Mr. Shea:

I have been a defender of Voris and The RCTV pursuits in the past, and I agree with you on this, but I must say further that you have done an even more masterful job in analyzing this than I could ever imagine. You should be applauded, not because you have come to his defense, but because you analyzed this objectively despite your past “issues” with Voris.

Thank you for your objectivity, and thank you for your criticism as well. I think that we must test our pursuits of the truth under the fire of criticism and scrutiny if for no other reason than to get to the truth.

Your defense is well noted and appreciated. I thought it was quite strange that Catholics would act so puritanical in being scared of a story. After all, hardly seen others get upset over Flannery O’Connor’s stories, which seem far more “edgy” than a story that the author used to question moral situations like lesbianism.

Hmmm…. I’m no Voris defender, but this is nothing but cheapshot journalism, so let’s see:

Catholic News Agency claims to be a 501(c)3 based in Englewood, CO, yet there is no record of them under that name or ACI Prensa in Colorado. In addition, there is no record of either one on any charity watchdog site, such as GuideStar or Charity Navigator.

A search for their address on Google turns up two other Catholic organizations apparently located in the same building: Christ in the City Missionaries and Association for Catholic Info.

No business records exist for Christ in the City Missionaries either, but they do exist for Association for Catholic Info.

A man by the name of Jorge Luna incorporated AfCI and his name appears on several AfCI documents. His name also appears several times on the Catholic News Agency website, so they appear to be connected.

http://www.google.com/search?q=jorge+luna+site:www.catholicnewsagency.com&qscrl=1

And what do you know!!! Lo and behold…

AfCI failed FOUR YEARS IN A ROW to file its annual report with the state of Colorado. It’s all right there on the State of Colorado’s website:

http://bit.ly/oTngLc

Thank you Mark.  I am not a fan of the Vortex but what is being said by some of Simon Rafe is rather uncharitable.  Your defense of Catholic artists, writers, musicians etc. is much appreciated.

What a refreshing take on the situation.  Thank you.

Chris, I was going to make the Flannery O’Connor comparison.

I am confused.  501(c)3 is a federal tax distinction and doesn’t have anything to do with the state.  If you check the federal site, he is in good standing.  I would imagine that he forgot some state paperwork, but he has kept up with the paperwork he needs to retain his 501(c)3 status. 

Thanks for the defense.  I am a fan of Voris and his work and appreciate when this can be looked at objectively.

Thank you, Mark. As you and I discussed yesterday, there is much I disagree with in what you say (I find myself in the position of arguing prosecution rather than defence). I may have a response to your piece on my blog later today.

But thank you. You did not need to do that.

Well said, Mark. A colleague of mine wrote that “art cannot be created in a fortress that feels it is under siege.” In a desire to see things as black and white, we often lose the vibrant color that artistic freedom can provide. Artistic expression should not be judged in the same vein as doctrine or heresy. It should lead us to the true, the beautiful, and the good—even if it does that by reflecting upon the lie, the ugly, and the evil.

I think that many people feel the Church is a battleship, all gray with uniforms, instead of the heart of the civilization of love that Blessed John Paul encouraged us to build. Thank you for reminding us that we are not to become Calvin’s Geneva.

I wouldn’t generally connect Shakespeare to fan fiction, but on the other hand playwrights in his day were often not much above a hack, so who is to say that we won’t look back on this stuff as a masterpiece in a few hundred years?  There will just be so much chaff to separate…

Mr. Voris hasn’t called anyone “impure,” unless it’s with regard to their lousy “Spirit of Vatican II” theology. Pope Benedict has been just as strong in his criticism of those who do not preach the “uncomfortable” truths, especially regarding sexual morality. When is the last time your bishop preached about Humanae Vitae? And why does the USCCB support full funding of legislation that contains billions for “family planning”? Is it “throwing stones” to ask such questions, or is it just common sense?

Camille is right, governments at all levels insist that you check their box to perform even the simplest of charitable tasks. Just try to help your kids set up a Lemonade Stand for Life on a street corner near your home! You will meet a phalanx of bureaucrats, all paid for by you, who will mess up your life and those of your commendably virtuous children for years. There are “experts” who will take care of all this paperwork for you - starting cost: $7500 a year. Get the picture? Government tries to strangle private charity at every turn.

Let us pray that Mr. Voris’s critics spend equal time, and perhaps more effort, in criticizing **government** that wants to kill off private voluntary charity so it can all be funded by, and run by, government bureaucrats. Their cry? “Make charity mandatory!”

Ad multos annos, Mr. Voris.

Christopher Manion
Front Royal, VA

PS - as for past artistic endeavors, I sang to drunks for years working my way through school. Do I have to confess to the Catholic News Agency?

501C(3) or not, I contribute to Saint Michael’s Media monthly and will continue to do so. I love the Vortex and Catholic News Roundup.  Keep charging.

Bravo, Mark! I am a great admirer of both you and Mike Voris depsite differences of approach.
Now more than ever you have proven you are a class act! You’ve demonstrated an objective perception to this situation without compromising your integretiy or invalidating prior constructive cristism!

Dear Mr. Shea,

Thankyou for your fair and honest reflection.  At least there was no tomato flinging between you and Mr Voris in this article.  Also please remember there are alot of us “on our knees everyday folks” praying for you folks to be a Light in the Darkness….. and at the same time keep a balance approach in everything. Which is a on going challenge… we all know out here in cyber space.  Thankyou and God Bless.

“The Church is not Calvin’s Geneva” bwhahaha
I love it.

A well written article the biggest scandal of this whole thing in my opinion was the CNA article that was trying to suggest greater evils.

While I find arguments defending Voris specifically to be well-founded, the defense of Rafe and his fiction strikes me as more than a little ad hoc. Every one of these arguments used to support Rafe’s writings could also be marshaled in the defense of Brokeback Mountain with the only distinction between “art” and “smut” one of meaningless subjectivity.

Camille: The federal 501(c)(3) status is dependent upon being an “organization” with charitable type purposes.  There are no federal corporations, you have to be incorporated with a state.  If you lose your corporate status with a state, there is no “organization” that could be recognized as a 501(c)(3). I’d expect if they catch up with their state filings, they’d be reinstated retroactively to the date they were suspended and then have no effect on their status.

Good points. Made me think of Michaelangel’s “David”. Far removed from the fanatic puritanized and semi-jacobite frame of thought?

While I agree with your basic argument concerning Simon Rafe’s creation of a lesbian character, I think a Catholic writer is called to a higher standard than the secular writer. If a Catholic writer is to hold up a mirror to reality, than that mirror should reflect the misery caused by allowing human weakness to succumb to intrinsically disordered acts.

Too many forms of creative writing in today’s media (TV, movies, internet entertainment) embrace the reality of the temporal world, but fail to demonstrate the ultimate consequences of allowing that reality to define you. My knowledge of Rafe’s “adult themed” project is limited to what you wrote in this article, so I am unaware of how he developed the character.

Yes, a Catholic writer should hold a mirror up to the world – but should they not ensure it reflects to the reader the ultimate reality that is a life with Christ?

Sorry, Mark, but count me alongside irksome1.  Your defense of Voris’s tax status is well thought out, but your defense of Rafe’s “creative fiction” is less convincing.  O’Connor, Chaucer, and Shakespeare were simply being true to life as we all experience it, and did not celebrate what should not be celebrated.  However, Rafe’s work, if it has been described accurately, amounts to an invitation to people to enter into a slightly twisted fantasy.  I’m on board with Chaucer, but not on board with d&d fantasy.  BTW, I love Michaelangelo’s David, but someone please explain to me how that masterpiece is in any way similar to inviting people to “make love to the goddess.”

I’m not entirely familiar with how D&D works these days, but if it’s similar to how it used to be played before the digital age, I think it’s fair to draw a distinction between writing this type of game and writing a novel or play that makes the game writing more questionable. Even in fiction that portrays grave evil in way that seems to approve of it, novels, plays, and stories are by their nature about others. It would seem to me to be more problematic to write a type of fiction that invites people to enter into situations of grave evil as more of a participant. I think this is too likely to encourage people to imagine themselves in these situations and perhaps encourage a greater appetite for sexual perversion in real life. For these reasons I think Simon Rafe’s hobby might be considered problematic. Even so, I agree with you that this shouldn’t reflect back on Voris himself.

What was the point of this.
You give more exposure to the potential short falls of another (something many would not be aware of) only to say that you understand. That’s pretty big of you.
What value is there in this article or the one in CNA?
Sloppy paperwork and an employees off duty activities. The only real story would be found in Voris’ response, whatever that proves to be.
This is just airing dirty laundry.

A webmaster who professes to be Catholic, while undermining the Truth of our Catholic Faith, is just another Sign of The Time we live in.

@Deacon Dan - please read Simon Rafe’s response (linked above).  He does do EXACTLY what you propose.  All his works of fiction are with the express intent of showing those ultimate consequences.  His stories (and I have personally read many) have the correct moral purpose.  He does admit that he went too far, and that has been corrected and should not be an issue in the future.  My gosh, it is as if some are demanding to paint him with a very wide Sharpie, a mark that can never be removed.  This is not the case.  Error has been made, lesson learned.  No reason to assume it will continue to be the norm.

Just one further comment.  I think what Rafe did was wrong, and I’m glad neither he nor Voris is pretending otherwise.  I don’t think Voris should be blamed for not knowing what his underling did on the web, and I think, since Rafe has explained himself and, presumably will not do this again, that he should be given some slack.  We all make mistakes, and I think the parties involved are open to learning from this one.

When this story broke I thought…oh boy, Mark will probably drop the hammer on Voris now.  So when I read this piece I was surprised and pleased.  The stock market may be dropping like a stone but your stock with me soared.  Thanks for weighing in and doing so in a measured way.

