Sunday, January 01, 2017

Michael Voris Reigns! Captures NYT's Attention

Emmy Award winning journalist-anchor, 
Michael Voris in studio at Church Militant. 

He. Looks. Amazing.

What a coup.  Church Militant is endorsed by no less an influential public figure than Stephen K. Bannonthe head of the hard-right website Breitbart News and now Mr. Trump’s chief strategist, and maybe, just maybe ... by extension, the Trump administration.

Steve Skojec ain't got nuthin' on Mickey.

Church Militant theology and politics.

Redefining Church Militant for political purposes is more like it.

“When you heard the expression ‘the Church Militant,’ it didn’t bring to mind a call to arms or some kind of mobilized, militant action in the way we understand the term now,” said John C. Cavadini, a professor of theology at the University of Notre Dame. “A lot of the struggle of the Church Militant is against interior temptations that lead you to greed and all kinds of spiritual pathologies. And it’s about engaging in acts of mercy. Part of the victory of the Church Militant is the victory of love. It didn’t have the triumphalist and militarized connotation that’s been attached to it now.”
While the term remains in the Roman catechism, which was promulgated by the Council of Trent in the mid-1500s, the official catechism produced under Pope John Paul II in 1992 replaced “Church Militant” with “pilgrims on earth.” The adult catechism then devised by Catholic bishops in the United States adopted those words, and they are overwhelmingly the norm in Catholic practice in the United States and abroad.
Patrick J. Buchanan, one of Mr. Trump’s precursors in running for president on a platform of right-wing populism, embraced Church Militant theology in a 2009 essay in the conservative magazine Human Events. After delineating conflicts between Catholic leaders and Democratic politicians over issues like abortion and contraception, Mr. Buchanan made a more sweeping assertion:
“Catholicism is necessarily an adversary faith and culture in an America where a triumphant secularism has captured the heights, from Hollywood to the media, the arts and the academy, and relishes nothing more than insults to and blasphemous mockery of the Church of Rome.”
The words could serve as a mission statement for Mr. Vorsi’s A television producer who renounced his earlier life as a gay man, Mr. Voris, 55, has developed a media operation from’s studio in suburban Detroit that produces books, online articles, YouTube videos, podcasts and a daily talk show. These cumulatively attract about 1.5 million views a month, he said. - NYT

Say what you will about Michael, but I am proud of him.
He's handsome and articulate and works hard,
and he has survived.  He is a fine example of
fidelity and courage.


  1. It was nothing more than a hit piece from a failing newspaper on Voris, Bannon, and Catholics in general. I find it hysterically funny when secular news outlets try to report on religious matters. Any non-Catholic would come away from that article thinking we were a bunch of nut-cakes. Actually - I am a nut-cake, but that has nothing to do with my Catholicism. heh

    1. I thought it was a fair piece considering... Publicity is publicity - as the saying goes - although they did spell his name wrong in one paragraph.

      The article is helpful to the extent that it shows what secular media thinks of 'news' sources such as Church Militant - to be honest, I'm surprised they took any notice at all. I find it helpful to retain some semblance of objectivity.

      I'm not convinced Church Militant or 1P5 are at all objective with Catholic news, but they get an A+ for effort in trying to usurp the Catholic Magisterium.

    2. And that is why I don't read "Catholic" blogs anymore. While I like both Steve and Voris as fellow Catholics, I don't hold with much of what they're doing.

    3. After reading this piece of "news" I came to the same conclusion, Adrienne.

    4. I like Voris - I really do - and Skojec is fine too - I like to read them sometimes - just to see where they go 'off'.

      Again, on the NYT's piece - I stick with secular news since most of my former friends and family are not at all religious and it keeps me balanced - if you will. Catholic social media makes me crazy. I worked at a very traditional bookstore at one time, and I'm still in recovery. Pope Francis is right, uber-trads aren't always playing with a full deck.

