The worst chemical attack in years in Syria ... and a post about a comment.

For how shall we hear unless someone cries out 

above the tumult and destruction and delusion? - Alfred Delp

We have in our day, no prince, prophet or leader ...

BEIRUT, Lebanon — One of the worst chemical bombings in Syria turned a northern rebel-held area into a toxic kill zone on Tuesday, inciting international outrage over the ever-increasing government impunity shown in the country’s six-year war.

Dozens of people, including children, died — some writhing, choking, gasping or foaming at the mouth — after breathing in poison that possibly contained a nerve agent or other banned chemicals, according to witnesses, doctors and rescue workers. They said the toxic substance spread after warplanes dropped bombs in the early morning hours. Some rescue workers grew ill and collapsed from proximity to the dead. - Source

It is absolutely appalling.  A horror.  The killing of civilians.  The destruction of cities, villages, communities, families, women and children.

I wasn't going to post on Steve Skojec, simply because his life and work is none of my business.  I reconsidered after reading more about the Syrian chemical attack, killing dozens of people, many of them children.  I was struck by something Skojec said in a comment, defending "the work we do here to defend the family and the institution of marriage."  That's his work?

So what follows is the post I was not going to post yet decided to do so because it is so damn ridiculous that an American Catholic husband and father can post the bullshit he does in the face of serious, real life, in your face, suffering and death.  People have to snap out of their delusion.

Are you driving your family nuts with your religious fanaticism?

Religious parents might do well to take a sort of moral inventory.  I thought of this after Steve Skojec posted something yesterday about how spiritually tried he has been:

I don’t know about all of you, but lately I’ve not been in a very good state of mind. Everything feels harder than it used to. The battle, which was always fought uphill, has begun to appear almost futile. Trials and difficulties have seeped into all the various facets of life — work, family, expenses, the lived experience of the faith — making each burden feel heavier than it would have felt alone. I have the sense — and I know that I am not alone — that chaos and discord are being intentionally sown right in the midst of the people I hold most dear, all while something cruel and defiant whispers in my ear that none of it matters. Nothing matters. Just give up.

I think he should listen to those voices in his head.  He goes on to describe his malaise:

The writing that once came almost effortlessly for me has turned into an elusive craft. If it isn’t interrupted by an unexpected phone call or email about some new, negative development, it’s thwarted by an oppressive feeling of near-total malaise. Anger. Frustration. Apathy. It alternates, but it’s rarely conducive. My spiritual life has taken a noticeable beating as well ...

Well of course it has Mr. Skojec.  What have you been dishing out?  What have you been doing on your website?

Later on, Skojec, responding to a sympathetic string of comments revealed something that may hold the key to a bigger problem ...

Steve Skojec Mod The Great Stalin • 12 hours ago I, too, have a wayward child. It has been...excruciating, this past year or two. A huge distraction from my work, and in many respects I see what has happened as a direct attack on the work we do here to defend the family and the institution of marriage.

To be sure, Skojec's private life is none of my business, yet he makes his personal life public when he posts stuff like this. So, even though it's none of my business, what I'd suggest to him is first and foremost - avoid those who praise you and donate to you and boost your stats.  Get the attention of your family instead.

Stop viewing unexpected demands as an interruption in your life. Start accepting God's providence and his will in your life. You are a husband and a father and that is your primary state in life. If the duties of your state in life seem to be an intrusion, an interruption, even a distraction - that's a bad sign. Something is wrong. If your 'wayward child' is a distraction and is causing problems for you - it will only get worse if you ignore it. To respond in anger only foments anger. Frustration does indeed lead to apathy. Apathy is a form of sloth. When we neglect the duties of our state, apathy in the spiritual life is the end result. If your family is a distraction, something may be missing. The family may need your love and attention more than you realize.

Religious fanatics blame the devil when things go wrong - more often than not, I think we can place the blame upon ourselves.

Just saying.

