Archbishop’s credibility would participate in such a farce.

  64. janek3615 says:

    I am, by God’s grace, closing in on seven decades as a Catholic in America so I have seen, been part of, rebelled against, and been brought back to the Faith. And I must agree for the most part with Michael Voris. Sure there are really some strong faithful bishops in this country and some organizations, parishes and priests that labor mightily for Christ’s Church. But, by and large, most of our prelates and priests are pretty timid and tepid fellows, more happily aligned with the Democratic Party and its mushy values than the Church of martyrs. Then again, it was Our Lord who said, “Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it! Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.” (Matthew 7: 13-15)

  65. Dear Fr. Zuhlzdorf (Father, bless!)

    I voted to say that I substantially agreed with the views expressed in the video. In fact, I entirely agreed with it, with but one exception.

    That exception is with the thesis in the video that bishops, archbishops, and cardinals have refused to teach catholic doctrine. I agree with Napoleon that one should never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence. For the last forty odd years (and very odd years they were indeed), at least in the U.S., our clergy have been poorly schooled in the languages of Scripture, Tradition and the Magisterium (i.e., Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and Latin). In addition, such education which they have received in those three fonts of the Holy Spirit has been tainted with presuppositions which discount the existence of that Person of the Holy and Life Giving Trinity, and in fact, the Holy Trinity itself.

    It is no wonder though that our clergy, whether bishops, priests, or deacons, are largely unable to teach Catholic doctrine. Nemo dat quod non habet: no one can give what they do not have.

    It is a great relief to me that there are still some bishops who still have the knowledge and ability to teach, our great Bishop of Rome chief among them. It is also a relief that there are still some priests, such as yourself, who can lay claim to the same knowledge, and who in fact do teach the Catholic and Orthodox faith. Thank you for that.

    Very truly yours,

    Bernard Brandt

  66. irishgirl says:

    I voted for option one-as usual, Michael Voris nails it!

  67. james says:

    He is right. I will say this – and probably get lambasted… But until we go back
    to the Church before Vatican 2, which means returning to the Original, Latin Mass…
    The return of modesty in dress and at Mass… of daily family Rosaries…
    and so on… We will continue to splinter.

    Many (most?) parishes, many priests… bishops… Cardinals… many… embrace
    modernism. They live in the world, and “of it”. Proudly. Priests no longer wear
    the collar. Nuns look like social workers. It’s not Catholic, and not spiritually
    attractive, as decreasing vocations have proven for some time.

    Funny… vocations seem to be on the rise in more Traditional orders… Perhaps
    a clue – indeed, a remedy. I hope this is the plan of our Holy Father Benedict XVI.
    For it is our only Hope. We will only find our True Catholic Identity in the past…

    Why all the beauty of our Blessed Church was wiped out emasse… does it not seem
    absolutely intentional?? So why try to keep it all propped up?? Dismantle it.
    ASAP. Souls are being lost. Daily.

  68. Athelstan says:

    Vobis is mostly right.

    Why should young people feel drawn to the typical Catholic suburban parish? Too often they’re run by and for a certain cohort of baby boomers. Boomers who have a very distinct idea of what the church should be like – in many ways more frozen in amber than any stale low mass culture (which was not always as stale as people like to think) in ethnic Catholic parishes of the 50′s – and they are invested in that idea.

    Where did that idea come from? The Council took place just after the noontide of Liberal Protestantism – at the tail end of a couple decades of remarkable ecumenical rapprochement as both Catholics and Protestants made it through WWII and its aftermath and discovered a kind of brotherhood. There was a kind of irrational exuberance in the air – about the possibilities that Liberal Protestantism presented, the respectability it commanded, and the possibilities for real reunification. And so a vast panoply of Catholic traditions and culture was thrown overboard overnight to hop a seat on the new train. The Council didn’t demand that, but it happened anyway.

