Voris Warns Fans: DO NOT Read J. Vennari or M. Matt!


Hat tip to ECS and others, years back, who called this Opie Dopie-funded “newsman” out…

Quote from Voris’ web page article:

“It is our judgment that most Catholics should not read articles and essays such as those above by Christopher A. Ferrara and John Vennari, nor similarly themed articles and essays available elsewhere. We also believe that such articles and essays should not be published anywhere for public consumption but, rather, reserved for those capable of reading such without risk of damaging their faith in the Church and the Vicar of Christ. We make these recommendations for the same reasons that we discourage people from visiting sedevacantist and pornography web sites: they are potential occasions of sin…

Get AQ Email Updates

40 comments on “Voris Warns Fans: DO NOT Read J. Vennari or M. Matt!

  1. canadian.tradical on said:

    well that is interesting.

    however, they just neutered their apostolate ‘if’ the Pope is contributing to the crisis. I guess they do not like some of the Italian authors who have likewise been criticising the Pope – even though the Pope said it was ok and gave one of them a phone call.

    ultimately, they just announced that they are ‘yes’ men and if the Pope were to espouse heresy they would go along silently.


  2. Unfortunately, it appears Mr. Voris does not believe in the “circular firing squad” theory. He should understand that the Modernists will attempt to divide and conquer all those who stand up for Tradition and will employ many “useful idiots” in their quest.

  3. Voris is the front man for Marc Brammer who owns him and holds his leash. Marc Brammer is a member of Opus Dei and works in the financial arena where he has made his money. It is no surprise, at least to me, that Voris whose popularity and fan following has grown very large, has now turned on the trad sites which rightfully question and criicize Vatican II, the concilliar church and its popes.

    For LaVoris to label other websites who raise proper and coherent questions to statements heretical in nature by the Vatican and Bergoglio as “ecclesiastical porn” is disingenous and slanderous. For him to label the SSPX as “soft sede” is also slanderous. The Apostasy starts at the top and has been made clear by many Valid Apparitions of Our Blessed Mother at Fatima, Quito, Akita and elsewhere. To ignore Her warnings and Her solution to these ills that She clearly described which will and has plagued the Church in the 20th Century and which continues to this day is spiritual suicide. Voris is the Jim Jones of the Catholic Church and will lead his naive followers to a similar end. Our Blessed Mother has provided the solution which the clergy, Pope and Bishops must perform and also the means for the laity to follow in order to mitigate the chastisement we are currently just beginning to suffer. One can only do what one can do for the position in life God has placed them and with the graces received. One must discern that there is a Holy Catholic, Apostolic and Universal Church which is embodied by those who keep God’s laws, follow and love His Son and Mother of His Son which the gates of hell will not prevail against it. It is not the Church of human design and organization which has evolved through the years, corrupted by man and is currently in auto-destruction. Jesus seeks the spotless Bride.

  4. Mike is just a little confused about who the real enemies of Tradition are for it is not Christopher Ferrara and Michael Matt who are leading some catholics down the road to perdition. But, Mike is a graduate of Notre Dame U. in the 1980s and Lord knows what he was taught or learned there. May I suggest prayers in his behalf that he may rightly understand what it is that we are about here st AQ and all the other enclaves of true Catholicism.

  5. Yes he was Jebby trained in College at the Former Catholic Notre Dame University but he holds and is proud to display the STB behind his name for a Sacred Theology Baccalaureate, Pontifical University of Saint Thomas Aquinas (Angelicum, Rome), Magna Cum Laude.

    A little confused? Is that like being a little pregnant?

    He knows well the teachings of the Saints like Ligouri, Aquinas and others who clear state what is to be done when a pope teaches against the traditional magisterium of the Church.. He is dead wrong in this one and is placing his head in a location only a cartoonist could describe where the sun doesn’t shine. If he choses to do it for himself that’s fine, but he has put his followers who live and died at each of his words in with him by dictatorially telling them wrongly to avoid the “ecclesiatical porn” written by some very learned people far more educated in the faith than he. He should be pummelled with fists until he retracts his statement and he is silent.

  6. Nothing like insulting and alienating the small minority of Catholics who actually agree with much of what you say. Even the legendary Piers Morgan couldn’t manage that. Well done.