I may be wrong, and I may sound like Job's friends, but I think it is important to remember what Our Lord told Sr. Lucia of Fatima about what he expects of us:

 Our Lord explained to her: "The sacrifice required of every person is the fulfillment of his duties in life and the observance of My law. This is the penance that I now seek and require." - Sr. Lucia

Our Lady of Syria, pray for your people,

pray for us sinners,

now and at the hour

of our death.

Amen.

Using Steve Skojec's name to attract readers and hits to ... up your hits and stats.

Because "Blogs without many readers ... might garner some interest in their blogs."

I've done posts using Skojec's name - but not for the reasons he thinks some people do.  I really think people may use his name because he or his website or what he wrote is simply the subject of their post.

... do not be wise in your own estimation. - Romans 12:16

It's too bad we get so carried away by our own self-importance - believing ourselves to be so important. There is a certain quarter of the Catholic Internet, however, that has apparently become obsessed with Steve Skojec and his work at 1P5.

I noticed Steve thinks that too.

Oh Steve! Steve Skojec!

This is my favorite photo

of Steve.  He looks like he has

a great sense of humor.

More seriously, blogs are pretty much an old person's craft, or hobby - old people blog - younger people tweet, do Facebook or some other app on social media.  Websites, news aggregator sites are pretty much convenience sites - headlines.  What is online now is like talk radio.  Informative, but contentious, playing up controversy and ripping apart opponents.  Skojec engages Catholics online, he's a good writer, no doubt about that - but he needs to rile up controversy and engage the crazies to supplement his income.  Just like the other writers and sites he criticizes - he does the same thing.  It's like politics.  It works for him to usurp other sites, other writers, who he cleverly dismisses with this type of statement: "There is a certain quarter of the Catholic Internet, however, that has apparently become obsessed with me and our work here." 

Song for this post here.

The power of the holy name.

Obviously the criticism and rivalry he appears to attract bothers him, and he feels the need to defend himself, by denigrating others.  That's just dumb.  Skojec applauds himself:

The fact is, the more openly I became concerned with the actions of the Francis pontificate, the more vilified I (and by extension, this publication) became by the likes of those mentioned – particularly the “luminaries” of the Patheos crowd, which later became the Aleteia crowd when Elizabeth Scalia brought her particular brand of smug, virtue signalling, quasi-heterodox Catholicism to their pages as Editor-in-Chief after leaving Patheos. (I previously revealed what happened to the already waning Catholic channel there after Scalia ended her tenure. It seems the best they can find are angsty, self-loathing Z-list “Catholic” bloggers to fill their roster these days.) Picking fights with and/or mocking websites like ours — rather than addressing the real problems we all face as Catholics — has become quite the club sport with this particular genre of Catholic writer. - 1P5

Writers for online magazines, blogomerates - including some real journalists pretty much engage in this 'club sport' all the time.  It's their raison d'être for being online.  Nevertheless, they are all Catholics -  snipping at one another because they disagree on this or that: "Picking fights with and/or mocking websites" whose writers disagree or whose writers are obsessed with Steve.  

(I used Steve's name here but I don't make any money for hits or stats - and rarely do I check stats.  But I will tomorrow to see if Skojec's name increases traffic here. What?)

"Mr Nelson!  You will never amount to anything!"

"Yes Sister.  Thank you Sister."

Anti-papist to anti-pope: We can't know it yet?

First Anti-Pope Clement VII

1P5 editor Steve Skojec weighs in on Barnhardt's claim Francis is an anti-pope.

At least he disagrees - to an extent.  He declares that Barnhardt -

... is NOT a sedevacantist, as she makes clear. She just thinks we still have the same pope we had in February, 2013. Is she right? Not my call. Does it matter? On an objective level, of course it does. To know the true pope from the false one is better than not to know it. But we can’t know that with the certitude of an ecclesiastical judgment. Not yet. - 1P5

Not yet?

