Church Militant TV: The Razor’s Edge Is Now Very Sharp



ChurchMilitant.TV will not engage in public criticism of the Pope. Period.

This unconscionable statement still appears on the Church Militant manifesto as I write. This is the same outlet which accuses Chris Ferrara of “The Remnant”, John Vennari of Catholic Family News and others like, most notably, Louie Verrecchio of “Harvesting The Fruit of the V II” of being producers of “ecclesiastical porn”. It is to be noted that none of the three accuses the Pope with more vehemence than Voris himself does when he accuses, say, Cardinal Dolan, a favourite target of him (difficult to miss the mark, I concede).

Mr Ferrara published a wonderful article days ago describing, inter alia, the heavy invectives used by Voris against Dolan. But apparently, what is allowed when addressing a Cardinal is not allowed when addressing a Pope. Not even, mind, when the scandal and confusion is so much bigger when coming from the Pope. I wish I could find the article.  Many thanks to the readers who can help on this. EDIT: FOUND! Many thanks to all those who posted the right link!

The position of CMTV does not make sense. It is not, nor has it even been, part of the Magisterium. It is just plain absurd, and it becomes the more absurd the more Pope Dope (very charitably called, on this blog, The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church History, TMAHICH; and this, only because he is the Pope) goes on with his astonishingly drunken, or drugged, or otherwise, at this point, indisputably evil statements.

This absurd position has already put CMTV in a quandary, because the reality is now punching them in the face every day, and Francis does all he can to help with the punching. Even the slower witted start to understand, in greater and greater numbers, that you can’t condemn Nazism and forever refuse to criticise Hitler. The fish stinks from the head down. The buck stops at the Pope. The Pope is, also here indisputably, the man who praises to the skies (Kasper) or moves to position of great influence (Forte, Baldisseri) those who push an heretical agenda, as he removes the orthodox (say: Burke) and appoints the heterodox (say: Cupich) whenever he can. You can’t go on criticising Goebbels and Himmler forever, and say that you will “not engage in any criticism of Hitler. Period” anymore, or you credibility will be soon used to make pig fodder.

Enter the “razor’s edge” theory.

In blatant contradiction with the statement above, the new mantra seems to be that you (cough…) can criticise the Pope. The requirement, heard before, that this should be possible only to very saintly people (like Thomas More, who is rather dead, and the like) seems to have been dropped, too.

No: nowadays, every non-saintly person can criticise, and Voris will not call you “spiritual porrnographer” for this fact alone. But you see: if you criticise the Pope, you must do it in a way that meets Mr Voris’ approval. The approval, in other words, of the same man who told you, until the day before yesterday, that you were not allowed to criticise him, period.

It is all so absurd that, were Voris not a certainly nice chap and a fundamentally honest Catholic, would merit him some serious criticism. Then there’s the matter of the personal attacks, which will be dealt with later. 

The new “razor’s edge” theory says that the one who is – in so many words – admitting he was wrong until now can now tell you how to do what you were right in doing in the first place.  This is, we are informed, a very thin path that manages to hint at what a moron Francis is, without really saying it. Because you see, if you say things openly you will confuse the simple people.

The simple people seem to be the newest line of defence. It goes along the lines of: “I understand the Pope has made himself worthy of criticism; but you see, the simple Catholics would be confused if I said so forcefully”. They might – God forbid! – even start attending at the next SSPX chapel! Heavens! What’s next, Belzebub?

The position does not stand the test of logic for at least two reasons:

1) If simple people are easily impressionable to the point of abandoning the faith, then Cardinals and Bishops should never be openly, much less harshly, criticised. They are all successors of the Apostles, being basically all of them – all the Cardinals who count at least – bishops. It is not to be explained how this hypothetical simple Catholic would be strenghtened in his faith when Voris walks over Dolan like a steamroller, but would lose his faith at the open criticism – according to the old position, and let’s call it Voris 1.0, even of “every criticism not coming from a living saint” – of the Pope.