    Of course now almost everyone can see plainly the dead end that Liberal Protestantism really is. Unfortunately, to rebuild is much harder than to destroy. Many young people today, raised on a steady diet of cynicism and libertine relativism, will be offput by a vigorous reassertion of Church authority and doctrine, and mystified by the return of esoteric, sensual Catholic traditions – such is the state of secular society today. But they will at least see that there is a real choice to be made. The Church won’t be something they can be indifferent to. Only be regaining a sense of her true self – joyfully, one hopes – can the Catholic Church have any real future. And in so doing, the young will be drawn back to her again.

  69. PS says:

    No, this is largely wrong. Wrong not just insofar as it is in the vein of Voris’s usual lack of charity/penchant for sensationalism and vituperative screed. It’s wrong in that it presumes that Bishops in the US aren’t doing just this. I get the sense that per Voris, other than Burke or Chaput, there are no good Bishops in the US. That’s nuts. Are we to suspect BXIV’s judgments/appointments on the matter? JPII’s? There are, of course, plenty of “liberal” Bishops, no doubt. But that is the problem of the Pope first and foremost. It’s silly to presume we can make someone think differently. I share the frustration and the basic sentiment that the Church-on-Earth seems to suffer from deep crises. And frankly, the fact that _we_ know better and (as Fr. Z. can probably attest, judging from the growing numbers of registered users on his site) the fact that there are increasingly more people who know better, who can tell something is wrong, indicates to me that things are becoming healthier in the Church, not the other way around.

    Voris ultimately answered the basic question he poses: why be a member of such a dysfunctional church? Well, because the true Church is not at all dysfunctional and we are and always ought to be members of _that_ Church. Catholicism has had boom times and bad times (remember the lions? married bishops? three popes?) and, more importantly, at its most prevalent, it was perhaps at its most lax.

  70. Eric says:

    I voted the second option.
    Although he didn’t hit the nail right on the head, the force of the blow was enough to nearly sink the nail.

  71. Hans says:

    You can’t honestly tell me that Dolan isn’t far better than Weakland, Templar. Is he perfect? No. I don’t expect him to be, but when I become perfect, I will expect perfection from my bishop. What matters is that the direction of motion is correct.

    If you expect the bishops to be perfect, you will always be disappointed, from the first century on. That is part of the heresy of the Protestants and of the sedevacantists.

  72. Templar says:

    Sure Dolan is far better than Weakland, but it’s completely besides the point. Few abortions are better than many abortions, but even 1 abortion is intrinsic evil. Being a Heterosexual Bishop acting as if a Gay Parish in your Diocese is Normative is better than being a Homosexual Bishop, but Homosexuality is still Disordered and an Archbishop, even more so the Archbishop of NYC, acting like this is just another day is exactly what Mr. Voris is complaining about.

  73. Jerry says:

    re: beez – “His claim that “there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church” is not consistent with the teaching of the Magisterium he claims to honor. While I agree the best hope for salvation is within the Catholic Church, it is an attack on the Orthodox Churches that is simply uncalled for.”

    This is indeed part of our faith: _extra ecclesiam nulla salus_ (outside the Church there is no salvation). Note what it does not say: that only Catholics will be saved.

    Pope John Paul II explained in his general audience of May 31, 1995:

    For those too who through no fault of their own do not know Christ and are not recognized as Christians, the divine plan has provided a way of salvation. As we read in the Council’s Decree Ad Gentes, we believe that “God in ways known to himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel” to the faith necessary for salvation (AG 7). Certainly, the condition “inculpably ignorant” cannot be verified nor weighed by human evaluation, but must be left to the divine judgment alone. For this reason, the Council states in the Constitution Gaudium et Spes that in the heart of every man of good will, “Grace works in an unseen way…. The Holy Spirit in a manner known only to God offers to every man the possibility of being associated with this paschal mystery” (GS 22).

    It is important to stress that the way of salvation taken by those who do not know the Gospel is not a way apart from Christ and the Church. The universal salvific will is linked to the one mediation of Christ. “God our Savior…wants all men to be saved and come to know the truth. And the truth is this: God is one. One also is the mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all” (1 Tim 2:3-6). Peter proclaimed this when he said: “There is no salvation in anyone else” and called Jesus the “cornerstone” (Acts 4:11-12), emphasizing Christ’s necessary role at the basis of the Church.