BK,

I’m afraid your interpretation of Simon’s response is enlightened by a more intimate knowledge of his writing than my own (or the person reading Mark Shea’s article who has NOT read Rafe’s work).

I attempted to qualify my statement by admitting I had not read Rafe’s work mentioned here.

Based upon the given information, I felt a certain qualification needed to be made as to the general duty of a Catholic writer.

To Nancy D. (and whoever else): What did Simon Rafe do that “undermin[es] the Truth of our Catholic Faith”? Or is every sin committed by a Catholic an undermining of the Truth of our Catholic Faith?

To Deacon Dan (and whoever else): “Should they not ensure it reflects to the reader the ultimate reality that is a life with Christ?” So must every depiction of a homosexual character by a Catholic author bring up misery in the character’s life due to his/her homosexual lifestyle? Is that an accurate depiction of reality?

To Jeffrey: If a Catholic writer feels it is necessary for his or her literature to include a character who is eagerly willing to participate in sin, then yes - the consequence of that decision should be presented as well. To suggest otherwise would be to assert there is no consequence to turning your back on God, and that would be to deny the absolute Truth of reality.

Mark’s playing the puritan card eh? Maybe he has never played D&D. What you do in D&D is role-play, which usually means you end up doing stuff you would never think to do in real life. It’s like a ‘safe’ imaginary alternative universe where you can be your real evil self and indulge in things that are wrong or immoral in real life, like murder folks that cross you, or seduce bar maids, or have a lesbian encounter with a sex goddess.

The idea that Rafe’s game world has some edifying purpose is an incredible stretch. It’s just porn. It’s a sexual fantasy formalized into a game world. Everyone who has ever played D&D knows it. D&D itself is a fantasy where the narrative is up to the players (as opposed to being controlled by the author), and it all-too-easily devolves into fantasies of sin.

I don’t suppose it is too much to ask that people try and read Rafe’s work before trashing him?

@ Brian Killian:
 

“The idea that Rafe’s game world has some edifying purpose is an incredible stretch. It’s just porn.”

 
From Rafe’s apology / explanation, it doesn’t sound that way to me. It sounds to me like a largely sincere work of Catholic imagination partially distorted through conscupiscence.
 
Is your judgment based on anything more than the CNA story? Have you read Rafe’s actual work? Trashing someone’s reputation based on insufficient evidence is a violation of the eighth commandment.
 
@ Bones:
 

“I don’t suppose it is too much to ask that people try and read Rafe’s work before trashing him?”

 
Is is available anywhere?

From the excerpts I have read of Simon Rafe’s work, both here and on CNA, it is simply and clearly obvious that his intention was nothing other than titillation.

As for murder being a graver evil than homosexuality, that is not necessarily true. The case can certainly be made that a grown man murdering another (say after discovering him in adultery with his wife) is not as grave an evil as teaching children how to engage in homosexual sodomy, which in fact is now happening, as I understand it, in some school districts in the U.S.

Folks, we are fallen. The whole world is an occasion of sin. With God’s grace we make graced choices for the good. If you ban everything that is not Scripture (and God knows there is meat aplenty for concupiscence in those holy pages!)and the Catechism—whether by Catholic artists or for Catholic consumers—you deprive us of the opportunity to exercise that grace.
Please don’t bring us to the absurd point of judging whether Mr Rafe’s work is an occasion of sin by making us determine (a) whether his futuristic lesbian is a “practicing” homosexual (as opposed to an accomplished one?); (b) whether she is enjoying it; and (c) if one or both of those is true, whether the conditions of the fanfictional world are such that she is vincibly or invincibly ignorant of natural law as it applies on her particular planet!

Thank you, Mark. How convenient for some that this comes up at a time when Michael is very busy @ WYD and completely occupied with his work there for the glory of God and the Church and the benefit of our youth. I very much appreciate Voris’ work @ RCTV.com although I may not always agree with his approach.  Kudos to you both!

@ jkm: The question is not whether Rafe’s character is sinning, or how culpably. The question is whether the scene presents readers, and should be prudently judged to present readers, with a near occasion of sin. Saying “whole world is an occasion of sin” obscures the crucial criterion of proximity or nearness, apart from which it would be meaningless to intend, as the Act of Contrition bids us, to “avoid near occasions of sin” (or, as the Apostle says, “you would have to go out of the world”!).

@Carl Sommer, are you talking to me? I never made that allusion you mentioned.

This is another example of what is so wrong in the post-Conciliar church, especially in the US and the West. You think nothing of the multiple violations of trust and of the 1st and 4th commandments by Rafe as inconsequential. Thus is shows again the loss of the sense of sin in post-Christian America. I guess St Dominic Savio was wrong in saying “death rather than one mortal sin”. Let’s just let “writers” like Rafe run wild with their fantasies about homosexual trists a la Star Wars. BTW, one commenter worries about Rafe being the victim of calumny, I have several of his email missives excoriating good, solid Catholics defending the faith, calling one of them (without foundation) schismatic and heretical…something which he did later retract to his credit.

Interesting to see AmChurch liberal Catholics calling the kind of modesty we learned in imitation of the Blessed Mother as “puritanical”.

Shea being fair to Voris ? Wow ! (that’s in response to the headline, didn’t read the article).

@ David Wendell: This is no surprise to those of us who realize that Shea has always been fair to Voris all along.

Jimmy good work on this one. As a musician I run into this sort of thing all the time. May God be with you.

@bob cratchit,  not talking to anyone in particular.  Sorry if I offended you.

A couple of things:

First off, the comparison between Flannery O’Connor and what this gentleman did is absurd. Absurd in such an obvious way, that I’m embarrassed for those who have made this comparison.

O’Connor believed that one had to penetrate the world “as it really is” to get at the truth about God, the human condition, and all of creation. Artistic beauty reveals that truth, and her vision of sorry art has to do with the stuff that avoids the world in its ugliness. This is what the true Christian artist is all about.

This was not, however, what Rafe’s RPG is all about, as described. I play RPG’s. The aim of an RPG is to titillate and entertain, rather than to give us a portal into a larger world. Fanfic, RPG’s, videogames: none of them are ever written with the intention of expanding the soul. And there’s nothing really wrong with that.

Now, having said this about Rafe, I don’t believe Rafe’s “sin” is all that major. He simply exercised poor judgment. Time to move on and leave the poor guy alone, but it seems a bit silly to make excuses for him, especially ones so disconnected with the nature of art and reality.

I agree absolutely that this is a ridiculous attempt to smear Voris, and I hadn’t considered Rafe until I read your very interesting thoughts about Catholic writers. “Brideshead” is a very good example, and the novels of Graham Greene and Piers Paul Read present many more. I was always touched that such a cranky old traditionalist as Waugh was always so gentle with the gay men of his fiction. (Of course, biographical details explain why this might have been.) It is a good lesson in separating the person who sins from the sin and, perhaps, the orientation itself from deeds stemming from the orientation.

The issue of the divided loyalties of the Catholic writer towards his faith and his art has long fascinated me. I have read a suggestion that Waugh’s awkward ocean-liner lover scene was a result of Waugh’s trying to placate his Catholic conscience. (Of course, the Catholic writer of Waugh’s time had also the obscenity laws to work around—with good results, I may say. Greene, though in his way explicit, does not raise a blush; Read can and does.)

It’s a puzzle all right, and it reminds me of the poor child of Antonia White’s “Frost in May” who gets into terrible trouble over something similar. How can one write about sinners without mentioning their sin or even trying to convey to the reader the glamour of evil? How does one write about the sinner prospering and the virtuous suffering without courting accusations that one is on the side of sin? 

Without wanting to heap coals on Rafe’s head, I do think a “choose-your-own adventure” type scenario is in a different moral class than a literary novel. On the other hand, it may be no worse (and perhaps better) than the thinly disguised pornography that sells so well to women who browse the burgeoning “Romance” section of bookstores. 

I suppose the question may be “What is fiction and what is porn?” I would hazard that fiction seeks to make the reader forget about everything by the story, but porn aims to make the reader feel sexually aroused. Instead of remaining in a state of self-forgetfulness, he (or she) becomes only too aware of her own sexual response.

Pardon me: “everything BUT the story.”

@Asclepius : Absolutelyly agreed no-one should make excuses for Rafe - Shea’s piece does seem ill-advised, almost as if Shea wanted to make a point about art and puritanism and this was an opportunity, rather than a clear link.

However, to write this is unfair and wrong;

“The aim of an RPG is to titillate and entertain, rather than to give us a portal into a larger world. Fanfic, RPG’s, videogames: none of them are ever written with the intention of expanding the soul.”

Really? So you are out-and-out calling Rafe a liar in the apology he writes? You are saying that - in the middle of his contrition and apology - he is just lying when he says he wrote particular stories with the intention of promoting a Catholic view? And then he links to the two remaining stories he has left in place; the first of which has opening author’s notes reading (in part) “This story is an explicitly pro-Christian piece” and then goes on to tell the tale of fallen-away Catholic coming, explicitly, home to the Christ and the Church?

And the second story which is a (clumsy) riff on The Great Divorce and contains a large number of very heavy-handed promotions of Catholic understanding of Heaven and Hell and Purgatory?

Rafe’s judgment may be awful and he may have been consumed by (in his own words) hubris that he could write certain things, but to say fanfiction is never “written with the intention of expanding the soul” requires you to call a contrite man a liar. He tried and he failed spectacularly (his words) in some stories.

For one, I think he succeeded in the couple he left up on the site. Once you get past the heavy-handed moralizing, he’s an okay author.