2) If it is a scandal, and a threat to the Church of Christ, that a Cardinal or Bishop confuses the faithful; and if it is therefore perfectly adequate, nay, dutiful, to attack this Cardinal with harsh words; then it results, with elegant inevitability, that it is the more adequate, and the more dutiful, to criticise a Pope, who causes a much bigger scandal and represents such a vaster threat to the salvation of souls; and inevitably, it becomes the duty of every Catholic to criticise the Pope far more harshly than every Cardinal, because the danger he represents is so much bigger.

It does not make sense, in this constellation, to hide behind the finger of the “respect due to the Pope”. Where have you seen, in two thousand years of history, a Pope behaving like this one!? The very public antics of this pothead, of this lurid old man, of this walking mockery of Christ and His Church have no precedent in two thousand years of Christianity! Every Catholic with a brain sees it! How is the menace to be countered, if not with the same virulence of the attack? 

Again, logic here comes to our help. 

Either is the Pope the biggest single influence on Catholics, or he isn’t. If he isn’t, the particular respect tributed to him has no reason to be, and there is no great risk of confusion of faithful, either. The same goes for Bishops and Cardinals. Therefore, it does not make sense to waste time to criticse either. Pray more rosaries instead.

This position conflicts with reality and is discarded by everyone, Voris first. 

If he is, then it follows that the prestige and sacredness of the papacy can only be defended by explicitly attacking the man who ridicules, smears and abuses it like no other Pope in history. There is no escape from this. It is simple logic. The defence must always be proportionate to the scale of the menace. If the Antichrist happened to be a Pope, would Voris refuse to criticise him harshly because of his position as Pope? 

Granted, this disgraceful Argentine is not the Antichrist. Far too stupid, coward, petty, transparent for that. But then this is why we call it TMAHICH; or pothead; or nincompoop, cretin, and the like; which is very mild considering how many devout Catholics must reflect on the profession of the female ancestors of this man, whenever he opens his mouth.

There is no escaping simple logic here. Either clergy shape faithful, or they don’t. If they don’t, CMTV has no reason to exist, because Dolan & Co. are largely irrelevant. If they do, then the Pope is the greatest menace to the Church ever appeared on this planet; more than the Muslims, the Lutherans, and the Communists. Because this time, Satan managed to get an inside job.

Before I finish, there is something that is very dear to me, and that I would like to address explicitly. It is not personal to me, but I think it should be personal to all of us.

Mr Voris has publicly slandered Mr Ferrara, Mr Vennari and Mr Verrecchio. I am sure I forget a couple, but these three are the ones that come to mind. It is now high time that a honest and public apology to these men, and to those treated like them, be made. Until this is done, this will be a second heavy stone weighing down the credibility of Church Militant TV, a Catholic outlet which in the end seems bent on defending the very worst (Francis) whilst it viciously attacks the very best (Mr Ferrara, Mr Vennari, Mr Verrecchio, and obviously the SSPX).






Posted on November 15, 2014, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 20 Comments.

  1. The apology is long overdue. Thank you for your defense of those who have been engaged in the battle for the Church for decades.

  2. I believe you might be looking for “Pay no attention to the man behind the Vortex”:

  3. It is so sad to see someone as zealous and faithful to Our Lord look like a fool. I never saw Michael Voris as arrogant but his refusal to apologize to good men like Louie, John, Michael Matt etc. shows his shallow level of spiritual maturity. *sigh* MV is blinded by someone or something. We can only hope that Our Lord blesses him with the graces to wake up soon and rejoin his brothers. God bless you for pointing out the truth behind the situation Mundy:+) You nailed it.

    • Mr Ferrara says it is rather “someone”. Still, as Mr Voris is the face and public image of CMTV, he must be made accountable for what he does not do.
      Having said that, I think he is a very good chap making wrong choices.

  4. This thread is ‘spot on.’ Voris has a great deal of useful, accurate, passionate and factual information in defense of our Catholic Faith but he is in denial and a hypocrite when it comes to the accountability, responsibility and documented actions of the Pope himself. It has if he is saying that the Pope is hands off even when it must be obvious to Voris that the Pope is personally responsible for doing harm and destruction to our Catholic faith. It breaks my heart that I must in addition to prayer demand that the Pope be Catholic and safeguard the centuries of sound Catholic teaching and practices.