    This affirmation of the Savior’s “uniqueness” derives from the Lord’s own words. He stated that he came “to give his own life in ransom for the many” (Mk 10:45), that is, for humanity, as St. Paul explains when he writes: “One died for all” (2 Cor 5:14; cf. Rom 5:18). Christ won universal salvation with the gift of his own life. No other mediator has been established by God as Savior. The unique value of the sacrifice of the cross must always be acknowledged in the destiny of every man.

    Since Christ brings about salvation through his Mystical Body, which is the Church, the way of salvation is connected essentially with the Church.

    http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/alpha/data/aud19950531en.html

    Michael Voris has a video where he discusses the same topic:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Dcfj0PU_JQ

  74. JosephMary says:

    Michael Voris is giving a retreat at the Mother of the Redeemer Retreat Center in Bloomington , Indiana this weekend.

    I have been watching him for awhile. He is pulling no punches.

  75. Sid says:

    Three gravely serious problems with Mr. Vortex’s report:

    1. The problem in The Church isn’t Protestantism. It is Liberal Protestantism (and Liberal Catholicism). Were Catholics really copy cats of “conservative” or “evangelical” Protestantism, we’d actually be better off than copying Liberalism.

    2. Protestantism covers such a broad field that the word is becoming meaningless: Liberal, classical Lutheran, classical Calvinist, classical Arminian, Evangelical, Pentecostal/Charismatic, Dispensationalist, Mega-Church consumer and fast food religion, Unitarian, Quaker? Which does Mr. Vortex mean?

    3. I’m not trying out for the Sour Grapes Award today, but bashing of (non-liberal) Protestantism is getting irksome. Non-Liberal Protestantism is a noble religion. It’s produced too many outstanding people to be worthy of bashing. Yes, there were the events at Drogheda. Were we Catholics any better at the Waldensian massacres and the Sack of Magdeburg?

  76. trespinos says:

    Option three. Not buying it, in the way he presents it. He paints with far too broad a brush. He exaggerates to the point of actually making statements that are unjust with respect to what our Church’s leaders have done and are doing. His screed is something I might expect of a Lefebvrian or sedevacantist. Do I ascribe it to malice? No. Ignorance? But how can I when he has a S.T.B. after his name? No, for that reason alone, I expect better of him.

  77. lmgilbert says:

    Voris is using the language and the tone of schismatics, something we emphatically don’t need at the moment.

    For that matter, how is giving him a forum here going to advance the cause of the Latin Mass, the Benedictine Reform of the Liturgy or the unity of the Church?

  78. Sedgwick says:

    These people talk a good game, but the last time I encountered them, on the Catholic Truth Scotland blog a few months ago and in their videos, they were condemning “progressives” as harmful to the faith, and yet refused to admit that the Novus Ordo itself was created by “progressives” (actually, worse: a Freemason and 6 Protestant advisers) and was therefore ALSO damaging to the faith. Not only refused to admit it, but went to great and utterly dishonest lengths to avoid even addressing the issue.

    So tell us, RealCatholicTV.com: by calling the Mass a “Protestantized” Mass, are you finally ready to admit that the default liturgy of the Church, promulgated by one of the worst popes in the Church’s history, is actually undermining the faith? If so, then we finally agree, and welcome to Catholic reality.

  79. Andrew says:

    He makes some acute observations, but his analysis of root causes is inadequate. He just wraps a lot of things into one and tries to pin everything on the “false ecumenism” concept. Even if it was true it would beg a question of “why”. Why would the hierarchy (which was right on track before, presumably) favor so blatantly an erroneous approach? Actually, the causes are much deaper and much more complex and the origin of the difficulties is to a great extent also found in civil society. Let’s hope that the new evangelization will figure out how to preach the gospel to the deaf ears of modern man.

  80. I could only watch the first 90 seconds. The stilted…putting up…important…words…became too much. Blame…the bishops…

    He should trash the green screen and perhaps get a haircut.