I can see how it would be ok to have homosexual characters in books of fiction. But these are not just fiction; they are ROLE PLAYING GAMES. That’s different. RPGs involve getting really into the character, entering into the role. That’s what makes it so fun. It’s active reading, not passive reading. And that’s why homosexual encounters are problematic. You engage mentally, and get more into the character, rather than merely passively reading about it. It’s problematic.

I tend to agree with those who think that there’s quite a bit of difference between the creation of literary art which requires a true reflection of our fallen world, and the creation of things like video games or RPGs which place the reader or player in the position of having to make certain decisions some of which may involve the proximate occasion of sin.  It should be taken for granted that there are plenty of harmless video games and RPGs which do not do this in any way, and which may be innocently enjoyed.

Suppose that instead of inviting the reader to decide what benefits he or she wishes to gain from a love-encounter with a goddess (including, by what has been reported, envisioning himself or herself as actually participating in lovemaking with the goddess), the scenario in “Castle Dracula” read as follows: “You must obtain information from the Evil Dark Lord.  To serve him tea and cookies in the hopes that he will tell you what you need to know about his invading armies, turn to page 42.  To waterboard him, turn to page 38.  To subject him to the physical torments of the rack, hot irons, and a cat ‘o nine tails, turn to page 12.  To slice off his fingers and toes with your +8 Dagger of Infinite Doom, turn to page 27.”  Each page will contain a detailed description of each of these scenarios, with the reader in the “you” position, e.g. “You carefully pick up the steaming pot of Earl Grey tea.  The Dark Lord snarls, “No lemon!  I hate lemon!” You assure him that you will not put lemon in his tea and ask him if he prefers Mint Milanos or Ladyfingers…” etc.

Now, further suppose that the torture scenes are truly gruesome and completely morally neutral in tone.  RPG designers will “weight” the scenarios so that the player will be rewarded for the right choice, allowed to proceed for less optimal choices, or punished (or killed) for the wrong ones.  If all choices are equally permissible the game will simply continue.

So: suppose the “tea and cookies” option gets you killed, and the mutilation option gets you the best outcome?  Or: suppose the mutilation option gets you killed, but only after a few pages of text in which the reader is invited to imagine himself taking out all his anger and hatred of the evil character in graphic bloody detail? 

Now, if the Castle Dracula RPG said, when you turned to the “make love to the goddess” page, “You approach the goddess to take her in your arms.  She raises one icy eyebrow and your impudence and smites you with her +56 Crossbow of Divine Wrath.  Roll to see if you survive…” that would be one thing.  But that’s not usually how these things go, which means that we do have to consider whether the intent and/or the effect of such things is to create the possibility that the reader will be tempted to grave sin.

To go back to my torture example, there’s clearly a difference between an RPG-style torture scene and the same sort of scene in a work of fiction.  A book dealing with a soldier’s guilt after having participated in torture, for instance, or even a fantasy work in which the evil character tortures some of the good ones, is going to have a different effect altogether than a scenario in which the reader is invited to view various torture options in a morally neutral way and then imaginatively participate in the torture scenario of his choice.

All of that said (and it is a lot) this is hardly a denunciation of Mr. Rafe for having written an RPG of possibly dubious morality; I see that, like others here do, as a mere error of judgment and think his response to it has been entirely appropriate.

I agree with Maria Gorseon. It’s much more of a problem when YOU, in the person of your character, are engaging in sinful activity. So I do find his previous work problematic, but he is obviously contrite. I for one appreciate this post, though I disagree that the unchaste content in the RPG is something that does not need to be repented. However, he has repented it.

Mr. Shea,

Jesus warned us,

“Not every one who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” (MT 7:21)

Perhaps the prayer of Father Benedict Groeschel is appropriate here, “Mercy!”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gDhR1R3S…

At Fillmore East 1971

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lB9ZmBX_PJg

Only in a suffocating inquisitorial semi-Calvinized reactionary mutation of authentic Catholic faith could a defense of Michael Voris possibly be labeled “AmChurch liberalism”.  Only a merciless and law-driven sectarianism could possibly describe somebody as conscience-haunted as Simon Rafe as “running wild”.

Seriously, people need to think about how ridiculous that looks to any normal healthy Catholic.  It’s like the reader on my blog who wrote, in the true paranoid style:

“As for Mr. Voris, he has finally earned his stripes. He now has a bona fide wolf pack after him. I think I shall give him a donation as a token of my esteem for his excellent taste in enemies.”

My response: Only, of course, you don’t know who his “enemies” are. You merely know that somebody criticized him. Indeed, the only people who really seem to be his “enemies” in this story are the puritanized mob of inquisitors he himself tends to foster, who are willing to throw Simon Rafe under the bus to protect their boy Voris. Nobody at, say, Commonweal, the National Catholic Reporter, or America would care in the slightest about Rafe’s RPG. Only the suffocating crowd of Calvinized witchhunters that Voris himself plays to care about such things. Your donation is not striking a blow against some shadowy cabal of liberals who are out to destroy Voris. It is just landing a punch on somebody or other who hoped to get the mob of pitchfork wavers who idolize Voris to use his own puritan zeal against him.

****

Half the reason I wrote this piece was to defend Voris and Rafe.  The other half was to point out that the people I am defending them from are not the shadowy cabal of liberals RCTV are constantly imagining to be the sole source of the Church’s trouble, but the inquisitors and reactionaries whom they are doing so much to whip into a schismatic frenzy that eats their own.  Dominical utterances about logs in eyes are important to heed here before blurting the standard issue culture war stuff about those evil libs.

“When you live, as RCTV does, by denouncing others as impure, you’d better run a tight ship of your own.  When your bread and butter is encouraging contempt for bishops as bad managers of underlings, you’d better be careful about your own underlings. He who lives by the sword, etc.”  and “I disagree with Voris on certain points and think that his My-Way-or-the-Highway presentation leaves much to be desired, but I don’t for a moment think him a dishonest man.”

Mark,  I think this was a cheap shot of your own.  Voris brings to light those things that undermine Catholic faith, especially when they are coming from the bishops.  As a 59 year-old Catholic, I have found absolutely EVERYTHING Voris says to be a true account of what has been going on.  If he didn’t bring it to anyone’s attention, we all know it change would come much more slowly, if at all.  He is deeply supportive of the Catholic bishops who have cleared their heads of the smoke of satan that has permeated our church for over half a century. Souls are at stake! 

Stop criticizing his delivery just because it doesn’t resonate with you.  It is clearly the right message for thousands!

I apologize to Simon Rafe for not actually reading his apology before commenting.

@Steve Greydanus

Good thing I didn’t trash anyone’s reputation. CNA already did that. I’ll be more precise.

Rafe’s whole game world is not porn. What is porn is that RPG scenario as described by CNA and described indirectly by Rafe himself (why is Shea defending something that Rafe himself isn’t willing to?)

Shea’s argument that it’s puritanical to object to such things because it’s holy fiction is ridiculous. The idea that this scenario plays some edifying role in the game is crazy. It’s highly improbable and unbelievable. It’s *not* improbable and unbelievable that this scene pits YOU the role-playing character into a disordered sexual fantasy (the goddess is an equal opportunity lover). This happens all the time in RPG games.

What will you guys be arguing next, that Rafe’s sex goddess scene is part of the Theology of the Body, and that lusting for women in your heart is not sinful because it’s just fiction?

“As a 59 year-old Catholic, I have found absolutely EVERYTHING Voris says to be a true account of what has been going on.”

Does this include his reckless denunciation of Bp. Mulvey as somehow complicit with a shadowy gay cabal, merely because he had the courage to confront and demand obedience from the rebellious Fr. Corapi?  Because personally, I think Bp. Mulvey acted with absolute heroism in the face of both Corapi’s vile slanders of him and of Voris’ reckless and kneejerk attack.  And that is not the only time Voris has recklessly simplified something to a simplistic culture war narrative and used it to whip up the mob against people who are doing honorable work in the Church.  That you cannot conceive of a *single* time where Voris has ever erred says more than I ever could about the poison of his approach and the schismatic culture it is fostering.  Such a culture of puritanical purging zeal against the impure tends to eat its own—as this little contretemps demonstrates.  It’s not liberal readers of America, Commonweal, or the National Catholic Reporter who are demanding Simon Rafe be punished or who are calling a defense of Michael Voris “AmChurch liberalism”.  It the Frankenstein monster of suffocating reactionary zeal that is doing that—precisely the audience that Voris cultivates.

@Mark : Can you please post a link (or the date of the vid etc.) where Voris denounces “Bp. Mulvey as somehow complicit with a shadowy gay cabal, merely because he had the courage to confront and demand obedience from the rebellious Fr. Corapi.”

I haven’t seen it.

Actually, in this case, it would not be the result of “The Frankenstein monster of reactionary zeal”, but rather the failure to accept a sincere apology in good faith.

why is Shea defending something that Rafe himself isn’t willing to?

Because, from what I can tell, it doesn’t look as serious to me as it does to him.  He’s obviously the final judge of his own conscience, humanly speaking.  But from what little I saw of the game as it was described in the article, I don’t see any slam dunk argument that it was sinful.  We see various options described, some of which are sinful acts, but we don’t know what consequences of those actions are in the game.

Shea’s argument that it’s puritanical to object to such things because it’s holy fiction is ridiculous.