    • LOL!!!

      As I picture black helos filled with snarling trads descending on scenic Detroit (although LaVoris is actually out of the office – conveniently – saving the Phillipines this week), your post has now given me the proper background music, St. Elmo…

      The title is “Suicide Is Painless”

  7. Btw, here is the document link from Voris’ own organization, sans the google docs link…


  8. Assume, for the sake of argument, that everything one learns from “ecclesiastical porn” sites and articles is true.

    Real classy, Voris.

  9. Well, I think he has a particular “cultish” NO following, a la Fr Corapi…..
    ( The shaggy sheep dog?)

    It was kind of John Venneri and the Remnant to include Voris as one of their speakers last September in West Virginia… live and learn. (Et tu Brutus?)

  10. Oops, that’s “et tu Brute”- just checked

  11. Knowing of Julius’ fighting spirit, Josefa, I’ll bet the ACTUAL word he chose before “…tu, Brute” was the Latin equivalent of an ol’ Anglo-Saxon epithet known to soldiers and sailors worldwide!

    Which same expression may likely be found in some correspondence headed to Detroit, even as we speak!

    Btw, a pal who sent The Remnant a blistering condemnation of Voris’ ignorant vituperations had it yanked from their web page. (Sailors! Heh heh heh!)

    It will be interesting to see how Messrs. Ferrara and Vennari respond. (Heh heh heh!)

  12. Don’t really like the source, (CNA) but Simon Rafe, who works for Church Militant TO THIS DAY, has apparently acknowledged and apologized for this bizarre sexual web role playing. I’m sure it was religious, huh?. ( the offending material was scrubbed)
    Now I’m a forgiving person, but is this type of porn OK with Church Militant, or is it only Catholic “porn” that’s a problem?? Why was this “gent” not fired? There is temporal punishment in this world, y’ know Mike)

    “Voris was equally surprised by evidence showing that his staff apologist and program host Simon Rafe – who is the webmaster at St. Michael’s Media, and co-authored its “Saint Michael’s Basic Training” apologetics course – had also written the “adult” role-playing game “Castle Dracula,” and fan-fiction depicting homosexuality in the Star Wars universe.

    “I don’t know anything about this,” said Voris, when presented with descriptions of the works and evidence of Rafe’s authorship.

    As recently as August 15, (2011) the website batcave.co.uk hosted the text of “Castle Dracula: A Tunnels & Trolls Solo Adventure by Simon Rafe.” Signed and dated “Simon ‘The Darknight’ Rafe, Baptism of Our Lord, 2010,” the work contains a paragraph vividly describing a sexual encounter with “a beautiful Elven woman” revealed to be “Asrel, the goddess of love, life, health, healing, beauty and sex.”

    Rafe gives the player a series of options in the scenario: “If you would like strength and vitality, turn to 70. If you would like health and life, turn to 383. If you would like true love, turn to 467. If you would like sex appeal, turn to 203. If you would like sexual potency, turn to 366. If you would like make love to the goddess (even if you are female – Asrel is an equal-opportunity lover!), turn to 11.”

  13. I am probably going to upset a few people by my comments here, but I would like to say I can see both sides in this debate. I know a person who sits on the fence can end up with a sore backside but let me put the two cases.

    Firstly Michael Voris has been a consistent defender of the teachings of the Church and has steadfastly gone after numerous bishops, priests and others who have betrayed the faith. I think it is unfair to downplay this or suggest he is, in any way, in the same category as the weak-kneed theologians and bureaucrats who ignore every heresy going on in the diocese for the sake of so called peace.

    The Church Militant article makes a point of saying that the Pope is not perfect and it further specifically says that they are not ultramontanist. Even more significantly, you will note that they do not dispute the various charges made against Pope Francis by the traditionalists.

    Does all this mean I am simply siding with the Michael Voris position and saying we must not criticise the Pope.

    No, I am not taking that position. I am simply trying to say I understand the position Michael Voris has chosen and I can understand his reasons. I am disappointed that the Church Militant article chose to tell people not to read The Remnant. It argues that this sort of writing is like ecclesiastical “porn”. By this it seems to mean that it can lead the weak astray into abandoning the faith. I find this puzzling because I find Michael Matt not only excellent in his comments on current Church issues but always very respectful and diplomatic.