    Also, looking to blame the bishops for this whole mess is weak. We all own it. Blaming the bishops is like blaming a baseball manager when his team is batting .200. Does he share some blame? Absolutely. Will firing him make everyone start hitting? Not likely. For the team to succeed, the players need to hit the ball, pitch the ball, and catch the ball. The manager can’t do it for them.

  81. Sleepyhead says:

    Here’s yet another example of the “Protestantized Catholic Church”. Alpha is n-o-t authentically Catholic – no mention of the sacraments, saints, martyrs or The Magisterium. Yet Alpha is run in many Catholic parishes – it’s an own goal.

    http://www.alphana.org/Groups/1000053690/What_Catholic_Leaders.aspx

    http://www.alphafriends.org/story/alphas-emea-europe-middle-east-africa-week-2010

  82. JonM says:

    Some of the critics seem to miss Mr. Voris’s specific confrontation: In various diocese, including Detroit, there are expensive campaigns to encourage Catholics to come back to the Church.

    This action is of course morally right and praiseworthy certis paribus, but what Mr. Voris suggests is that its strategy and exection are completey wrong.

    Too many are getting hung up on his use of the term ‘Protestant’ or ‘Protestantized.’ The fact is that a wave of Protestant-esque spirit overran much of the Church in the post-World War II era.

    And again, attempting to tease out ‘conservative’ Protestantism from ‘liberal’ Protestantism is a silly proposition, particularly in this context. It is like getting into a huff over a bottle of fresh 100% pure Gulf oil and a bottle of a 10% Corexit blend. Both will kill you as dead as a hammer!

    For those attacking his ‘no salvation outside the Church’ remarks… Well, that is our faith. Mr. Voris did not endorse Feenyism, which some seem to be infering.

    Having earned an Economics degree, I have to inject a bit of economic trade off theory in this discussion, which is sort of what Mr. Voris is doing.

    Is it more efficient to spend a boat load of money to make the Church look like a sappy, comfortable lodge where every trouble in life melts away in a group hug? Or, is it better to point out that people aren’t Catholic (or are not practicing their faith) because Church leaders are not imploring them under pain of losing their immortal souls to do so?

    The economy is really, really bad and many of us can’t afford another project let alone one that is simply poorly constructed from the start. If prelates are really interested in conversions and people coming home, they need to ditch the homosexual parishes, Hindu shrine offerings and political schmoozing (Democrats and Republicans) and instead start courageously preaching the faith of the Martyrs.

    Michael Voris nailed it perfectly as he says who in the world would want to join a religion that is constantly reinventing itself?

    This isn’t hard stuff! Frankly, this is the grown up version of not wanting to do a term paper: The actual study and composition would be half the time spent on excuses and delays!

    TLM = Stunning, other worldly experience = Conversions

  83. joanofarcfan says:

    Voris is right. I first attended a Protestant service just last year and was shocked and really appalled at how it was just like the Post Vatican II Mass, communion and all. I found out later at breakfast with the minister and his wife that they are pro-abortion. It leaves me with the sense that it all goes together.

    So sad how we have lost our unique Catholic identity in the liturgy. I am so blessed to have a wonderful Latin Mass nearby to attend.

  84. Susan the Short says:

    For St Louis IX in the Springfield MA diocese:

    come to Turners Falls and Our Lady of Czestochowa parish, a true oasis in the wasteland.

  85. PerIpsum says:

    I think Mr. Voris could dispense with the whole Protestant dichotomy and applying it to the Church. Everyone knows that for the last 50 years, many of the Catholic hierarchy have been infatuated with “pleasing” our seperated brethren. No matter what, the Catholic Church will remain the bride of Christ, no matter how bad we try and mangle it.

    But on the whole, Mr. Voris is right. I happen to be a seminarian for the Archdiocese of Detroit, and the vocations campaign, while having good intentions, is deficient. It was priests who sacrificed themselves for Christ and his Church who inspired me to be a priest, not catchy and hip ads that mimic clothing zingers and that portrayed priests as “average joes.”

