Daily Archives: October 12, 2013
This fine Michael Voris video puts at the centre of our attention a very simple concept: some clergymen will not allow a small nuisance like Our Lord to get in the way of their own marketing effort.
This is very evident in the effort of Father Barron to downplay or even deny the existence of hell as a concrete possibility for the likes of you and me – and, very obviously, for the likes of him -.
Voris makes an obvious point: when you start to doubt Hell as a concrete possibility for everyone of us you have undermined the very core of the message of Christ. But then again, there are a lot of clergymen around (and I do not except the Bishop of Rome; most certainly not) who truly seem not to have any idea of what Christianity is about.
One must not agree with Voris’ every word, but it is very difficult to disagree with the message.
Personally, I am more optimistic than he is concerning the chances of salvation of baptised Catholics, following the opinion of Garrigou-Lagrange and his serene confidence God’s efficacious grace irresistibly takes many baptised Christians, and a bigger number of Catholics, out of the worst; but then again, when Garrigou-Lagrange thought of a generic “Christian” or “Catholic” in 1950 he had in mind a much different person from a generic “Catholic” in 2013; a time when, if you observe reality for what it is, not even the Pope gives a damn for orthodoxy.
I doubt Francis is any better than Barron. I truly do. I think the main difference between the two is that Francis is Pope and Barron isn’t, so the former can only clearly hint at what the second feels free to openly state.
The fact is that the Barrons of the world have created a fertile ground for Francis, but Francis’ Papacy in turn creates the conditions for many little Bergoglios (let’s call them the Bergoglini) to go on with their work of destruction undisturbed. Give Francis ten years (Lord: please, please not!) and you will see an astonishing number of Barrons around.
Wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat. It seems to me Francis’ and Barron’s way leadeth straight to the wall; or much, much worse.
I hope no one will be offended by this, and will try to explain myself carefully and in full.
My repeated invitations to be short and to the point (an invitation you read above every message you write) are motivated not only by obvious time considerations, but also by my desire (often expressed on this page) to have full control of the material appearing here and to avoid any contamination with material I do not like. This blog is not for debate, nor does it have any vague resemblance with “pluralism”. This is an unashamedly one-sided effort reflecting – as much as reasonably practicable – the views of one person: myself. This is, if you ask me, what blogs are for.
Therefore, I will have to check any link or any document or any video. Most of you have – through the comments I cull – no idea of how many commenters post here trying to surreptitiously introduce their own agenda and their own platform on this blog. From Medjugorje fans to V II tambourine sissies, and from Sedevacantists to antisemitic nut cases, there is no shortage of them.
Some are stupid and obvious, some are smart and far more subtle. Therefore, everything must be checked. Some will create a “person” (posting messages after my liking) and then slowly introduce their own agenda in conflict with mine. I suspect the latter are Jesuits writing incognito, but that’s just me…
Please reflect that if you post a video of 30 minutes your message in fact needs 30 minutes to be read, and if you post (as it has just happened) a 68 page document you have posted a message 68 pages long. This is not short, and it is not to the point.
On exceptional circumstances (as happened yesterday) I might look at a 38 minutes video and even comment on it, but please understand this is very time-consuming and take time away from the real aim of this effort: blogging. Already Rorate Caeli and The Hermeneutic of Continuity have eliminated comments, and they know why.
I enjoy reading the comments and get interesting points of discussion from them, but please consider this is not a platform where to attach the blog you would like to have, because I have to spend a lot of time controlling that the blog you would like to have is a blog after my liking. Frankly, I prefer – and will – write my own blog instead.
I will not switch out the comment function, but I ask you to understand the implications of a growing comment activity on a blog run by one person in his own free time.
As this blog grows, the number of comments will also grow. As the time I dedicate to this blog, already a solid multiple of the “half hour a day” I had set at the beginning, will not be able to grow anymore – and might reduce if circumstances require – I see only two choices in front of me:
1. eliminating comments altogether, following the example of the above mentioned blogs.
2. continue to accept comments, but dedicating less and less time to any single comment, publishing only those immediately recognised as short and interesting and directly cancelling all those who demand from me resources I do not have.
This will require from every commenter the rather healthy attitude that when he writes a comment he knows the comment could not be published. This is healthy because it helps him to keep the comment short and to the point, so that within my allotted time for reading comments more comments – all short and to the point – can find their place here, making the blog more useful and enriching for everyone.
You obviously can put a link to my attention if you think it is interesting and I thank you for that, or can write a long blog post if you have the time; hey, it’s your time, you dispose of it. But please do not be offended if I do not publish it, and please consider I might not even have had the time to even open it, or read it.
A blog like this takes away a lot of time, as for every blog post you read much has been read around to pick the argument considered the best for the day. Then there are the books that I read, my private life, my job, my friends, and my private prayers and devotions. I cook, clean, wash and iron for myself. It is not that I have, in all this, the time to check the 68 page document, or the movie, or even the long message that is in my comments box together with another dozen messages of the sort. This is not the “homograph” with dedicated moderators. What you write here takes time away from the news researching and blog writing.
It says “short and to the point” because that’s what it’s meant to be. I might publish longer messages – sometimes they are so beautiful or interesting, I must – but this must not be read as an encouragement to write such posts lightly, or to expect they will be published.
Please do not take this as a complaint. This blog grows, the number of comments grows, the number of nutcases also grows, and more and more people are becoming more accustomed to link videos, long articles, etc. as they can obviously do and see it done on the comment section of the big internet sites. This all creates a situation where I spend more time checking the comments than I originally wanted to spend writing the blog. Again, you do not see the number and length of the comments I cull.
God bless you all. I really appreciate the interaction and your dedication; but please help me to let this blog remain a blog first, rather than mainly the moderation of comment activity. Again, it’s the growth of the blog that causes this kind of problems, so in a way it’s a blessing; but I still have to deal with it in a way that makes a sensible blog writing activity possible.
The audience will grow. The time at this level of effort probably not, or just a little.
Something’s got to give.