Could you please quote for me the passage where I say this?  Also, what is “holy fiction” precisely?  The point *I* recall making was not that Rafe was writing holy fiction, but that he was writing fiction, and was trying to do so with integrity, attempting to balance between being a faithful Catholic and being a faithful artist who creates characters that hold a mirror up to (fallen) nature.  Rafe himself thinks he failed.  It’s his to make that call.  In a healthy Catholic Church, it would also be the audience’s to make that call *as an aesthetic judgment*.  But in our semi-calvinized Catholic culture, we have been pre-emptorily deprived of the text of the game lest the mob of Puritan Inquisitors use it to destroy an innocent man and so have to go only on a press clipping.  From that press clipping I can see nothing certain about the alleged “sinfulness” of the game.  You, on the other hand, can somehow divine that the whole thing was nothing but porn despite knowing nothing about how the consequences of these sins play out in the game—which kind of demonstrates my point about the stifling puritanized semi-Calvinism of conservative American culture.  If the Chronicles of Narnia and Harry Potter are deemed too dangerous to contemplate in such a culture, God help somebody who writes like Graham Greene, Mike Flynn, Gene Wolfe or Flannery O’Connor.  I can’t help wondering if the only reason they get cut slack is because that stifling subculture is almost completely unaware of them. Simon Rafe’s big crime is that he wrote for an audience outside the ghetto of Fortress Conservative Catholicus and was discovered to be doing so by those inside the Fortress.  That he is somehow now being arraigned as an AmChurch liberal or “running wild” and his head is being demanded by some of the louder voices in the mob of pitchfork wavers only makes my point about the mercilessness of the Frankenstein monster.

Concerned Bloodhawk:

See his video on the Corapi brouhaha.  Made sometime in June or July.  He doesn’t name Mulvey, of course.  He simply accuses some shadowy cabal of trying to destroy the Righteous Man Corapi.  He leaves his viewers to do the math and condemn Mulvey and SOLT (who were the only people involved in calling him to heel).  He’s never apologized for it.

Nancy: Actually, in this case, it would not be the result of “The Frankenstein monster of reactionary zeal”, but rather the failure to accept a sincere apology in good faith.

Same difference.  The point is precisely that Rafe is being treated like a pariah by a small but nasty minority of self-appointed Orthodoxy cops for whom even sorrow, contrition, and a firm purpose of amendment are not good enough.  That is indeed reactionary zeal and it shows little knowledge of the mercy of Christ.  My consolation is that it seems to be a small minority.

@Mark : “He doesn’t name Mulvey, of course.” So, your comment that “reckless denunciation of Bp. Mulvey as somehow complicit with a shadowy gay cabal, merely because he had the courage to confront and demand obedience from the rebellious Fr. Corapi” is about as accurate as Rafe’s depiction of what a teenage girl is capable of doing to a minotaur?

Seriously - Susan Pevensie as a close-combat machine? She’s an archer.

Here is a link to the script of the piece in question;
http://www.realcatholictv.com/scripts/vort-2011-06-23.pdf

The audio of the video might have been changed in the recording, but I really doubt it. In any case, this is easier to copy paste.

Here is a relevant section; “He unabashedly talked about the angry homosexual subculture
that controls so much of what goes on.
He blasted unfaithful bishops .. meaning not only the obvious ones but also the ones who
quietly and cowardly sit back and let heterodoxy and heresy spread unchecked.
It isn’t a stretch of the imagination to conclude many of the enemies he made and noses
he got out of joint among the bishops and their lapdog media lackies are glad to see all of
this going on.”

I don’t see that as connecting anyone - least of all a specific Bishop who called Fr. Corapi to heel - with anything. What it says is that Fr. Corapi spoke out against a homosexual subculture which has great influence (something many people agree exists) and that he also talked about bishops who did nothing or not enough. That doesn’t mean that either a specific bishop is part of the later group (seriously, what possible evidence is there that Voris was talking about the guy who asked Corapi to keep his vows etc. in that group? Answer - none) nor that the two groups are synonymous.

Was Voris’s piece on the Corapi issue just strangely ironic in a weird way? Yeah. Is a heck of a lot of what he says just downright boneheaded and causing a whole bunch of division? Duh, yup. But he didn’t say what you’ve consistently said he said. You’ve said that a number of times - and I think it’s only fair for people to read the words themselves and decide if your comment on what Voris said is accurate or not.

Personally, I don’t think it is.

There is a difference between admitting when one has sinned, asking for forgiveness from God, and doing Penance, and denying a sin is a sin to begin with.

@Mark : “He doesn’t name Mulvey, of course.” So, your comment that “reckless denunciation of Bp. Mulvey as somehow complicit with a shadowy gay cabal, merely because he had the courage to confront and demand obedience from the rebellious Fr. Corapi” is about as accurate as Rafe’s depiction of what a teenage girl is capable of doing to a minotaur?

Ah.  So you wish to pretend that Voris’ denunciation of some shadowy cabal of fiends bent on destroying the Great Priest has absolutely nothing to do with the people at SOLT and the bishop who, you know, demanded he be disciplined.  Fine.  Enjoy your dream world.  But for the rest of us, it was quite obvious that Voris was portraying Corapi as Righteous Truthtelling Priest vs. Corrupt and Sinister Hierarchy.  It’s his standard Culture War Template the he applies continually, and he recklessly applied it here.  Nor did the Corapians (as these deluded sectarians now call themselves) fail to get the message.  Mulvey and SOLT evil.  Corapi Persecuted saint.

Only it turns out Corapi was, in fact, unfit to be a priest and Mulvey and SOLT were absolutely right to call him to heel.  Are there liberal clergy who don’t much like Corapi?  Sure.  Was this, in fact, what the problem was which brought Corapi down, as Michael Voris said?  No.  What brought him down was that a brave bishop named Mulvey endured tons of abuse from fans of both Corapi and Voris and stuck to his guns, thus exposing a fraud and a knave unfit to be a priest. (I should also mention that EWTN caught an awful lot of flack from the energized followers of Corapi and Voris, who lost little time joining in the chorus of pitchfork wavers who condemned the network for “persecuting” him by adhering to standard policy and not broadcasting his work during the investigation).

Bottom line: Voris was way out of line to leap into this fray and paint a picture of Brave Truthteller Corapi vs. Corrupt Shadowy Gay Cabal.  There was no cabal.  There was brave bishop Mulvey and the SOLT investigators, who got the job done with absolutely no thanks to Voris and his mob of pitchfork wavers.  Now those pitchfork wavers are after simon Rafe (some of them).  They should drop the pitchforks and go learn the meaning of mercy, not just for Rafe, but for a lot of the Body of Christ.

There is a difference between admitting when one has sinned, asking for forgiveness from God, and doing Penance, and denying a sin is a sin to begin with.

True.  And that would matter if Rafe denied any sin.  He didn’t.  Yet still some people demand he lose his job and see him as a libertine “running wild”.

I also don’t categorically deny he sinned.  I merely am not persuaded of it and I see no way that, given the information we have, we could make that call.  I take him at his word that he thinks he did and that he has made a sincere confession.  I mere am not certain I agree with him.  If I knew more about the game, I might.  I don’t see how anybody can be dogmatically certain he is guilty of a grave sin.  Still less can I fathom how he is somehow emblematic of “AmChurch liberalism”.  Only in the whacky world of hothouse Traddery could a defense of Michael Voris and Simon Rafe appear to be AmChurch liberalism.

@Mark : “Voris was way out of line to leap into this fray and paint a picture of Brave Truthteller Corapi vs. Corrupt Shadowy Gay Cabal”

And I - and others - don’t agree that is the picture Voris painted. The issue (and please, I invite people to read Voris’ script and watch the vid) was that Fr. Corapi had previously spoken against things and that now those who were part of those things (liberals, gays) were happy about his fall.

A lot of what you say about Voris is right on the money - but to try to say he was a guy who defended Corapi is just odd and not supported by what Voris did say about Corapi.

If that is a fantasy world, well . . . which page do we turn to?

My question is, if Rafe is a writer and an artist… how the hell does he stand to work with Voris?

CB:

Please.  A villain, let’s say, Maciel, is punished on the order of Pope Benedict XVI.  Suppose my first response to this is to say, “He unabashedly talked about the angry liberal subculture that controls so much of what goes on in the Church. He blasted liberals and heretics, meaning not only the obvious ones but also the ones who quietly and cowardly sit back and let immorality and corruption spread unchecked. It isn’t a stretch of the imagination to conclude many of the enemies he made and noses he got out of joint among the liberals and their lapdog media lackies are glad to see all of this going on.”  I say this, without qualification, to a mob of people who are already screaming for the head of Benedict and calling him a damn liberal and a persecutor of Real Catholics (as, in fact, happened with Maciel in some cases).  They then scatter over the Internet duly condemning Benedict (just as zillions of comboxers scattered over the Internet duly condemning Mulvey and SOLT).  Sorry, but a *responsible* person knows the effect his demagogic language is going to have on a mob only to ready to believe in conspiracies against their idol.  Voris, if he is not aware of the effect of his demagoguery, has no business taking a public forum to make such pronouncements.  If he is aware, then shame on him for never clarifying or retracting his words.  In simple fact, it does not matter one damn bit if liberals rejoiced at Corapi’s fall.  It was not, in the slightest, germane to the question of his guilt or innocence.  To drag it into the discussion served one purpose and one purpose only: to suggest that Mulvey and SOLT were in league with this shadowy cabal.  And it was, I assure you, heard that way by a great many people who railed at Mulvey in my comboxes and over on the BS Dawg’s FB page and website.  You can pretend such demagoguery did not occur, but I know better and have the hate mail to prove it.

Good analysis. I agree with most of it, and the other bits made me think.

As someone who played RPG’s as a kid, giving the player the opportunity to make bad decisions, versus good ones, is part of the game. The user is challenged to make the correct choice as part of the adventure.

I dont see anything wrong with what Rafe wrote either. The CNA article looked like an ill prepared hatchet job.

The smear reminded me of those people who want to burn Harry Potter books.

“Half the reason I wrote this piece was to defend Voris and Rafe.  The other half was to point out that the people I am defending them from are not the shadowy cabal of liberals RCTV are constantly imagining to be the sole source of the Church’s trouble, but the inquisitors and reactionaries whom they are doing so much to whip into a schismatic frenzy that eats their own.”