    The second position is that taken by numerous traditionalists that Pope Francis is a bit of a disaster and has said and done numerous things that have belittled traditional Catholic faith, worship and teachings and have played straight into the hands of a left wing secular Catholic hating media. With this, I must admit, I completely agree.

    What follows though is the question as to what tactics should or may be used to deal with this problem.

    Michael Voris sees it as wrong to directly criticise the Pope. The Church Militant article argues that this could weaken the faith of many and drive them into alternatives to the Catholic Church. Given the appalling state of the Catholic knowledge and faith of many ordinary Catholics today, I think Michael’s concern may be legitimate. Look at the numerous Catholics leaving the Church for Protestant denominations. Will a public attack on the Pope from within the Church help arrest this loss or simply make it worse?

    I can give the example her of my own father. He is an agnostic, who in recent years has been very impressed with my daughter becoming a Carmelite nun and with the love and welcome he has been shown by the whole community of Sisters at her Carmel. I took this opportunity to give him a book on the Catholic Faith to read which he did. Soon after, at a family gathering, he made some comment about how good the new Pope was and how he was telling the Church not to be obsessed by abortion and homosexuality. I inwardly groaned and cursed the day Francis was chosen Pope.

    However, outwardly I did not attack the Pope. Because, as I think Michael Voris is possibly saying, that if we attack the Pope in view of the world, we are being seen to attack the Church itself. That’s what the world would see. They would not understand the nuances of what constitutes Papal Infallibility compared to the errors (possibly numerous) in a Pope’s personal life or daily comments. That, I think, is how my father would have seen any criticism I made of the Pope, and he would have been puzzled, because he knows I am a loyal and committed Catholic. My father did not grow up a Catholic and knows little of its recent history so there is no way I could tell him about the general chaos since Vatican II and the internal betrayals and deceptions without turning him right off the Church.

    There is an old saying, “Don’t air your dirty washing in public.” The world would not see our criticisms of Pope Francis as defence of Catholic Faith. Rather they will see it as internal tribal squabbling and the old nasty, right wing conservatives versus nice loving, fair minded liberal progressives.

    The Church Militant article says:
    “A line must be drawn when it comes to criticism of the Holy Father, even when he says or does things that would invite appropriate criticism when said or done by those of lower ecclesiastical rank. Errant priests and bishops can be replaced. The Pope cannot. It may make us cringe at times but it always was and always will be true that ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia. There have been extraordinarily awful Popes in the past but, for all that, the Church not only survived but thrived. The Popes immediately before, during and after the Protestant Revolt showed little recognition or understanding of the catastrophe unfolding before them (not unlike the post-conciliar Popes of our own time) yet, from such unpromising soil emerged an astonishing number of great Saints, and the Council of Trent.”

    This basically summarises their position.

    However, I can also say that I personally believe Pope Francis has done damage to Catholic teaching on faith, morals and the liturgy. I believe his actions and comments have been at times, not thought out, superficial and even insulting to those fighting for the faith. I have winced at many of the things he has done.

    And I do not believe that we can simply remain silent about this.

    What on earth am I suggesting as a solution? To be honest, apart from massive prayer, I don’t know.

    Perhaps something I read on the American Society for the Defence of Tradition Family and Property website may be a step in the right direction. It was an open letter to Pope Francis from Prince Bertrand of Orleans Braganza in which he expressed his concern about the Pope’s welcoming of Argentinean communists into the Vatican with a farewell message to “Carry on.” This was another case of Pope Francis doing something that could be massively misunderstood and cause real confusion of message. The way the TFP handled it was by publishing a well worded, totally polite, open letter from the Prince to the Pope.

    Is this a possible method of trying to deal with this problem? Could well written, polite, but explicit, open letters to the Pope, published on suitable websites be one way of trying to get the Pope to understand the harm some of his actions and statements is doing?

    I don’t know. But I think we must avoid attacking other faithful Catholics who have chosen not to publically criticise the Pope. We may not agree with their decision but we need to work with them not against them.

    • “Errant priests and bishops can be replaced. The Pope cannot. It may make us cringe at times but it always was and always will be true that ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia.”