    It is no secret why certain dioceses suffer from a lack of vocations. The neighboring Diocese of Lansing half a quarter amount of Catholics than Detroit, yet they have more than Detroit does currently. We are in a process of purification and growth. Ubi mors, ibi spe… where there is death, there is hope.

  86. RC2 says:

    I voted #3. His message seems extremely dated to me — more appropriate for the Church when I joined it (as an ex-Protestant) close to 25 years ago than for now, without denying that problems and weak bishops still exist. 25 years ago it was routine in the three dioceses I live near to hear heresy at Sunday mass; to not be sure whether consecration had occurred due to canonical liberties; and it was hard to find confession. I even brought a friend in mortal sin to a priest after mass and he told her to make an appointment because he had lunch waiting. Nothing remotely like that has happened in any of those 3 dioceses in a decade, the priests are “JP II generation” –of a different stripe altogether than 25 years ago; and their ranks are beginning to ascend to the episcopacy. However bad it is out there, it’s markedly better in every way: worship, catechesis, praxis, community life, courage than it was then.

    Moreover, I have to ask if he is paying attention to what Pope Benedict has been telling us for 5 years. Consult almost any address to bishops or priests and you will find he tells them that catechesis and “prophetic teaching,” while indispensable, have been over-relied upon as a means of renewal. He told the bishops at Fatima for example,

    “The courageous and integral appeal to principles is essential and indispensable; yet simply proclaiming the message does not penetrate to the depths of people’s hearts, it does not touch their freedom, it does not change their lives. What attracts is, above all, the encounter with believing persons who, through their faith, draw others to the grace of Christ by bearing witness to him.”

    He hardly ever speaks to Catholics without begging us to worry less about doing and saying and more about **being** the kind of people whose very presence transforms –the kind of people we become when we allow ourselves to be transformed by a personal relationship with Christ in prayer and frequenting the sacraments.

    See for example the Q&A with priests at the end of June, or his simple yet profoundly beautiful remarks on what Mary has to say to the city in December last year, or as I say, almost any address to pastors or committed Catholics.

  87. cor ad cor loquitur says:

    Wrong wrong wrong, in substance and especially in style. We have an energetic and orthodox Pope, who is working hard to rebuild Catholic teaching and identity, using improvements in the liturgy but also using a variety of other means appointing strong bishops, for instance, and tirelessly writing books, giving talks and publishing encyclicals. There are far more reasons for hope than for despair in the Church today.

    Voris’s biggest error, I think, is that he turns away from the hope that Christ has given us. Let him read Spe Salvi

  88. randomcatholic says:

    Spot on!

    It high time we had more of this. All the optimism and support for the hierarchy in the face of massive decline and scandal this past 50 years is impossible to support. “New springtime” indeed…. where exactly?

    We need to recognize that the Church in the West is in deep crisis, not just from the sex abuse scandal (that is a symptom) but from a loss of faith.

    The problem will only get better if we stop pretending it isn’t there.

  89. Magpie says:

    randomcatholic: I think there is a new springtime. Sure there are only a few small green shoots, but they are there. There are many late frosts and the weather is still pretty inclement though.

  90. Joel says:

    Voted #2

    I have heard it discussed by some good priests that we have of late been the church of the masses and that we are now headed toward being the church of the martyr’s again. I tend to agree and think this theory is supported by Voris’s argument.

    So while I think his point is painfully accurate, I also think there is too much generalization, no hope, and too much finger pointing. (He also could have made the point in half the time.)
    There also has to be a degree of accountability placed on us lay folks as well, especially us parents. When we just go along with what we know is wrong, we are partly culpable. If my children hear and see “puppets” at a Mass, it is my responsibility to teach them differently and to get them to a Mass that is orthodox.

    Best line was “supper vs sacrafice”. In fact I think that sums up the entire argument rather nicely.

  91. robtbrown says:

    For that matter, how is giving him a forum here going to advance the cause of the Latin Mass, the Benedictine Reform of the Liturgy or the unity of the Church?
    Comment by lmgilbert

    He also has a video on the Latin Mass.

  92. robtbrown says:

    cor ad cor loquitur,

    I didn’t notice any lack of hope in the video. Mostly, it was just a description of the present situation in the Church, which of course varies from place to place.

    I realize that BXVI is working hard to reform the Church. But the only liturgical change I’ve seen here after SP is that a pastor has instituted handshaking twice during the mass. That’s what I call liturgical reform.

    Frankly, I’m getting tired of the promises of how good everything will be in the future.

  93. New Sister says:

    I think the question should have been not if he is “wrong” but “incomplete” – nonetheless, I vote for #1, because all Mr. Voris says in this release is accurate.

  94. JonM says:

    I want to respond to those saying that Mr. Voris is too barbed because we are in a ‘Springtime.’

    No we are not. At least not with young adults.

    Note well: I am a 26 male convert in a good diocese and in a good parish.

    Father Z posted some months ago stats on practicing Catholic youth. The figures were staggering particularly in practical, everyday living of the faith. Example: A tiny minority considered marriage ‘a priority.’ Keep in mind, these are ‘active Catholics.’

    Even at my good parish, the Baby Boom crowd has a monopoly of power over various councils. Lot of Marty Haugen Gathering Us In. Lot of (rather ordinary) Ministers of Holy Communion. Constant shuffling so everyone with white hair gets to read. And…

    At any given Mass on Sunday, I would guess there are fewer than ten people in their 20s (total attendance around 750-1000.) Generally, one man (me) and the rest women.

    Something is very wrong with this and represents a demographic catastrophe if this is indicative of other locations (I think it does.)

    I can tell you first hand, sappy ‘coming home’ ads and billboards will not shock people in their 20s and 30s out of pornography, pre-marital sex, and materialism. Some of these campaigns imply that joining the Church removes all hardship from life as it melts away in a warm group hug; everyone with a half functioning brain sees through this fantasy of Baby Boom soit-disant marketers. Baby Boom, the generation that has bequethed to us a disaster (though they enjoyed ever inflating incomes and constant mortgage rates…but I digress.)

    This kind of marketing is so lame and toxic and does not bring people into the Church. The end result is only another Church bureaucracy with annual appeals for funding. And I think this is very much Mr. Voris’s point.

    Boil it down to this: for every ‘resource unit’ (dollars, time donated, time of priests, etc.), how many people will be brought into the Church A) the Archdiocese of Detroit way B) the TLM, dynamic, shocking traditional way.

    I think B > A.

  95. Supertradmum says:

    I agree 100% and this has been my experience over 35 of working in the Church and in Catholic colleges, etc. Wish he had better visual techniques, not just the talking head.

  96. Jack Hughes says:

    “At any given Mass on Sunday, I would guess there are fewer than ten people in their 20s (total attendance around 750-1000.) Generally, one man (me) and the rest women.” – John M

    Yup statistically that sounds about right at the Cathedral evening Mass on Sunday (I sometimes attend due to family concerns) there are usually about 20 or so people in their 20′s and 30′s(they are usually very liberal i.e. hetrodox); and yeah the fallen away Catholics need to be shocked out of thier materialistic sex-filled, liberal lives and sappy come home campaigns just don’t do it!!! – The number of times I’ve come across young materalistic hedonists on campus who’ve lost the faith makes me want to cry, one girl said that students at her catholic secondary school went to weekday Mass just to avoid first lesson of the day and that her confirmation retreat at a monestary was a joke with the kids finding the monks home-made wine, getting plastered and (if I remember correctly) commiting acts not fit to discussed online.

    @New Sister what is the situation like where you are?

  97. lmgilbert says:

    “Constant shuffling so everyone with white hair gets to read. And…”

    Twaddle. You and your age cohort can volunteer to read just as we did. We do not have and do not want a lock on this ministry. Nothing would delight pastors and people more than young people stepping up to the plate.