      All my life I've fallen under their influence - or at least have been infected by it from time to time. Mostly the apparition fanatics and locution subscription holders, it's only the last 15 years or so I've encountered the Remnant types - who seem normal - but they seem to live in
      another dimension.

      That doesn't mean I'm not a crackpot myself - but if they're normal, I don't want to be.

    5. "That doesn't mean I'm not a crackpot myself - but if they're normal, I don't want to be"

      That's why you're one of the best to hang with ... God bless you and keep you strong, Terry!

      You're one of A KIND!

  2. I avoid Michael Voris and Church Militant. He is just not credible to me. I like Pray More Novenas and Morning Offering as a source of sincere prayerful sites. Michael seems to be building a media empire for his own edification. We are in the age of fake news. Everything is news but little is credible. I do think we have entered the world of Big Brother. Words have lost meaning and anything said or written today can be the opposite tomorrow.

  3. It's all because Steve Bannon was impressed with the tabletop sock dance. What?

  4. Terry, yours is the last Catholic blog I read. Now my list is down to zero.

    Proud of Voris? You are proud of Michael Voris, the one who lives to bash bishops and cause dissension? The person who lies constantly about church authority to put them in the worst possible light?

    Please tell me that you are joking, Terry.

    1. I'm sooooooooo joking. Can't you tell? The lead line is: "He. Looks. Amazing."

      The gif is supposed to be funny.

      Who am I to be proud of Michael? LOL!

    2. Oh - and I do like just about everybody - so don't let that bother you. (Although I still don't like Trump.)

    3. One more - "He's a fine example of ...." is a line from a film I just saw about a woman who couldn't sing opera but staged her own concerts and had a huge following. The film is Florence Foster Jenkins.

    4. You do have a good heart, Terry. And you are right in not disliking anyone. You are right, there is a big difference between liking and approving.

      And I so agree with you about Trump. He seems to have a love affair going on with Putin, and that particularly concerns me in this 100th year anniversary of Fatima, when Our Lady warned us about the errors of Russia. Seems we have a president who is falling right into it. And one who at the same time wants to ramp up the nuclear arms race.

      What prophecies are we going to see fulfilled this year? Will we see entire nation disappear from the face of the earth as Our Lady of Fatima warned?

    5. Thanks. I have followed Fatima since I was a child, but my focus was devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and total consecration when I became an adult. Everything I have is hers and she can do with me as she wills. I've never viewed Fatima in a negative light. I've often pondered the meaning of the messages as well as the visions and the revelations concerning the consequences of sin, but I never understood the 'end of the world' fears so many Catholics attribute to Our Lady's catechesis. The words of Sr. Lucia recognize the apocalyptic battle between the devil and the Immaculata, but Our Lady's sense of urgency is for repentance and conversion and spreading devotion - not threats as so many seem to interpret the message. I look forward to our Holy Father's visit to Fatima with great peace and joy. Our Lady has revealed the consequences for unrepentant sin, as well as the way to reconciliation. Her Immaculate Heart is our refuge and the way that will lead us to God.

      I know you know that - but the fear mongers cash in on the warning and chastisement stuff from 'other' sources, connecting them to Fatima, or placing these words on Our Lady's lips.

    6. But Terry, what do you do with the pronouncements made by our Lady of Fatima? Certainly they are not part of the deposit of faith and no one needs to believe or accept them. So if you don't want to accept her warnings about Russia, you don't have to. But how do you have a devotion to Our Lady of Fatima and ignore her warnings?

    7. How do I ignore her warnings? I totally accept the message and revelations of Fatima as given by the seers, particularly Sr. Lucia, as well as the Vatican interpretation of the events. I've already said many times the warnings about Russia have their own trajectory. They are unfolding - we've seen that - it's a historical fact - and it is ongoing. The errors are having their effect. How have I, or how do I, ignore Our Lady's warnings? What a crazy thing to say.