    Why did Jesus say to Peter, “Get behind me Satan”?
    Matthew 16: 23
    23 But he turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man.”
    Although Peter had just moments before declared Jesus as the Christ, he turned from God’s perspective and viewed the situation of Jesus suffering from man’s perspective.

    And yes Voris does lash out against many who love their Catholic faith more than life itself and must stop it.



  5. Well said, Sir…

    I stopped watching CMTV when the first Voris Moto Proprio against the SSPX/Vennari/Remnant/Ferrara/Verrecchio was issued, though I still don’t know to whom or to which target audience it was directed – those who attend the SSPX Masses simply yawned and went about their day’s work; those who attend SP Latin Masses elsewhere probably did the same; the CINO’s said “Right ON!”. The only ones left are the elderly and families who genuinely try to live their Faith within the current NO structure. So…can one reasonably conclude that it was and is simply a scare tactic to keep the pews full and the mouths quiet so the bills can be paid by the parish, under the guise of being a “good and faithful” Catholic?

    I agree that Voris’ position grows weaker by the day – or by the mouth. It is as untenable a position as that of an abandoning spouse who seeks divorce and/or annulment despite the impassioned pleadings of spouse and children. Any sane, reasonable Catholic can see past the wall being built around his position and must, if they want to survive, do what we spouses do when backed into the divorce corner – make sure Christ and Our Lady are on our side…and then come out fighting. To remain static in the face of such an injustice is to concede defeat, whether it’s defending one’s marriage or defending one’s Faith against an errant spouse on the one hand or against an errant Hierarchy – or Pope – on the other.

    • I think Voris has the same problem of many in the US and elsewhere: they see a good Pope as an unavoidable component of Catholicism. The idea that a bad Pope could be elected is terrifying to them and, they think, will be poisonous to others.

      The antidote to this thinking is, simply, Catholicism.

  6. Papolatry! Papolatry! Papolatry!

    Okay, I’m done. Just had to get that out. 😉

    Spot on as usual, M. It boggles the mind that Voris can be so correct on so many counts, and then completely drop the ball, almost completely destroying his credibility, and rendering all of his generally well thought out arguments moot.

  7. C. Ferrara’s article you are looking for is probably ‘ Pay no attention to the man behind The Vortex ‘ edited on November 11th on The Remnant website ( ‘ Fetzen fliegen ‘ )

  8. Yes, Mundy…I think you got it right with “I think he is a very good chap making wrong choices.” He IS good…tries sooo hard…but is blinded in one area. Makes me humble that I can see truth in this area and he cannot…he is so gifted and courageous…while I am far from it:+) I pray he gets free soon. He is blessed to have you speak the truth in kindness about him…and continue to see his pure motives behind the blind spot. God bless you Mundy:+)

    • I think we would go on famously sitting in front of a beer in a Roman pub. I believe fully in his own good faith. But boy, he is being blind from one eye and a half…

  9. Mundabor, I agree with you totally on this one. A factor operating with Voris and other Catholics, particularly Americans, is one you have pointed out in other posts. It is the belief that the Holy Ghost actively CHOOSES the Pope, sort of waving a magic wand over the conclave and thereafter. This makes no sense, based on history or logic. it makes of any Pope a figure more like that of the head of the Mormons, able to make doctrine at will (e.g., black people aren’t fully human, then they are). There is a strong reluctance, within a broadly Protestant & Freemasonic culture (the latter being the true founding religion of the US), to break ranks and appear disloyal. This leads to Catholics who willingly don blinders, and there are plenty of them.

    One thing I am curious about is the “pothead” comments — literal or figurative?

    • Certainly figurative. Perhaps not only so.
      The man has admitted to smoking pot as a young night club bouncer (you’ll have to scout the Internet on this, it might have been in Italian).
      If you know this man a bit, him admitting he smoke pot “once” means he was a regular user.
      He was also surprised once in the airport with a bag full of marijuana in his luggage. All not his fault, of course.
      But one starts to think.

  10. I will say that I admire the Voris toupee. It is a cry of defiance against baldness. I’m not as admiring of his faux-traditional site.

%d bloggers like this: