"Are we prepared to promote conditions in which the living contact with God can be reestablished? For our lives today have become godless to the point of complete vacuity. God is no longer with us in the conscious sense of the word. He is denied, ignored, excluded from every claim to have a part in our daily life." - Alfred Delp, S.J.

Wednesday, July 16, 2014

Screenshots: Pewsnipper's War

Shea: A clearinghouse for contempt for much of the Church’s magisterial teaching and this pope in particular. Take the log out of your own eyes, anonymous Pewsitter cowards! 
... more
Fr. Longenecker: PewSitter negative, sour, cynical, misleading 

It's no longer funny.

If there was ever an atmosphere of hate and derision - you will find it on the Pewsitter web page.  Talk about American Catholic Tabloid News.  Yesterday it struck me as LOL funny - if not seriously insane - today it is just plain scandalous.  The site presents as a legitimate source of Catholic news and they resort to tabloid tactics insulting their critics with the most unflattering photos and salacious headlines they can concoct.  (That's my job, BTW.)

I'm blown away by Catholics online.

I got an email from some guy with a website, calling me out for leaving up a post I wrote in self-defense of falsehoods he wrote about me on his blog a few months ago.  He said that my post - which was in response to his poorly researched post - (which I had totally forgotten about BTW) - is  "slanderous, name calling, inaccurate, and mean spirited."  Holy crap!  The pot calling the kettle black I'd say.  All he had to do was ask me - instead he insults me again by calling my post "your little victim rant about me."  Huh?  Who was ranting?  This guy is supposed to be a professional Catholic apologist, evangelist, radio host, and writer - yet off screen he resorts to the exact same type of behavior he accused me of.

Sound familiar?

Amazing that any of us dare call ourselves Christians and go on to cite others for heresy and error and all sorts of infidelities. (Yep!  I'm guilty too!)  Calling others out like this discredits the Catholic online presence completely.  It demonstrates outright hypocrisy, envy, greed, ambition and false religion.  Everyone can mouth Catholic teaching - even go so far as to correct the bishops and the Holy Father himself - but they only have the outward show of religion.

If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, his religion is vain. 
Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to care for orphans and widows in their affliction and to keep oneself unstained by the world. - James 1


  1. I hope Shea sues them for libel. If they posted a photo of me looking like that--I'd sue!


    What was that business from St James again? I forgot...

  2. "Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to care for orphans and widows in their affliction and to keep oneself unstained by the world". - James 1

    I thought of Papa Francis as one who fits that biblical description perfectly. God bless him!

    Poor Mark...I still like him no matter how many battering rams try to hit him. ^^

  3. I think Pewsitter has become a clearinghouse for scandal and heresy. If you want to get a link on Pewsitter, write something attacking the bishops and/or the Holy Father. They will pick you up in a second. I am horrifyingly amazed at some of the blogs and websites they link to. Then, of course, there is the twisted and manipulated way in which they present news about the hierarchy of the Church. There is little doubt that their aim is to turn the laity against Church authority.

    I am so glad that the bloggers at Patheos are taking them on. Faithful Catholics need to be warned that Pewsitter is a spiritual minefield that can be very dangerous to their souls.

  4. The only criterion to use in discerning Pewsitter, Mark Shea, Simcha Fisher or any other spiritual voice (progressive, orthodox, Catholic, Evangelical, etc) is whether the Fruit of Holy Spirit is manifest in this voice. There are nine Fruit of the Spirit in Galatians 5:22-23 though the Catechism (based, I think, on the Septuagint) lists twelve -- charity, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, generosity, gentleness, faithfulness, modesty, self-control, chastity. When the Fruit of the Spirit is evident in one's life, we can say that this person has put on the mind of Christ and has embraced His character.

  5. I just want to add something here. My blog is a personal blog - I'm not advertising or fund raising. I'm not proselytizing, I'm not a teacher, preacher or a religious - I'm just a Catholic with a personal blog. I don't get paid for writing articles and books, I don't get paid for blogging. I don't pass myself off as an apologist or an evangelist. I don't do interviews or the lecture circuit or conduct 'retreats'. I simply have a personal blog.

    The people I'm discussing here put themselves out there as professional writers/authors, evangelists, Catholic apologists, Catholic news sources, and so on. Astonishingly some even hire themselves out for speaking engagements and retreats - frequently cashing in on their conversion stories and/or surviving some horrendous traumatic ordeal to become Catholic. They present as religious professionals, ask for donations and charge for whatever they can.
    They totally put themselves out there, standing on virtual street corners and yet they act and publish the crap they do - still trying to convince themselves and anyone who will listen that they are called to convey Church teaching to the masses. They fight and brawl and condemn and speculate in rash jugement upon the motives and actions of people they do not even know.

    How can they even claim to be Christian? Who are they ministering to? For what? To make them as evil and mean as they are themselves? Who would ever be attracted to their version of the Catholic faith, much less want to buy their books?