The discussion is ludicrous, albeit it fascinating to read how these people seem to have gone from anti-papist to practically judging a validly elected Pope to be an anti-pope.  On some level it means they believe Benedict XVI to have been forced into retirement-resignation, and Francis covertly made pope.  Even after statements from Benedict refuting these and so many other conspiracy theories.  It's as crazy as the impostor pope stories about Paul VI and Sr. Lucia.  It fits with the sedevacantist theories about the suppressed election of Cardinal Siri as Gregory XVII in favor of John XXIII.  Theories pretty much based on the active imaginations of Euro-trad-monarchists, as well as the dubious revelations of Bl. Anna Katherine Emmerick and the prophecies of a handful of other mystics.

If there is anything worthwhile in Skojec's essay, it is his refutation of Barnhardt's selection of private revelations and prophecy to support her claims.  Anyone familiar with the promotion of conspiracy theories on the apparition of Fatima and the so-called third secret will spot the same old fake messages immediately.  It's Bayside-Necedah revisited.  It is amazing how embedded in Catholic culture these false prophecies have become.  I can't help thinking of the extended secrets of LaSalette, repeated so frequently since Vatican II.  But I digress.

Skojec helps his readers out by pointing to the errors of the works of prophecy Barnhardt depends upon:

I’m not going to devote the time and research necessary to write a deeply substantive critique of Ann’s theory. Briefly, though, I do want to address some issues I have with her argument.

To begin with, three of the five prophecies she cites are of questionable provenance. The St. Francis of Assisi prophecy is the most significant of these, since to read it one feels as though it is meant for our present time. - Read the rest here.

I don't know, but there is something rather likable about Skojec, he's a good writer, seems like a great guy with a good sense of humor, a good Catholic - why he goes off on this stuff I'm not sure.  Like I said, he does a good job sourcing and discrediting - or at least judging unreliable the prophecies Barnhardt sites.  In addition to the St. Francis false prophecy, he locates the source of the fake Fatima message, and gives some good background information.  However, he seems to leave the door open to the possibility these 'could be' true.

Reading private revelations literally, and forming private opinion about what is related therein, while attempting to configure it with current events, is a sure way to end up with the sedevacantists and schismatics who have alienated themselves from the Church.  At least Skojec has the good sense to recognize all of these issues mean nothing without an ecclesiastical judgment, that is, an authoritative judgment from the Church... aka the Pope and the Magisterium - the bishops in communion with him.

Skojec concludes his essay directing readers to seek the clear, authentic teaching of the Church and to disseminate that - and not to worry about who is the true or false pope.  Not bad advice - yet he still leaves that Barnhardt foot in the door - Francis might be an anti-pope - we just can't know it yet.

And the Resignationism theory spins on, along with the  'bad council, bad Mass' trope.

The men shall wear white berets and the women shall wear blue.

I want you to wear something borrowed,

like that pretty chapel veil with your blue jumper...

Oh.  And tell all the people Paul VI has been replaced with an impostor.

The Skojec Reset

When you're down and they're counting...

Steve Skojec of OnePeter5 has encountered a bit of opposition, or friendly fire, if you will, in the form of a rebuke/snub from his FSSP pastor.  Ostensibly for not showing up for Mass during the pandemic, despite the dispensation.  As a result, his son's 1st Communion is postponed, and his soon to be born child may have been refused Baptism.  From Catholic Herald:

The last straw for Steve Skojec was an FSSP priest telling him that his son couldn’t make his first communion, and his soon-to-be-born son would not be baptized, because their family hadn’t been to Mass enough during the pandemic.

The founder of the traditionalist site OnePeter5 was outraged and heartbroken — but even more, he writes in a blog post titled Against Crippled Religion, he was profoundly disillusioned. (He wrote a follow-up post two days later titled An Epidemic of Brokenness.) - Steve Greydanus

This story is worthy of note since Skojec has a long history of calling out the pope, bishops, priests and laity, as well as institutions for  their failures and lack of orthodoxy.  Greydanus offers the job description like this, "For seventeen years, he had been a gung-ho apologist for traditionalist Catholicism..."  I've written about Skojec many times here, so this commentary isn't out of place.  I posted some comments on FB which are more suited in the context of this blog, so I've reposted those here.

When your secrets all found out...