AMEN!

This story did do one good thing, and that is to look up once again the definition of detraction.  Detraction, by way of reminder, is the revelation of the faults and sins of another to a third person, and is mortal unless there is little harm from the revelation. 

While journalist do have some leeway in their public duties, such as inveighing against the official faults of public officers, or the revelation of the reasons an individual is unfit for a future (or present) office, isn’t there a case where the individual who fed this to CNS, and the reporters who worked on this story, committed this sin because the purpose was to disparage and discredit not just Simon Rafe, but Michael Voris and St. Michael Media in general?

Seriously…people are defending the writing of sexually explicit, immoral and prurient RPG material by a person who doubles as a Catholic apologist?  Whomever is doing so should be ashamed of himself.

By the way, Alessandro Serrenlli, the man who attempted to rape and did murder St. Maria Goretti, later repented and gave some insight into his motives.  He said that he read obscene and sexually explicit, and perverted, material geared towards adolescents and young men.  He warned the youth of his time (when he was in his 70’s) not to get anywhere near it since it poisons the soul.  I guess he became a Calvinist?  St Maria Goretti pray for us!

CNA is not a credible source of Catholic news. They have no standards in what they publish and how its published. And I have no idea why they would go looking for dirt at RealCatholicTV, both organizations seem to be cut from the same cloth. I avoid them both.

Why does this site keep refreshing the page, forcing you to lose your comment in the middle of writing it?

@CB
Any reasonable exegesis of Voris script can deduce a concerted effort to set up two camps. He sytematically slanders one camp while remaining ‘neutral’ on the basis of ignorance of the other. My only beef with Mark’s interpretation is that I think the primary targets are clearly himself and other bloggers who criticized Corapi. The bishops and their shadowy fellow plotters are merely backdrop to the main targets. Their literary function seems to be to ensure we “Boo” at the right moment in the pantomime.

The irony of Voris’s rants against the Church is that he is the best immitation of Luther I have seen for a long time. Luther was right about so many things that were wrong with the Church, and he was eloquent and abrasive in denouncing them. As he discovered, however, denouncing error and failures is easy compared to coming up with a solution.

I haven’t read Rafe’s work of fiction, but there are two considerations that should be noted. 

The first is that there is a distinction between a story with evil characters or evil actions and a story which is itself evil.  In a good story, as in real life, evil actions have evil consequences—sometimes more, sometimes less, and the one who suffers the most is not always the most guilty party, but there is a cause-and-effect relationship.  On the other hand, there are genuinely evil works in which evil is celebrated and suffers no bad consequences.  Your defense of Rafe only works if he has NOT written something like that.

The second is that the moral condition of the time and place of a work have to be considered.  A manual of dueling would not be as problematic today as in 1820 because dueling is no longer culturally accepted; the manual would not be a genuine temptation.  What we DO have a problem with today is the development of pornographic imaginations to an extent not seen in centuries.  Perhaps a Catholic from 1820 would be at greater risk from the dueling manual, but we are at greater risk from the sort of works that Rafe appears to have produced, and this has to be taken into account.

I, like Simon Rafe, am not perfect yet. He said he has gone through the Sacrament of Penance. This being the case he has been forgiven. Since Jesus can forgive him then so could I. But those of you without sin can throw the first stone.

Something about all of this just doesn’t pass the smell test for me.  Why is it excusable for a Catholic writer to create a game where people can enter in a sexually immoral fantasy?  Why is that innocent and “art”?  Why is it just an imaginative tale, an innocent hobby?  I admit I’m not as learned as the rest of you, and I’m starting to be glad of it. Things aren’t as complicated for me, I guess.  I see a man with creative talent and imagination using it to help people engage in a sexual fantasy.  I don’t know how you make that okay.  To me, it just stinks.

J+M+J   Shea, do yourself a favor, and this goes to all “professional” so called Catholics out there, stop your criticism of Michael Voris.  It is reassuring that Mr. Voris is the “real” thing since it sparks your incessant criticism and annoyance of anything and everything about him and everyone like him.  Just the fact that you and your cronies get all worked up about Voris’ fantastic work and true Catholcism is telling.  You continue to obsess. Voris is on the right track, whether you like it or not.  You’re not even a theologian and write as if you had some authentic grasp and deep understanding of our faith. Far from it.  On the other hand, Michael is a theologian no less.  Something, of course, you would never mention.  Wake up, you are embarrassing yourself.  God bless Michael Voris.  He has opened the eyes of many Catholics (and is trying to open your eyes as well) who have been confused for far too long a time, who have had horrific catechism (or lack of, or distorted “kumbaya”, modernist, liberal nonsense), including religious, priests, bishops with dreadful and appalling instruction.  The tide is turning and quickly. So hang on.  Solid Catholicism, the Traditional Latin Mass (glorious!) will be the norm in no time for the glory of God!  Once this takes root again, this world will become a much better place.

Just so you know, Mr. Shea, no matter how much you defend Voris, your every word will be examined for imperfections and impurities, and your mildest criticisms will be taken as vituperation, and you WILL still be called on for your imperfect love of Voris, which will make you NOT a “real” Catholic.

These people are making me sick. You’re right; they’re Calvinists, and a harm to the church. I can’t wait for them to break off and form their “REAL CATHOLIC CHURCH” so they’ll leave the rest of us alone.

They remind me of Jesus when he said, “we played you a jig and you wouldn’t dance; we played you a dirge and you wouldn’t mourn.” Nothing makes them happy but their angry righteousness, spoon-fed to them by Corpai, and now Voris. I say let these ingrates have their idols.

Concerned Bloodhawk: A lot of what you say about Voris is right on the money - but to try to say he was a guy who defended Corapi is just odd and not supported by what Voris did say about Corapi.

That’s true. Voris did not actually say ANYTHING about Corapi, he just went after the vague “cabal” and the “professional Catholics” and refused to say anything about Corapi, either way, which was just shrewd poker. If he’d defending Corapi, he’d have egg on his face and if he didn’t he’d anger part of the shared Corapi/Voris audience. So he went mum on Corapi and savaged others. He still hasn’t had any criticism for the “professional Catholic” priest who made a mint off his sheep and rode his hog into the sunset.

A very poorly conceived article.

Something obviously meant to *surprise* and gain cheap applause, but so very shallow and so revealing.

1)  The defense of Voris would be commendable if ‘truly’ done in a good and loving way without all the subtle and hidden razor-cuts suggesting a more questionable motive. 

2)  The defense of Rafe is simply childish, irrational, and ignorant.  Hard to believe a mature Catholic (even a convert) could be so *dumb* and so handicapped in basic ‘good vs. evil’ discernment.

Milites and ED:  Thanks for jumping in to illustrate Luci’s point.  Some people just can’t take yes for an answer.

Mark, thanks for your attempt to use prudent judgment here despite past disagreements with Mr. Voris.  As to your comments on Mr. Voris: yes, screwing up paperwork is plausible - everyone should give him a few weeks to see how he does with it, rather than jumping on the class warfare bandwagon to accuse him of overweening greed (as they accuse anyone who could be making a profit from their own industry). 
As for Mr. Rafe, you make an excellent point: Mr. Voris’ responsibility for oversight is primarily for his work *at work*, not on his free time.  However, I disagree with your approach to Mr. Rafe’s freelancing from a moral perspective.  No man can long be a ‘house divided,’ or serve two masters.  If his freelancing encourages sin while his day job seeks to help others avoid it, he has bought into an “empty promise” somewhere.  Please realize that it’s possible to be creative and express artistic talent without promoting sin.  Not that some don’t fail; just remember that it’s feasible, and God can bless it if you try.

Luci (regarding your Saturday, Aug 20, 2011 1:14 AM (EDT):) - Curious, JUST curious.  Are you a pro Choice Catholic?  Do you go to confession? Did you vote and would you vote again for Obama who sign AGAINST the Born Alive Protection Act.  Where, if a baby is born alive from a botched abortion it is either saved (Born Alive Protection Act) or it’s thrown in the trash (Obama’s preference)?

Are you even (real) Catholic?

Toni,

How did abortion, confession, and the Born Alive Protection Act come into this? Are you just giving Luci the litmus test to see if you can just disregard her statements out of hand? So you’re either a fan of Voris and his style of argument, or you’re a child murder supporting Democrat? Got it. This truly is the world where there are only two sides to any question.

I’ve been handling not-for-profit and 501 (c)(3) corporation questions for the different churches or organizations I’ve been involved with since 1977.

The overlapping federal and state laws are a mess, and in some jurisdictions seem to have been crafted so that you can easily rack up a technical violation by missing a filing, thus allowing the bureaucrats to exact a late-charge penalty for reinstatement. When I dealt with Michigan corporations about a decade ago, this was one of the bureaucratic tricks. This is what snagged Mr. Voris.

For the Feds, don’t get me started. The latest boondoggle was requiring most NPCs to file a form called a 990N by June 30 or have exemption revoked. Basically you gave IRS your address. The form name was similar to ANOTHER 990 form that some NPCs did NOT have to file, so many smaller NPCs ignored it, or if their address had changed, they did not of course receive the form requiring them to give a new address. Their exemptions got revoked. These could be reinstated — by paying $800!

So on the tax question, I’m on Vorhis’s side. He just got caught by another bureaucratic fundraising scheme. CNA’s sensationalization of this particular issue in the Vorhis case was really unfair.

I’m surprised that Father Corapi has not commented on the YOUCAT.

Father Corapi often spoke about the fact that the sins of the flesh destroy the spirit.