      I ignore the Gruner types and Vennari and the "Final Battle" people and their falsification of the Fatima message and warnings. I ignore those who combine and intertwine the Fatima message with private revelations which never panned out - such as those pronounced by Fr. Gobbi and Fr. Gino the fake stigmatist. I reject those who make Fatima into a foolish cult and neglect charity and respect and even reject the Pope and Magisterium - calling them conspirators and liars. Did you read the post following this or the comments I made in response to others? Does anyone actually read what anyone says any longer?

      How can you possibly take from what I have said, and consistently have said, that I ignore Our Lady's warnings at Fatima?

      I feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone on this blog.

      Maybe something is wrong with me?

      Maybe I should get dressed up in blue, drape my body with rosaries and scapulars and roam the streets announcing the end is near? Handing out photos of aborted babies and homosexuals having demonic sex? Do all people devoted to Our Lady or traditional Catholic teaching have to embrace such extremist apocalyptic attitudes as you people seem to think Fatima is all about?

      Our Lady calls people to conversion and to amend their lives in and through penance and prayer, and to sacrifice themselves for sinners. THEN she says, 'if my requests are not heeded ...' and THEN she catechizes on the consequences of sin. It's all in the catechism and scripture. We know naturally there are consequences for sin - the message of Fatima has been promulgated, and few seem to have responded - except to claim that the consecration has not been made - contradicting what the Pope has said, making him a liar - yet even with their fabrications, few were scared by the warnings.

      Why can't you people figure that out?

    8. Thinking about your question - it sparked a few memories regarding Fatima enthusiasts - specifically the old 'Blue Army' types. They were almost like McCarthy types, convinced communists were everywhere. They were suspicious of everyone. Even Fr. Fox had some of that. I did an icon for him of Jacinta and Francisco - yet I had to go through a battery of questions regarding my spiritual moral life first. Then he wanted me to add a bunch of details to the border which symbolized aspects of OL's garb - he wanted the entire, literal message on a simple panel of the 2 blesseds. I had already installed 2 III class relics. Anyway, he was incredibly scrupulous about it.

      Years ago in Boston I used to go to the All-Night Vigils, one night they asked for someone to lead the rosary, I volunteered (one of the last times I ever did so) the woman in charge thought I might be a 'liberal' and questioned me before I was allowed to lead the rosary - even asking me how much I knew about Our Lady's warnings and so on. See how nuts that is?

      This pre-occupation for the warnings and chastisement stuff has always been emphasized to absurdity - Blue Army people wore blue berets and chapel veils and could be quite weird - which is why many priests and Catholic laity kept their distance or ignored anything to do with Fatima. Until JPII came along and returned Fatima to a theologically cohesive spirituality.

      Not good enough for the fringe groups who saw in all of that some kind of conspiracy and in turn hawked the final battle-Russia is not consecrated fear mongering.

      All I'm saying is don't complicate Fatima or put words on Our Lady's lips. I'm saying it generally, not to you in particular.

      I went to Fatima in poverty, a pilgrim. I recall seeing the Domus Pacem all lighted up, well dressed diners inside in a very nice dining room. Standing outside at the windows were the poorly dressed peasants, watching them - it reminded me of the peasants outside a palace. The people inside were well acquainted with the message of Fatima according to John Haffert. The peasants outside were the devout who would walk on their knees to the Capella.

      See the difference?

  5. Americans have a proud history of seeking Reds under the bed. More recently things have moved on. Nowadays it's Putin under the bed, Michael Voris under the bed. Traddies under the bed, Remnants under the bed. And then there are those mysterious 'hard rightists' under the bed. Maybe it's time for a new Joe McCarthy to take them all on.

    1. McCarthy was an alcoholic. (Just being facetious, but I really think he was. Not that there is anything wrong with that.)

    2. It's awfully crowded under that bed!

  6. The enemy within. We have a boatload of McCarthy wannabes getting ready to pounce.


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.