I find Steve Skojec's recent lament ironic.  He almost sounds like how Pope Francis has repeatedly cautioned against such things as rigidity. This type of apparent snub by a priest has happened to many people - traditionalist or ordinary Catholics. Saints have been interdicted and excommunicated and disciplined over the centuries - it's kind of Catholic. I'm stunned that Skojec, who used to come off as more Catholic than the Pope, is now close to giving up the faith.  I very much doubt he will do that, however.

Hopefully this is an authentic awakening. Similar purgation happens to all of us, when our lies are all found out and there is no one to guide us. Excuse me for falling back on pop culture, but the lyrics of this song seem apt:

"When the doctor failed to heal you

When no medicine chest can make you well

When no counsel leads to comfort

When there are no more lies they can tell

No more useless information and the compass spins

The compass spins between heaven and hell." - Sting

This is what happens to us - we think we have found the pearl of great price (and we really did), but we get ourselves sidetracked in trying to grasp it for ourselves. As we go along, more and more of what we think we have, needs to be put in perspective, sometimes even annihilated. Our attachments, our idols may then be taken away. I often think of Edith Stein who explained the purpose of this stripping away:

"In aridity and emptiness the soul becomes humble. Former pride disappears when a man no longer finds in himself anything that might cause him to look down on others." - Science of the Cross

 
I hope Steve and company - and of course, myself - can continue to allow ourselves to be taught, "To lose always and let everyone else win..." - John of the Cross. To stop looking down on others, to quit pretending we know more than all who teach us because we do everything right, as it were. I used to think like that - because I lived a chaste, celibate life, prayed a couple hours a day, went to Mass daily, and so on. I attributed to myself what the psalmist says, "I have more understanding than all who teach me, because I do your will." Yet only Christ can say that - not me.

"Sell your will, give it to the poor in spirit, come to Christ in meekness and humility, and follow him to Calvary and the sepulcher." - John of the Cross

I keep repeating the same maxims because they can be easily forgotten, but I love to recall what St. Therese taught her novices:

"Therese believed that God frequently allows us to experience in ourselves the same weaknesses which we deplore in others,,, [Thus] when we see ourselves fallen into those faults we are then more prompt to excuse them in others." - My Sister St. Therese, Sr. Genevieve

Purification, purging, even the collapse of our spiritual 'domicile' so to speak (built on sand) - to the loss of everything - are trials to purify our faith. Sort of like what happened to Job. We also need to remember Job's friends, who offered their bad advice - perhaps like my commentary here.

 
We need to let the dead bury their dead and we need to follow Christ alone. Christians are not approved by the world - indeed, Christians often do not approve of one another - all the snark online verifies that much. But how does that concern us when our job is to follow Christ? St. Seraphim of Sarov assures us, "Keep yourself in peace and thousands around you will be saved."

 
So there you have it - that is what I understand by the words, 'let the dead bury their dead'. It is in reality a going out, of sorts - outside the city gates, bearing the insult Christ bore. For here we have no lasting city; we are seeking one which is to come. Through him let us continually offer God a sacrifice of praise, that is the fruit of lips which acknowledge his name. Our life is hidden with Christ in God and I know I need to fix my eyes on him, who inspires and perfects my faith.

May God grant us the grace, that "former pride disappear, and that we can no longer find in our self anything that might cause us to look down on others." 

 

God have mercy on all of us.

Screenshot: A strange comment.

Comments lifted from a Remnant article.

Steve Skojec • a day ago

Don't you wish he was as tired of doing awful things as we are tired of having to write about them? I often think to myself, "My poor audience doesn't want to hear me mention ONE more thing about Francis...but he's done SEVEN of them worth noting since the last time I forced myself to write."

Most likely the worst papacy in history. Certainly the most exhausting.

3  

•

Reply

•

Share › 

• 
  

  Craig Roberts  Steve Skojec • 16 hours ago

  
  

  Poor you. :(

  
  

  
  

   

  •

  Reply

  •

  Share › 
• 
  

  Chris Ferrara  Steve Skojec • 19 hours ago

  
  

  And yet we have no choice but to write about them, for this is history in the making, and who is more important in Catholic affairs, which we cover, than the Pope? Especially this Pope, who INSISTS on being the most important person in Catholic affairs, reminding us of it with at least (on average) one appearance of the God of surprises per week.