Simon Rafe is crafting nefarious sex fantasy and enticing others to indulge in same. Yet, you describe it as creativity…nothing more than an “artistic” and “innocent” hobby??”  If we use worldly standards your position makes sense, but we are talking about a Catholic apologist (i.e. a defender of the faith) right?  The way you justify Simon’s behavior reminds me of morally bankrupt Madonna and Lady Gaga fans who justify their idols’ blasphemy and perversions with words like “art” and “harmless” entertainment.  Wake up!  Jesus is calling us to purity in heart, mind, body, and soul…to be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect.  Take a look around.  You and others who use such faulty reasoning and false justifications only reinforce a lost, apostate generation with no sense of sin.  Come on, Mark, you should know better!

For ONCE Uncle Shea has acted LIKE A SAINT! God bless you Mark Shea. God bless you Michael Voris and God bless you Rafe.

—
“Jesus is your friend. The Friend. With a human heart, like yours.
With loving eyes that wept for Lazarus. And he loves you as much as he
loved Lazarus.” Saint Josemaría Escrivá

Blog: http://gadel.info
Skype ID: cceerpp
Twitter: @Apologetics

These incidents are not in and of themselves a big deal. I think the issue is that if these incidents had happened in a Catholic organization that Voris opposed, then there would probably be no end to the vitriolic editorials from Real Catholic TV about the situation. Perhaps this incident will help Real Catholic TV learn that snap judgments and half-baked editorials are neither fair or do a situation justice. Sometimes its good to have the shoe on the other foot for a change. What was it Our Lord said about planks, splinters and eyes? Maybe now that Real Catholic TV has experienced the human foibles of people in the Church, they might become more balanced in their reporting and editorials when those weaknesses appear in organizations other than their own.

I think Voris’ voice is a healthy addition to Catholic discourse. RealCatholicTV has exposed a lot hypocrisy, numerous practices that contradict Catholic faith.  Many of these stunning revelations come from info posted on the web sites of catholic organizations—information that lies in plain sight!  He has ruffled the feathers of some very powerful people and well-funded organizations.  So, why is anyone surprised when Voris, his staff, and the web sites of RealCatholicTV and Saint Michael’s Media are subjected to these very same types of inquiry (i.e. held to the same standard)?  Voris, his staff, and organization will constantly be probed for hypocrisy to ensure they practice what they preach—this is as it should be.  Without this type of scrutiny Simon Rafe might never have been called out for dabbling in and propagating dark sexual fantasy under the guise of “harmless” online gaming—Voris needs to clean up his own back yard first!  Still, it is sad and disturbing that most of this probing and scrutiny will continue to come from the duplicitous who care less about fidelity to Christ and more about digging up dirt to silence Voris—a thorn in their side.

Toni:

Thanks for illustrating my point about the band of self-appointed inquisitors Real Catholic TV fosters.  This discussion has nothing whatever to do with the issues you drag in.  Stick to the subject.

I think a lot of issues are being tossed into a blender in the combox, and this happens quite often.  Let’s break it down.

1) The Non-Profit issue with RCTV
2) The matter concerning Simon Rafe
3) How problems in the Church are discussed

With regards to 1:
I’m going to point back to Father Anthony Cekada’s post (a few up from here) and agree that this was unfair given the complexities involved.  I don’t think it’s the big smoking gun the author probably thought it was.
.
With regards to 2:
I saw the CNA article soon after it was released.  I allowed myself some time to process it and after much reflection, I don’t know this could not be considered detraction by CNA.  There was no real attempt to notify Voris of what was found and a waiting period to see what would happen.  I believe Simon Rafe would have been equally as contrite if confronted privately, as he was in his public admission.  Further, it was not known to any of us that he was doing this since he was blogging under a pseudonym - all the more reason to handle it privately first. I think the author, and the editors at CNA need to study up on detraction and examine their conscience on this one. It was handled like a tabloid and we should know that is not the benchmark for Christian Journalism.
.
With regards to 3:
I think everyone, including Real Catholic Tv needs to step back and reflect how they are conveying things.  Most critics of how they treat Communion in the hand are not opposed to Communion kneeling and on the tongue.  In fact, they too have a desire to see such reverence return.  I think the CNA article illustrates also, that investigative journalism - by CNA or by RCTv is wide open for the potential to rash judgment, detraction, and calumny.  Few people truly understand these things.  I think collectively, we need to hit the books in these areas.  While we are at it, we need to study up on derision, quarreling, and a number of other issues.  When derision is used to make a point it is nothing short of an attempt to force others to accept our position. 
.
We have to win hearts with reason, not force.  God gave us a free will and he never forces us. Similarly, we ought not to use force to get others to accept our understanding of the faith.  Follow the lead of the Pope.  He is not avoiding name-calling, ridicule and mockery because he doesn’t want to get his white cassock dirty.  His approach is simply virtue in practice.

Curiosity getting the better of me, I followed the links from his blog and looked up some of Rafe’s Narnia-oriented fanfic and have been reading it. I’m surprised by how good it is. He should give up this silly fanfic business and just write for real.

As for the other stuff, there isn’t one among us who has not done something stupid at some point or other. Many of us have reason to be grateful that we are old enough that most of our most egregious acts of idiocy were completed before the advent of the internet so they can mostly be laid behind us.

These younguns aren’t nearly so lucky.

How come a Catholic “non-profit” can get away with a “blunder” of not acknowledging that it lost its non-profit status to its contributors and be forgiven, while other non-profit organizations should be given extreme penalties?
—
—
Catholics are notorious for forgiving sins by other Catholics. Maybe that is why a lot of abusers and con men are attracted to religion.

Mark Shea, you are a genius.

To whomever invited the traddies to just get on with it and create their own church, I say, Bravo! Onward Christian soldiers! The rest of us stinking, filthy sinners (like the type Jesus hung out with) can then get on with it according to the love, grace, mercy, and forgiveness Christ came to give us.

As Shea has to keep pointing out in this commbox, many of the uber-orthdox here are the poster children of everything that is wrong with traditional Catholicism. I wish it weren’t so; traditional Catholicism has much to offer.

First, Mr. Shea, I thank you for your kind defense of Michael Voris and Simon Rafe.

As to the other remarks, Fr. Stephen Smuts linked to Michael Voris’s “Corapi & the Blogs” video here:

http://frstephensmuts.wordpress.com/2011/06/23/michael-voris-on-fr-john-corapi-and-the-blogs/

You can watch the whole thing for yourself. Nowhere does Voris mention Bp. Mulvey. Voris says repeatedly that he does NOT know all the facts and is NOT passing judgment on Fr. Corapi’s guilt or innocence. He makes a passing comment about how some liberal bishops are glad to see Fr. Corapi’s downfall. Call me naïve, but I did not draw the conclusion that he was “obviously” talking about Bp. Mulvey. Frankly, no one even has enough information on the Bishop to assume much about him, since he’s only been in office a short while.

Voris spends the rest of the time expressing disappointment at the tone of online commentators. And if I recall, Mr. Shea, you agreed with him, since you yourself apologized for your initial post about Fr. Corapi and removed it because you admitted you had been uncharitable and overly angry.

But claiming that Voris was explicitly denouncing Bishop Mulvey or SOLT amounts to slander, since Voris said no such thing, and I can’t even see how a reasonable person could draw that conclusion from the video. And please don’t tell me, as you did the other commentator, that I’m “pretending” Voris didn’t mean that. That’s to accuse of dishonesty, and I am being 100% sincere when I say I NEVER drew that conclusion, and still do not—and frankly, don’t even see how you could.

Mr Shea, this is quite an admirable defense of Michael Voris. It clearly demonstrates that you are fair, even-handed, open-minded, and willing to adhere to love and compassion towards those whom you disagree. At first I thought it might be a cheap self-righteous attempt on your part to disingenuously cast yourself in the pious role of an above-the-fray Pharisee who is trying to garner undue credit for his over-generosity at fairness. Such a position would surely serve you well in any future debates you might have with Voris, but alas, I was completely wron…...

“Indeed, the only people who really seem to be his “enemies” in this story are the puritanized mob of inquisitors he himself tends to foster, who are willing to throw Simon Rafe under the bus to protect their boy Voris. Nobody at, say, Commonweal, the National Catholic Reporter, or America would care in the slightest about Rafe’s RPG. Only the suffocating crowd of Calvinized witchhunters that Voris himself plays to care about such things. Your donation is not striking a blow against some shadowy cabal of liberals who are out to destroy Voris. It is just landing a punch on somebody or other who hoped to get the mob of pitchfork wavers who idolize Voris to use his own puritan zeal against him.” - Posted by Mark Shea on Friday, Aug 19, 2011 4:45 PM (EDT)

Oh.

Never mind…......

I think Brightstar is onto to something.

I have to wonder who is trying to discredit Michael Voris and Real Catholic TV, and why. Consider this:

http://commentarius-ioannis.blogspot.com/2011/08/who-is-trying-to-discredit-michael.html

Indeed, just the other day Steve Ray, another Catholic Apologist, had a brief but juicy commentary on this situation:

http://www.catholic-convert.com/2011/08/18/voris-and-realcatholictv-find-chinks-in-their-own-armor/

As I remarked at his blogsite, “...since you are in the Catholic Apologetics business, maybe there is a money angle to this after all because both Fr. Corapi and Michael Voris are or were competitors (however non-profit). I am not saying you did anything wrong. But I am naturally skeptical of criticism from a competitor, that’s all.”

Mark Shea (like Steve Ray) is a big competitor against Michael Voris. What ever happened to Jesus’ pray that we all be one?

PS, I won’t be buying any books by either Steve Ray or Mark Shea in the near future. In fact, I never bought their books (or even bought anything from Michael Voris’ Real Catholic TV or Father Corapi’s business, for that matter) I don’t like financing those whose motives appear to be competitory in nature vice salutory. (competitory - is that a word?) That said, I have to wonder whether the competition is trying desparately to put RCTV out of business while simultaneously trying to appear ever so pious and gracious.