  98. jm says:

    rbtbrown: i recommend Bouyer’s book on Protestantism. There is good and bad Protestantism, although I think you’ll choke on that idea. I guess I flinch at Protestant-bashing when the evangelical Episc. Church I attended had a far more reverent communion service than most parishes i visited at the time. Liberal Protestants are not conservative ones, and as a Catholic, I have more in common with believers in Jesus than pagans, whether they are baptized RC pagans or liberal Protestant ones. I am not defending liberal Protestants, but I think tough times call for seeing friends where they are, i.e. Evangelicals.

  99. Joy says:

    I voted for #1. I get these videos almost daily & can hardly wait till the next one! This weekend I will be attending the retreat in Bloomington IN where Mr. Voris will be the retreat master. Should be a great retreat! Anyone else going?

  100. JonM says:

    @ lmgilbert,

    Twaddle. You and your age cohort can volunteer to read just as we did. We do not have and do not want a lock on this ministry. Nothing would delight pastors and people more than young people stepping up to the plate.

    I can only speak for my relatively good parish. Perhaps theoretically any competent person can sign up. In practice, that is not how things are run. But that is sort of besides my point, anyway.

    Inviting young people into parish ministries is not really going to address the issue. We go to Church in order to receive grace and get purified, not to argue over inane bureaucratic proposals. For young people, the first step is getting them to have some modicum of faith, which will come from an ineffable blast (one that the TLM has delivered for centuries.)

    When presented the apparent choice of ‘Opportunity to get into petty squabbles over who gets to read Sunday’ and ‘Keep it in high gear and have some fun now!’…well, boys and girls in most ages would fall into the latter. In this modern age of unreal sexualization of everything, well our Lord said it perfectly, that the path to death is wide while the path to life is narrow and strait.

    Frankly, I think that one of the servers or deacons should do the reading if we are in the Novus Ordo. This at least reinforces a sacral nature, that we are not ‘gatherin round the campfire’ but rather praying to God. This also takes away the confusing and distracting shuffle in the Sanctuary.

    To be clear, reading is a station for men- if for no other reason than it is intensely annoying to have a woman speaking as Pontius Pilate on Good Friday. (And to be perfectly clear, this has nothing to do with ‘keeping women down.’ As one FSSP Priest stated, women have a very special and intimate relationship with God that men lack. If we focused on our natural orientations, the world would be less severely screwed up.)

    Anyway, my suggestion would be to have a TLM, spend a bit of money promoting it to youth, and watch the shock and awe after a few months. We need order and real leadership, which is lacking not only in Bishops but also in parents.

  101. Jack Hughes says:

    JohnM – HEAR HEAR

    Might I also suggest praying to St. Mary Magdelen, St. Philomena, St. Maria Gorreti and St Aloysas Gonzalas for todays might be a good idea.

    Btw was your priest refering to Ven Cardinal József Mindszenty?

  102. JonM says:

    @ Jack H,

    The FSSP Priest might have been refering to the Ven Cardinal Jozsef; I only saw a clip of some commentary related to traditional practices (explaining among other things tediously how a veil is not a form of bondage, that it is actually something indicating exceptional purpose and beauty.)

    I tacked on the part about following our natural orientations (sort of in reference to the feminist movement, how 70% of jobs lost were lost by men, how society is very, very anti-family/patriarchal, etc.) It’s sad that many men think being a man is either beer and American football or styled hair. [Hint for young men out there! Girls deep down like alphas!]

  103. Supertradmum says:

    Would the arguments surrounding the term “Protestant” be helped by recalling Rev. Fulton J. Sheen’s comment? “What do you call an ignorant Catholic?”, he asked. “A Protestant”, he answered.

  104. Fr Jackson says:

    Wow. We needed that to be said 35 years ago. Archbishop Lefebvre would have approved, I think.

  105. Tradster says:

    Give the original Protestants their due. At least when they disagreed with the Church’s teachings they showed the honesty and courage to leave it. Today’s heretics continue to call themselves “Catholics” while destroying it from within.