I found the first comment funny because of the 'poor you' response, and laughed because Skojec complained of this apparent burden - e.g. to point out everything that is wrong with this papacy.  He seems like a nice guy with a good sense of humor, so I wonder if he was joking?  To be sure, Skojec doesn't have to write about the stuff he finds wrong with the pope.  Although Ferrara claims they have no choice but to do so?  Really?

On another post at the Remnant, there's a screen shot of Ferrara apparently laughing with Michael Matt in their video discussion, and if the text is any indication - they appear to be making fun of Pope Francis.  I suppose they may have been compelled to do it?  No choice in the matter?

Today, and in days to come, many will be commenting on what the Holy Father said to the press on his way back to Rome:  "A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not of building bridges, is not a Christian." - Pope Francis gave that answer when asked about Trump, adding, “We must see if he said things in that way and in this I give the benefit of the doubt.”

Nothing wrong with that - the Pope also offers Trump the benefit of the doubt.

In the ensuing discussions which will inevitably take place, please keep in mind how not a few of the Pope's critics accuse him of not even being Catholic - and this from people who claim to be more Catholic than the Pope.  I suspect they will condemn the Pope for having answered the question about Trump the way he did.

That's unfortunate.

Happy indeed is the man

who follows not the counsel of the wicked;

nor lingers in the way of sinners,

nor sits in the company of scorners ... -Psalm 1

When the New York Times said ...

'God Is Dead', and the wars begun...'

When the New York Times said...

'Conservative U.S. Catholics Feel Left Out of the Pope’s Embrace'

Today's story from the NYT's reminded me of the Elton John/Bernie Taupin song, Levon, hence the reference in the post title.

Did you know the full title of the Times piece which the lyrics referenced went like this:  "The actual New York Times page 1 headline that included the phrase "God Is Dead" is dated March 24, 1968; the full headline read, "'God Is Dead' Doctrine Losing Ground to 'Theology of Hope'."

Ironic, don't you think?  Because the so-called conservative Catholics might well be saying the same thing today as back then - just fiddle with the subject a bit.  "Under Pope Francis, Catholic Doctrine gaining ground to 'Theology of Hope'."  (Incidentally - Benedict XVI started all of this, with his particular emphasis on the theology of Hope.)

Perhaps not the best analogy, but if you'll pardon the reference, it seems to me the elder sons and daughters of the Church seem to feel left out as the Pope welcomes the prodigal sons and daughters who fell away back home.  Just a thought.

The New York Times story.

Some Catholics in the church’s conservative wing in the United States say Francis has left them feeling abandoned and deeply unsettled. On the Internet and in conversations among themselves, they despair that after 35 years in which the previous popes, John Paul II and Benedict XVI, drew clear boundaries between right and wrong, Francis is muddying Catholic doctrine to appeal to the broadest possible audience. -NYT

Any Catholic with a blog or who reads Catholic blogs know the story.  Many spread the story.

This weekend in my Archdiocese protesters are picketing outside the Archbishop's residence demanding Archbishop Nienstedt resign - because cases of sexual abuse were mishandled in the archdiocese.  Many of the protesters are considered dissident Catholic because they are in favor of women's ordination and same sex marriage.

Just goes to show you can't please everybody.

Inevitably, journalists find there way to Catholic blogs to enhance their stories.  The Times article favored this one:

Steve Skojec, the vice president of a real estate firm in Virginia and a blogger who has written for several conservative Catholic websites, wrote of Francis’ statements: “Are they explicitly heretical? No. Are they dangerously close? Absolutely. What kind of a Christian tells an atheist he has no intention to convert him? That alone should disturb Catholics everywhere.”  

In an interview on Friday, Mr. Skojec said he was overwhelmed by the positive response to his blog from people who said they were thinking the same things but had not wanted to say them in public. He said he had come to suspect that Francis is a “self-styled revolutionary” who wants to change the church fundamentally. 