    1. Exactly, Terry. I have a catechism and the Church fathers. I don't these wanna be evangelists to teach me about the Church. I think they're all ego driven maniacs.

  6. This, sadly, is how many online Catholics deal with being disenfranchised. They look for excuses, thinking it is everyone else but themselves. They use their political ideologies to judge the church, ignoring the saints, while looking for a way to see themselves as the lone remnant who is really "right on." Of course, we all think we are right, and there is nothing wrong with that (I won't hold to a belief I thought I was wrong about), but the prudence, the humility, the ability to understand nuance is lost online, which doesn't allow for differences and so everyone who is different must be a part of the problem. I, of course, can fail like everyone, I'm human and easily irritated with nonsense. But it's worse with the online forum, because there is a cult-like guidance and mentality going on. It's the same problem with Medj. The same us vs the world, and anyone who questions us is of the devil. The same cult mentality. It's how cults form, even within the Catholic Church (where they slowly get excised for heresies). Pray for them. Pray for us all.

    1. Excellent insight. I fall victim to the same mentality and often read what others write from my bias rather than listening to what others are trying to say. I've noted how the fights and put downs online stoop to tactics such as shaming and intimidation in the same way political propagandists use media to silence and marginalize the opponent. I can fall into the same trap.

      The upshot is that no one is listening to one another and the most boisterous and argumentative are only preaching to those who share their bias and animus. This results in the uncharitable lynch mob mentality we read in the comboxes of their posts and in the sensationalized headlines on the Catholic news portals.

    2. I might have added that the brouhaha escalates because it is frequently stats and revenue driven for the website's administrator. Like writing about Michael Voris - it gets a ton of attention - or at least it used to before he went after the Remnant crowd.

  7. Well, I kinda like Pewsitter and they occasionally pick up my articles which are anything but anonymous. And frankly, Mark Shea is no paragon of charity and meekness when it comes to attacking fellow Catholics with whom he disagrees. Sadly, neither is Fr. Longenecker. Saying Pewsitter smells of sulfur is a pretty nasty attack on its writers.

    The bishops have created the situation by their failure to defend the truth. Fr. John Hardon once told me when I was asking him for advice about my newsletter, (He urged me to keep writing it by the way) that when those in authority fail to exercise it, those who don't have the authority need to speak. Of course it's crucial to speak the truth in charity. Would any dare to say that John the Baptist was putting out the "smell of sulfur" when he called the pharisees a "brood of vipers?" And is anyone so naive that they can't see there are many vipers among our bishops? Sorry, folks, that is simply a fact. I would bet we have many more heretical bishops in the U.S. than the number in England after Henry VIII made himself head of the church. The best way to rescue the ship is not to rearrange the chairs on the deck but go after the guys in the hold who are drilling holes in the side - even if they are wearing the uniforms of the crew!

  8. BTW - I don't get paid for anything I write either. In fact, I cover some of the costs of my newsletter and blog.

    1. I never think you are uncharitable or mean-spirited. You are not a phony or out to promote yourself.

    2. Thanks, Terry, I didn't think you were accusing me, but I get frustrated with all the folks who think any criticism of the bishops' actions is anathema. Goodness gracious, all the heresies in the Church came from men wearing roman collars. Are we supposed to shut up and let our fellow sheep be eaten up by error and sin without trying to save them? Hell is forever! Do the bishops who tickle ears care about those teetering on the brink?

  9. Terry, I think what bothers me the most about kerfuffles such as this is that most of the writers involved can do so much better than they are doing. Any writer with talent and intellect should be able to make a case without deliberately antagonizing those who disagree, inflaming feelings that are already running high, making fun of counter-viewpoints without having the style and humor of a true satirist (because some opinions are so outrageous they can only be satirized).

    I won't point the finger at anyone in particular, but I'm thinking specifically of someone you've mentioned in your piece. There are times when, even though I may agree with a point he is making, I want to disagree with him just for the hell of it because I feel he's not even trying to make points, but score them instead. And I ask you - if we're supposed to be evangelizing, is that really the right attitude to have? Aren't we supposed to try to get people to respect our opinions, even if ultimately they disagree with them? And for people who refuse to grant even that simple respect, aren't they ultimately just trolls who don't deserve to be fed?

    As I said at the start, and as I've written many times, perhaps there are people out there who simply shouldn't blog. They may be wonderful writers, and do great things with academic analysis, but their skin is too thin, their temper too short, they're too quick to respond without thinking things through (whatever happened to the idea of "sleeping on it" until the next day?). I grant you that in this era of social media it's often impossible to resist an immediate response - but if you can't, then shouldn't you ask if you should even be on social media?

    1. Thanks Mitchell - I understand now.


Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. If you use your real name there is a better chance your comment will stay put.