      Surely, this is no longer true – we now have the precedent of a Pope resigning because he’s not up to the job. If the last one can validly go early, why not this one?

  14. Michael Voris used the terms “pornography” re: Chris Ferrara and Michael Matt and “soft sedes”, (a lie,) regarding the SSPX.- If all he wanted to do is stop criticizing the Pope, he should stop criticizing the Pope- simple as that. But he should have never named others that have attempted to accept him and” bring him in” so to speak and to stop reading them!!! ( Is he the “Minister of Truth” or something? Seems very authoritarian to me) -CFN and The Remnant have worked unceasingly to expose the Truth and inform us, the faithful, on the state of Tradition and the reality of the NO Church.l. His terminology was unnecessary, pointed and hateful.
    Mr Voris is a full fledged member of the Church of “nice” now , but not very nice himself.
    He put himself out there with this article. Did he expect powde rpuffs and roses?

  15. If the watchman is not doing his job, then who will?

  16. Fidei, I think it is reprehensible for your father to warm up to the Church under false pretenses, i.e., that abortion and homosexuality are not worthy of obsessive opposition. Embracing falsehood is never the path to Truth. Nudging someone along in small increments is frequently the way to go, but not if the person is going after a carrot that’s not really there.

    Simple Jorge must be opposed at every juncture when he deviates from Catholic thought. Michael Voris should be opposed (or better yet, ignored) principally because he’s an unctuous, self-promoting tool with a protty mindset, but also because he leads people away from the honest truth, as presented by Matt, Vennari, and the SSPX. It would be one thing if he were simply saying “I refuse to criticize the Pope”, but he’s going WAY beyond that in attacking those who he sees as competitors for the Catholic dollar.

  17. Voris and EWTN are a few of the leading neo-Catholic voices who will attack anyone who questions Jorge, Vatican II, or the conciliar church. These people are to be ignored. If only Mother Angelica were still in charge at EWTN, things might be alot different.

    • Si! By now, it would be a daily Latin Mass there, I’ve no doubt.

      The nogoodniks “disappeared” her just in the nick of time. The gulf between her and the libs and the pack of ex-prot “superstars” and professional managers was growing. Read about it in Chris Ferrara’s “EWTN: A Network Gone Wrong.”

      Anyway, Doug Keck, Colin Donovan, Scott Hahn and Raymond Arroyo and their comfy six-figure salaries (supported in many cases by undoubtedly very poor Catholics) have at last made that network “Safe for (the) Democracy (of the dense.)”

      • Yes, very true. The sad and scary thing is many people that I know view modern EWTN as being “traditional” or “conservative” which is dangerous. I’ve always viewed neo-Catholicism and its adherents,(many of them you rightly mentioned above), as more dangerous or just as dangerous as the Walter Kasper, Hans Kung liberal crowd. I say that because the neo-Catholics are more numerous in people and media, where the libs aren’t imo. I think Mother Angelica should someday be looked at in the proper way as someone who might be canonized. She did alot for spreading the traditional Catholic faith and starting EWTN, even though now her network has gone bad, which wasn’t her fault.

      • I read that the last live show that Mother ever did, was when she stated she felt that the entire third secret (of Fatima) was NOT totally revealed after the Bertone pronouncements in 2000…(.Bye bye Mother?). of course this is just speculation

  18. There are so many things to say about this topic, so I’ll just post a few thoughts.

    I know people who attended the SSPX apostolate and have left to go sede and conservative NO. I know some who were supportive of the SSPX then when sede then joined the resistance group and are now back with the SSPX even though things aren’t perfect. They need the mass and sacraments from valid priests and the TLM.
    As a Legionary of Mary I’ve seen people go every which way with most people simply not interested in the least in religion.

    I came to Tradition about 9 1/2 years ago with my parents and my children after being brought up in the NO and learning not much of anything regarding the Faith. We’re meant to know our Faith and constantly be growing in it. Our love for God and His Church needs to be lived and seen. Part of that is explaining why we don’t do everything the Pope says.