“There have been bad popes in the history of the church,” Mr. Skojec said. “Popes that murdered, popes that had mistresses. I’m not saying Pope Francis is terrible, but there’s no divine protection that keeps him from being the type of guy who with subtlety undermines the teachings of the church to bring about a different vision.” - NYT

What is so hard to understand?  Especially when the Holy Father affirmed:

"The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church..."

We don't have to like the pope, we don't even have to read what he says - except if he speaks ex-cathedra.  Popes don't do it that often anyway.  We don't have to get our approval for the good works we do from the pope, the bishop or any priest.  We can't depend upon approval or support or even thanks and praise from any person or human organization - only from God. 


Bonus:

I love this comment on the Times article from Fr. Martin:

Laurie Goodstein's new piece, "Conservative US Catholics Feel Left Out of the Pope's Embrace," gives voice to a strain of Catholicism in this country that has been increasingly noticeable. A few of the quotes in this piece are patently ridiculous - like the person who accuses Pope Francis of being "dangerously close" to heresy. But the greatest irony is that some Catholics from this part of the church were the same ones who would excoriate anyone who disagreed in the slightest with any statement of Pope John Paul II or Pope Benedict XVI. Apparently, it's now okay to disagree with the Pope. - Fr. James Martin, S.J.

I wanted to say that.

This is funny.

Coming from Skojec, that is...

I'm not on Twitter but looking at Skojec's feed and those he follows, as well as those who comment on his site, I can see it's pretty much THE hotline for all the gossip and detraction which circulates online regarding the Pope and anyone else they disagree with.

Steve Skojec‏ @SteveSkojec

Replying to @ServusFidelis

The problem with the internet is that it has convinced absolutely everyone that their opinions matter. That's false. And it seems that often the least valuable opinions are coming from the loudest mouths.

12:21 PM - 30 Dec 2018

1 reply0 retweets0 likes

Burke Announces a Formal Correction of Pope Francis to Take Place in Early 2017.

Stunning photo by Steve Skojec.

If the Pope doesn't respond to the dubia, that is.

Cardinal Burke revealed that in an interview with LifeSiteNews.  If the Holy Father doesn't respond to the Four Cardinals dubia, Burke says they will offer a formal correction to the Holy Father sometime after Christmas.  Steve Skojec wonders if there may be an Akita/Fatima-chastisement link related to the Akita 'cardinal against cardinal' prophecy - and because the correction would take place in the 2017 Fatima centenary.  The apparitions are connected to some extent, since both concluded on October 13 and stuff like that.

Did Charlie Johnston predict any of this?

Anyway.

Isn't that a cool photo of the Cardinal?

Can you criticize the Pope?

At Fatima Our Lady urged the faithful

to pray for the Holy Father,

she never mentioned criticizing him.

Of course you can - you have free will.

The pope doesn't speak ex cathedra with every utterance.  Does he deserve our respect?  Absolutely.

Steve Skojec has a very good post discussing the issue.  It's well reasoned and is written in a very respectful tone.  Many people get upset with media reports and Vatican press releases, as well as the daily homilies or comments reportedly from the pope.  The pope himself can come off as pretty critical of all of us - no matter where we stand on the Catholic spectrum - traditionalist to progressive.  I think he is often misrepresented however, and his name taken in vain, as it were, by those who seek to promote an agenda or defend themselves.

My biggest objection to criticism is that it often involves scoffing and ridicule, treating the pope as we might a presidential candidate we disagree with, or some public figure we despise.  Sometimes the critics themselves seem to have serious issues wherein the crackpot blogger title is more than appropriate.  I have no time for Emmerich prophesies or Malachi Martin insights, or drunken rants on blogs, but a frank discussion, respectful and considerate is not a problem - if one feels the need to discuss publicly what the pope really said.