A friend pointed out to me that “including MV in the criticism [above] was a little unfair.” I apologize. Scripture says, “The workman is worthy of his hire.” RCTV does good work. Michael Voris is no fat egotistical buffoon. I shall leave it at that.

Gosh, Mark!  You really need to get out with your grandchild more often - or get out more often, period!  Your cynicism is getting you too tightly wrapped up. 

You sound more and more like Voris each time I read you.  At least he does not couch his contempt in 5,000 word blogs.  Try doing the videos like he does.  You might come across less caustically.

I just got finished reading the NCR combox. I read Rafe’s  penitent explanation and was touched. I was more touched by Rafe thanking you. I realize now that I was too hasty judging the man, far too hasty. I have no idea the degree of acceptability of the game he wrote, but a man that sincere is to be forgiven (if there was anything to forgive). You realize there’s a huge positive to all this, and that is that you’ve been gracious to a relatively graceless man (Voris), and one who tweaked your nose to boot. I hope he learns from your gracious example. I know I have.

I agree that Mr. Voris most likely did not realize the paperwork problems that were forthcoming and I never suspect him as a dishonest man (as you said).  As to the quotes from the role-play book: “If you would like make love to the goddess (even if you are female—Asrel is an equal-opportunity lover!), turn to 11”  This would worry me greatly from a moral standpoint. As someone who has been in the role-playing world for years (though not currently because as a parent I no longer have time for such things), most of my gaming consisted of writing out stories with other players. It was called “play-by-email” and it was very entertaining when you had a good writing bunch of players who enjoyed creative adventures. Unfortunately, many gamers who are not religious or do not have a good set of morals, will put a lot of emphasis on sex in their role-playing. Even if you write a character that is sinful, there is a public responsibility that comes up where you have to ask yourself, “Do I want to write this type of behavior as acceptable?” You have to ask yourself this since all manner (and age) of players are reading your material. Someone not strong in the Faith, someone who is naive and young, etc.. may read your material and if you create a character that is continually “sleeping around”, you can imagine that impressionable minds will think that is “normal” (and of course, in our culture, that does appear to be normal.. so all the more Catholics must try to show that it is not).  What I often did was create characters that had virtues or were repenting of their evil past. Or if I did create an evil character to write about, I would never get into sexual sins. One can not write a sex scene without causing another to sin merely by reading it. If the characters are unmarried, it would appear to be condoning that behavior (even if it was only fiction and there was no consequences or remorse from the characters). If you are writing about homosexual relations, that too, can appear to be condoning such things.

I think as Catholics we have a huge responsibility to evangelize even when we play, write, entertain, etc. Not always directly but even indirectly. We need more Christian (moral) writers so I hope that Rafe and those like him can steer their energies towards indirect evangelization. :)

I would like to know why Voris is running his event in Madrid at the SAME TIME AS WORLD YOUTH DAY when he was REFUSED official recognition by the Bishops, who, BTW, have done a FABULOUS job of selecting speakers etc. Is it to foster the APPEARANCE of Church approval?

S. Quinn, why was Voris and RCTV the ONLY organization in all the years that WYD has been run to be told that he wasn’t approved? None of the gay rights orgs handing out condoms at the event were unapproved? And no other group in all these years has ever been singled out for mention.

Then why a month later when Voris does attend, this smear campaign against him occurs? Could it be the Bishops like Hubbard in Albany, NY - the one who passes out needles to heroin addicts and gave Holy Communion to adulterer Cuomo living with his concubine and sanctifying homosexual filth - got mad that Michael Voris revealed the depth of godlessness that has infiltrated the American Bishopry?

Why aren’t the Bishops excommunicating these godless liberal politicians abortion and gay marriage? And you say they do a fabulous job selecting speakers? Huh?

The only reason Voris exists is the complete lack of spine of almost every other “Catholic” institution, and self appointed “news” service.

Anyone who does not admit the wholesale destruction of the church is not honest, blinded, or makes a living and does not want to rock the boat.

Just as in the days when Jesus walked the Earth…there are those who know that Annis is corrupt but will not speak. They know that Caiaphas is working with Pilate… but they don’t have the guts to speak…and just wish those Jesus freaks would go away.

I’m not sure that fantasizing about Them leaving the Catholic Church is any healthier for your soul than fantasizing about having sex with an Elf goddess.

We find ourselves in the day and age where any call to Orthodoxy is openly attacked by cafeteria Catholics as one of the worst sins imaginable.

What is Orthodoxy? The Catholic Encyclopedia says: “Orthodoxy (orthodoxeia) signifies right belief or purity of faith. Right belief is not merely subjective, as resting on personal knowledge and convictions, but is in accordance with the teaching and direction of an absolute extrinsic authority. This authority is the Church founded by Christ, and guided by the Holy Ghost.”

And why is there such a resistance to Orthodoxy? Because too many “catholics” have embraced the misleading and fallacious worldly “virtue” of Tolerance.

Tolerance for the sake of tolerance itself has become the ultimate “commandment” for too many “catholics”. Tolerance has effectively rendered the Ten Commandments into The Ten Suggestions. It has recast the Truths of the Church into the mere medieval opinions of an out-of-touch power-hungry Magisterium that should be overthrown. It has abandoned the Tradition of the Church’s wisdom for the progressive enlightenment of new-age feel-good pop-psychology that has supposedly discovered some brand new evidence that the human nature and the spiritual well-being of man has really been misunderstood lo these 2000 years. The confessional has been replaced with secular psycho-therapy. The Catechism has been left behind for the latest recommended self-help paper-back from Oprah’s book club. In short, this new virtue of Tolerance ultimately yearns for the ancient Monarchy of Christ’s Church to be abandoned for a new enlightened democracy of political activism. Apparently Christ was wrong: man DOES live by bread alone after all, and NOT by every word that comes from the mouth of God.

But tolerance is not an end to a means- but rather, it is a means to an end. Chesterton said: “The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid. Otherwise it is more akin to a sewer, taking in all things equally.” And that truth has never been more apropos than it is today.

When Christ warned “Judge not lest ye be judged” He was warning against two things: 1) The ultimate final judgement of another person’s soul; we cannot cast anyone into hell. That power is God’s alone. 2) Hypocrisy. We must not call out the sins of others when we are guilty of equally serious sin or worse. But if you read the passage in it’s entire context you will find that we are indeed commanded to help our brothers and sisters by pointing out their serious sins. And that surely pertains to the out-right rejection of many of the Church’s fundamental truths: Abortion, artificial contraception, the grave disorder of homosexuality, the definition of marriage, etc etc.

I have to wonder if the majority of people who oppose the idea of Orthodoxy, aren’t doing so because they have rejected some fundamental Truth of the Roman Catholic Church. And rather than investigate the reasoning behind these Truths, and putting their own foolish pride and selfish desires behind their faith in favor of the Church’s timeless wisdom they choose to embrace their own short-sighted “wisdom”. And in doing so, they in effect, desire to change the Church to fit themselves when they should be allowing the Spirit to change them so that they may see the Truth.

“Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division.” - Luke 12:51

Michael: Keep up the good work! Don’t let these underminers daunt you in your work. We all know who is behind them. AC

That was well said “Bright Star.”  I’ve been immersing myself in Catholic news sources and blogs and other intra-Catholic discourse on the web and elsewhere.  I was immediately taken aback at all of the glad-handing, PC enforcement, demonizing of outspoken orthodoxy, and propagation of modernism jumping off paper and screen.  I’ve been studying the art and science of effective propaganda, marketing, and public relations for years.  From what I’ve analyzed so far, a good portion of “Catholic” news is, at worst, direct subversion of Catholic faith and true Christian fidelity.  At best, it serves as clever misdirection and diversion of Catholics and is extremely divisive in it’s effect.  Ultimately, this all works to hinder the ability of faithful Catholics to respond to corruption and crisis within the Church in any unified and meaningful way.  These “Catholic” news providers and pundits are using the same playbook as those in the secular media and achieving the same result: Polarizing and perpetuating the multitudes of confused, distracted, uninformed and apathetic.  It will be interesting finding out who is funding this “Catholic” propaganda and why.

Official RealCatholicTV response to the CNA article:

http://www.realcatholictv.com/response/

Brightstar:

One can be orthodox without being an *******. One can be tolerant of other Catholics and welcome them and pray for them without compromising Christianity.

That is where you and many other traddie Catholics diverge. Many of us are, quote, orthodox, but don’t parade it around and cast doubt upon other well-meaning Catholics who are trying to be holy.

(“One can be orthodox without being an *******. One can be tolerant of other Catholics and welcome them and pray for them without compromising Christianity.

I didn’t realize that “holy” Catholics referred to other Catholics as “assh*les”. So much for your “tolerance” I suppose.

(“That is where you and many other traddie Catholics diverge. Many of us are, quote, orthodox, but don’t parade it around and cast doubt upon other well-meaning Catholics who are trying to be holy.”)

Cast doubt on other well-meaning Catholics?

If those Catholics are in error of Church teaching, then don’t you have an obligation to point out their error no matter how well-meaning their misguided intentions are? Shouldn’t you help your brother remove the speck (or the beam) from his eye? How else will they ever learn?

How is a call to Truth- “parading” around?

“If it is somehow automatically sinful to imagine and describe a homosexual liaison in a work of fiction, why is it not all the more sinful to imagine and describe a damn’d incestuous Dane stewing over the nasty sty of his sinful and ill-gotten queen? If Rafe’s imaginative work sins gravely by creating a tale in which somebody has carnal relations with an elf, then how much worse is it for Chesterton’s imagination to crowd his brain and ours with beheading fiends, murderous dowagers, and slaughter of all shapes and sizes?”