  106. C. says:

    @Sid and @jm, I think that’s the problem. Part of the Church is trying to emulate evangelical Protestantism, part is trying to emulate liberal mainstream Protestantism (some low church, some High Church, some in-Between church), part is trying to emulate Pentecostal Protestantism, part is even trying to emulate African American Protestantism. It’s still Protestantism – a heresy. Just because someone opposes abortion and gay marriage doesn’t make them Catholic.

    Catholics ought to fit in with the dominant cultural milieu, except sin. We should speak the same vocabulary and language, wear modest versions of the same clothes, participate in public life as full citizens. But when it comes to the Sacred Liturgy, we are Roman Catholic – not Protestant. You shouldn’t have Pentecostal prayer sessions, Evangelical services, Liberal Protestant “communions” — you should have the Roman Catholic Mass. It’s what we believe that sets us apart, not our culture, and it is at Mass that we express through prayer what we believe.

  107. robtbrown says:

    rbtbrown: i recommend Bouyer’s book on Protestantism. There is good and bad Protestantism, although I think you’ll choke on that idea. I guess I flinch at Protestant-bashing when the evangelical Episc. Church I attended had a far more reverent communion service than most parishes i visited at the time. Liberal Protestants are not conservative ones, and as a Catholic, I have more in common with believers in Jesus than pagans, whether they are baptized RC pagans or liberal Protestant ones. I am not defending liberal Protestants, but I think tough times call for seeing friends where they are, i.e. Evangelicals.
    Comment by jm

    Who’s Protestant bashing? I was a Protestant (Episcopalian) until 1970.

    Do you know what ex opere operato means? And are you familiar with the Protestant theology of the Sacraments? If you were, you would see the nexus between Protestantism and Modernism.

    BTW, I met Fr Bouyer twice. The first time was at Fontgombault in, I think, 1980. Then in 1986 at Jouques, near Avignon, where I was present for the solemn vows of a friend. A few months later I began studies at the Angelicum.

  108. Bornacatholic says:

    The Catholic Fish rotted from the Head down.

    Vatican Two was a disaster and I do not think the “improvement” we have seen the past decade (and especially since the election of Pope Benedict)will be permanent unless a new ecumenical council is held which corrects the prudential errors of Vat Two.

    I pray the recent “tradition” of the Pope going to a Jewish Synagogue is ended.

    Immediately.

    It is a disgrace for a Pope to go there and submit himself to the abuses of the Rabbis because when he does that, he subjects me to the same abuse.

    The Jews need to hear the liberating salvific truth that Jesus is THEIR Saviour too.

    If a Pope goes to a Synagogue and refuses to teach that truth, he has done worse than waste his time – he has, by his actions, emboldened indifferentism in his flock.

  109. Bornacatholic says:

    Constant shuffling so everyone with white hair gets to read.

    Yet another error in prudential judgment.

    Charlie the Cabinet Maker and Charisse the Clinician get to do the readings while the Fr. Charles, the ordained Cleric, sits idly in his chair – to what end?

    So that He (in personna Christi) can decrease while the people’s “ministries” increase?

    How’s that whole Chasing-Jesus-out-of-the-sanctuary-and-empowering-the-laymen-thingy working out for ya, Catholic Church?

  110. Jerry says:

    re: Bornacatholic – “Charlie the Cabinet Maker and Charisse the Clinician get to do the readings while the Fr. Charles, the ordained Cleric, sits idly in his chair – to what end?”

    While I, too, much prefer a cleric to do the readings, there are so many battles to fight right now I think we need to objectively prioritize them – and, in my opinion, this is one with a lower priority.

    What does the congregation lose when the laity reads Scripture? They hear the same words, just a different voice. Yes, there is the blurring of the roles of clerics and laity, but that is a more remote problem. [Non-clerics delivering homilies is entirely different.]

    Compare this to the unnecessary use of EMHCs distributing Holy Communion in the hand, where non-consecrated hands are touching our Lord’s Body, who only knows how many times His Body is desecrated unintentionally, and how easy it is for it to be desecrated intentionally. Or the impact of inappropriate liturgical music on the participants at the Mass. Or …