Skojec notes: "It has become an increasingly common problem in the Catholic world these days to find ourselves in the unenviable position of being afraid to say what we really think. This is both institutional — imposed as policy (whether written or unwritten) on those who work for Catholic organizations — and personal — through the various mechanisms of self-doubt. If we notice patterns, problems, and consistent deviations from the mien of previous pontificates, who are we to raise such questions? To borrow a phrase, 'Who are we to judge?'” - 1Peter5

I'm not sure it is our place to judge.  Likewise, those who take sides on any issue jump down the throats of those who disagree with them - therefore sometimes it is best to be silent - unless you want to get into a fight just for ego satisfaction, or you're Irish.

We live in confusing times and we aren't privy to what goes on behind closed doors.  We may not even have a need to know.

I've written before that people have to be careful what they read, especially by people who claim special spiritual insight, discernment of spirits, and sensitivity to the 'signs of the times'. As Fr. Angelo Mary Geiger writes:

[T]he autonomous personal conscience sometimes lays claim to a false discernment when it sets private revelation and presumed personal graces against the magisterium. The desire for union with God sometimes leads individuals to attach themselves to extraordinary manifestations of the “spirit,” but in such a way that weakens their attachment to the Church. Thus, Catholics continue to embrace New Age spirituality, or some dubious private revelation, or a personal insight even though they know that their conviction runs contrary to Church teaching or discipline. 

The discernment of spirits is so important today because there are many voices competing for our attention, and it is all so easy to assume that that what we hear, or even what we think and say comes from God. - Fr. Geiger

I think sometimes we have to step back and pray more and ponder in our hearts the things which confuse us - placing all of our trust in God alone.  As St. John of the Cross taught his novices: "Take Lot's wife as an example, because she was troubled at the destruction of the Sodomites and turned her head to watch what was happening, God punished her by converting her into a pillar of salt. You are thus to understand God's will: that even though you live among devils you should not turn the head of your thoughts to their affairs, but forget these things entirely and strive to keep your soul occupied purely and entirely in God, and not let the thought of this thing or that hinder you from doing so."

"Keep yourself in peace and thousands around you will be saved." - St, Seraphim of Sarov

Saturday Detention ... Nuts?

Alert the media!

I found the funniest blog ever.

I'm serious.  It is titled, Priests Have Become Cesspools of Impurity.  Whoever writes it uses laugh out loud gifs and takes slams at the Holy Catholic Blogosphere - ho holds barred.  I don't know the guy's name - but I think we could be friends.  Haha!  He takes down Barnhardt and Skojec and Voris and Matt like no one's business.  The author is SSPX - I think - and devoted to Our Lady of LaSalette.   That combo should maybe be taken as a sort of warning.  The Messages of La Salette  are more mythologized than the contemporary Fatima Secret inventions, and the one seer, Melanie Calvat, who was at least a melancholic towards the end her life, may not have been all that reliable.

That said, it's the funniest religious blog ever.

His Ann Barnhardt commentary is the funniest stuff I've read in a long time.  (Aside from her stuff.)  Here's one from July:

Ann Barnhardt Is Being Passed Around Like A Two Dollar Whore.......

Her first love was GaryVoris 

Then Gary passed her off to Steve Skojec of 1p5

Steve then handed her off to Patrick Archbold of CMR. - PHBCI

Now that's funny.

Seriously - again: Two things I did not know before reading some posts on the site:

• Michael Voris' first name is Gary.  

• Ann Barnhardt has a stalker who likes Mr. Drysdale from the Beverly Hillbillies.  (No - not me - I'm a fan of his wife, Margaret.)

The blogger comes off a little judgmental - but don't we all.  The Catholic Blogosphere is an insane asylum to some extent.  We all blog our thoughts and think everyone else is nuts except ourselves.  Someone is out there always ready to contradict us - that is, if they even pay attention to us.  And we want attention - that's why we are online.  Yes it is.

Scary.  Pouring out your life blood online ... maligning one another, speaking against everyone who disagrees with us.  Insisting we are right.  Boasting we're not like that Publican or tax collector.  Admitting we are sinners and praising ourselves for our conversions and thanking God we're not as bad as that jerk over there.

That's comedic.

Stay away from visionaries...

especially the followers of 

fake prophecies.

Just saying.