It is not automatically sinful to imagine and describe a mortal sin, however, perspective is obviously key. In single-author written fiction, the main guidelines for perspective have to do with the moral light in which the sin is portrayed. For example, the murder at the beginning of a standard murder mystery lets you know how the victim died. If you went so far into the killer’s head that it made the rape, torture and murder of the victim seem strangely enjoyable, that would be cause for alarm, but like I said, most murder mystery introductions assume that you will find the murder disturbing, and that you know that murder is wrong, and that the rest of the novel will be about figuring out who the killer was.

So, apply it to homosexuality in single-author fiction. A female character goes and engages sexually with a goddess character. How much intimate detail is given? Is the language encouraging you to fantasize? Those would be problematic. What would it be rated if it was faithfully depicted as a movie? Does it make you think “Oh no, she gave into her lust, what is going to happen next?!” or are you too busy thinking about every little detail of the act? I think you can see that there is a line there. If the text is brief and concise, it can be portrayed as a plot point and not as pornographic.

Now, apply it to a roleplay. You have created a character who is a lesbian, and that is a character flaw of hers. So, your lesbian character has an opportunity to engage in a sexual ritual with a goddess. Again, are you, the player, detached? Do you see this as a plot moment where your character is making a bad choice which is going to have far reaching consequences in her life and you’re starting to wonder if this character is destined for a bad end in the game, or maybe you created her to be a tragic character from the beginning? Or, are you licking your lips and getting ready to do some heavy imagining about this sexual ritual which you consider to be your “guilty pleasure” in roleplaying. I think again, the line is pretty obvious.

I don’t know where Simon Rafe falls into this continuum, because this article is all I saw. But if the lesbian goddess was created for “guilty pleasure” purposes and not as a clearly flawed and dangerous plot device for your character to interact with, then I can see a problem. However, if the lesbian goddess was created as a character temptation that your character either resists and therefore benefits from, or falls prey to and therefore is harmed by, then that’s a valid fictional device for a mature adult to creatively explore, provided they truly don’t have any personal temptations toward lesbians. If they have a personal temptation toward something it’s their duty to protect themselves, even if the material wouldn’t be harmful to other mature adults.

That’s my 2 cents.

Now that M. Voris is taking positive action on these issues will CNA, CNS and other Catholic news outlets now please move the spotlight on to U.S. Catholic Bishops?  The RC Bishops in America have paid out $1.2 billion (of hard-earned money donated by the laity) in settlements to victims of RC priest sex abuse and at least 6 Diocese and 2 Archdiocese filed for bankruptcy as a result.  Homoeroticism, transgenderism, greed, and corruption have spread like plagues in the Church and across our nation and who can deny that a majority of Americans are devoid of a sense of sin?  Catholic politicians in America mislead the public by misrepresenting the Faith in word and deed on a regular basis.  Only a tiny fraction of Catholics participate in weekly Mass and monthly Reconciliation—check the data for yourselves!  Due to an unresponsive RC Hierarchy, the laity, prompted by a love of Jesus and concern for the Church, exposed a corrupt “homosexual superculture” among priests in the Archdiocese of Miami, a “gay” culture that’s growing among clergy that receives support from members of the hierarchy as well as from those directly involved in the training of priests, as well as Church sponsored “gay” masses throughout the nation—we are talking about “chosen” and consecrated souls handpicked by Jesus to be His shepherds on earth!  How is this possible?  The RC Faith is being passed on to younger generations in fewer and fewer numbers.  Disturbing trends in parishes are on the rise with many becoming increasingly unbalanced:  Majorities of elderly filling pews but only small fractions of youth participating in masses.  When the dwindling number of priests, religious, and laity of new generations are taught the catechism they are increasingly receiving a weak and distorted version of the RC Faith.  Consequently, the lack of reverence during Mass and dwindling mass attendance is so deeply rooted and widespread it is the norm now and no longer the exception.  Catholics are supporting and/or practicing greed, violence, materialism, secularism, contraception, abortion, stem cell research, and disordered sex practices at unprecedented levels—check out the data from several reputable research institutes for yourselves! 

Yet, most of our RC Bishops remain silent and unresponsive during a time when their bold leadership is needed the most.  Catholic news sources would you now please put the spotlight on RC Bishops so that they will be prompted to take positive action too.  Hopefully RC Bishops turn away from silence, inaction or even blatant coverups and start to follow Voris’ example and respond to very unpleasant revelations of infidelity within the Church by thoroughly investigating turpitude, addressing these matters publicly, and taking corrective action.  Jesus Christ calls the Church Militant to be bold defenders of the faith in thought, word, deed and prayer.  Jesus called RC Bishops to be fearless generals on the battlefield leading us in spiritual warfare against “evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against mighty powers in this dark world, and against evil spirits in the heavenly places.”  Each and every RC Bishop must live up to that calling and for those unable the Pope needs to replace them by Bishops who will.  Preventing the loss of souls to satan and hell demands nothing less.

“The sins of the flesh are bad, but they are the least bad of all sins.” - from the margin of page 224 of the YOUCAT

No doubt, this statement serves to distort and dismiss the grave nature of the sin against Chastity. There is no defense for what Simon Rafe did. It is more than disturbing that someone on a blog that professes to be Catholic would defend such anti Christian behavior. The sins of the flesh destroy the spirit.

Thank you.  I agree with you, mostly.  I see your point about the danger of stifling the creative spirit. I am not sure though about where the line ought to be drawn, but we do have to suspect the best of others.  I was reminded of the Pope’s interesting depiction of a nuanced aspect of charity using a homosexual prostitute as an example.

Maria, could you explain in what way this post reminds you of a depiction made by the Pope?

First of all, I have a huge problem w/you, Mark.  I do not want the “sexualization” of anything associated with the word “Catholic.”  This world, including many so called Catholics have accepted pretty much of the secular world, especially when it comes to morals.  This country is almost stripped of its morals and we are going down fast.  If you don’t believe this, look at all the ads for viagra and other stimulants to enhance you sex life.  What ever happend to associating intimacy with real love and marriage?
I do believe that Rafe’s one of these “so called Catholics,” in name only.  His creative fiction belongs in Hollywood where he’s sure to make a hit.  True Catholicism/Christianity is NOT after the big bucks, but in exposing the “Truth.”
We don’t need more sex or imorality, nudity, homosexuality etc, etc out there, we are bombarded w/so much of this.  What we do need is more holsum movies, books, or anything that’s not going to make the “God given” sex act, into trash or depict women as sexual targets ready to drop their drawers.
Also, I’ve never ever heard from the Catholic church that the “Chronicles of Narnia” as being Occult.”  Rather, just the opposite.
I believe that if Rafe is willing to totally change his writing into more holsum and positive work instead of the filth he’s currently writing, he’s got a chance of keeping his job.  If not, let him go…!

Sorry Mark, but Simon Rafe said it himself - he was headed somewhere he shouldn’t go. He was entertaining a temptation and I’m surprised you don’t see that. It’s baloney to try to justify poor moral choices under the guise of “creative spirit” or “imagination”. If he, a prominant Catholic, is creating gaming, his gaming should reflect his Catholicity.  You are basically saying he needn’t be Catholic in the workplace. So perhaps you are ok with our politicians who push anti-Catholic legislation as well? Mr. Rafe says he is “equal opportunity” to homosexual acts in the game?  This is not like something that is read, which is bad enough, this is visual. The impact we now know is greater. It hurts souls. It hurts Christ.

I do believe that Rafe’s one of these “so called Catholics,” in name only.

And the subculture of Phariseeism Mr. Voris does so much to foster continues to eat its own.  Now even an RCTV employee, penitent for his blunder and eager to serve the Church, is to be purged from the ranks of the Church by the Combox Sanhedrin of the Purely Pure.  What an ugly, merciless parody of the gospel.

So perhaps you are ok with our politicians who push anti-Catholic legislation as well?

Right.  Exactly.  My defense of Simon Rafe and Michael Voris was an especially unconventional way of saying I want abortion, infanticide, gay marriage, child prostitution, and desecration of the Eucharist made compulsory under federal law.  Your charitable and insightful analysis has exposed me for the enemy of the Church I am.  Along with the rest of the fiends who run EWTN and The Register, we stand shoulder to shoulder in opposition to the Catholic Church and all its works and way.  Another disciple of Michael Voris has learned the clear lesson of his apostolate: you too can be judge, jury and executioner of the faith of your brother on the basis of the flimsiest logic.

THANK YOU!

As a huge fan of both fantasy and science-fiction works I greatly appreciate your analysis. I could not have said this better myself.

Mark, your responses are hilarious, and right on!

It’s sad that so many people are completely missing out on the point you are trying to make. I appreciate the insights in your writing, and I agree with your message.

Thanks!

Mr. Voris is not doing anything different than Catholic media such as the Catholic World report and the Wanderer. The Cardinal Newman society has a full time job exposing the heterodox apostate goings on at so called Catholic?! colleges like Notre Dame(IND), Marqutte, Georgetown and Santa Clara etc..J Brown of the Amer. Life League has her “Millstone” press awards for so called catholic clergy like Richard McBrien and ex catholic Dan Maquire. etc. etc.. While ex priest Corapi’s scurilous actions are despicable they pale in comparison to the Homosexual clergy misconduct apparntly by ARCHBISHOPS in Milwaukee(Weakland) and allegely in the Arch-Diocese of Miami. Not to mention how Arch-Bishop Mahoney of LA spent (before he thankfully retired) many MILLIONS of dollars in homosexual priest abuse payments to victims so he Mahony would not have to get on the stand and under oath in a court of law explain his scurilous role in Homosexual abuse-priestly misconduct scandals rampant in Stockton and LA Californa.