    We were born in this age for a reason. How do we live and spread the Faith in this technological age if we only focus on the PC stuff? I’ve been reading both The Remnant and CFN since we came to Tradition. I miss these papers when they aren’t available to me. The late Joe Sobran, Timothy Cullen, Susan Claire Potts, etc… are good reads. The next generation works on these papers, too. These papers are one of the ways for us to stay grounded and connected especially when things are so crazy. Ideally, we’d have priests at least overseeing these publications so we’d know they were writing with the mind of the Church. Traditional priests are unfortunately too busy while most of the establishment priests don’t seem to care so this is what we’ve got to work with.

    I’ve met people who really think the Pope (whoever he is at a particular moment) is infallible and to be obeyed. We’ve got to explain why that isn’t the case the same way we explain other aspects of the Faith. True Charity means we call out homosexuality so the error can be corrected and the person put on the path to heaven. The Pope needs to be called out when he’s leading people down the wrong path with his bad example or reckless words so he can correct his error and show people the path to God. Does this fall under the sin of omission if we don’t say anything?

    Since there are so few laborers, we need the newspapers to help us reach souls just as the Legion of Mary are the foot soldiers of a priest.

    One of many things that sticks in my mind from these papers is from Susan Claire Potts. She was not a Catholic growing up but was friends with a few Catholic girls at school. She loved to hear them talk about heaven and such. She wanted to go there,too, but they told her she couldn’t because she wasn’t Catholic. She said she needed to be Catholic which took her until she was in college, but she finally converted. Ever since, she’s remembered those little nine year old friends and thanks them for their gift. If I remember correctly ,the sisters in their habits made a huge impression on her too. She thought they were angels and was sad and missed them when they disappeared.

  19. et cum spirit,
    I found your comments about my father hurtful in the extreme. You said: “Fidei, I think it is reprehensible for your father to warm up to the Church under false pretenses, i.e., that abortion and homosexuality are not worthy of obsessive opposition. Embracing falsehood is never the path to Truth. Nudging someone along in small increments is frequently the way to go, but not if the person is going after a carrot that’s not really there.”

    Surely you understand that converting someone is NOT easy. I cannot make my father become Catholic. But your language e.g. reprehensible, false pretences etc shows a lack of understanding about what years of being agnostic and a growing up a non Catholic can do. Of course I am afraid for my father’s immortal soul. Of course I want him to know the full truth of the Catholic faith, but if I go charging in like you seem to want with a totally judgemental attitude and contempt for how he might “warm up to the Church” I will lose his interest altogether.

    It is not for nothing that Our Lord said I will make you fishers of men.

    We need a zeal for the Faith but it must be accompanied by intelligent love.

  20. I understand the concern re: thepotential loss of a family member’s soul,( I’m sure most of us are in the same boat, one way or another) but I always felt it was the the Holy Spirit , the spiration of Truth from the Father and the Son ,that imparts the genuine conversion we all so desire for our loved ones. Of course we are here to promote this, but falsity, no matter how attractive to a person on any level at any given moment, will not convert the soul, even if the objective is good.The end never justifies the means.. I personally have given up on trying to coax people with something that they might find appealing in a natural way, and just give them the unvarnished Truth- even if it makes them angry in the moment.. It can only ring true in their souls, and cannot be ignored. So along with much prayer to Our Lady for the graces needed to convert the particular soul, and by example, I think that is the best we can do..
    I think the reason that Catholics leave the (NO) Faith and go to other denominations is that the lack of sensible understanding of truth is gone , and that spiritual emptiness is a vacuum, constantly seeking fulfillment somewhere.
    As for the Pope, when he is in error it must be corrected! Error has no rights – Otherwise all those who are attracted to error will be lost.
    )Adoro te is so right about educating people about the truth of infallibility and obedience)

  21. I have never “sold the Church as something it is not” nor will I ever do that. I do not water down the teachings of the Church or pretend they weren’t there. My father knows my views on abortion and on homosexuality.

    I merely pointed out that to have launched into an attack on the Pope after my father’s remark would have been totally counterproductive. As an outsider having no knowledge of the Church’s internal workings, all my father would have perceived was that Catholics are as divided as all the other religions he has read about. It would not have helped him to conversion. Hitting people over the head with a sledgehammer rarely works.

    I am also concerned that a number of people are saying that Michael Voris is a prot etc. That is ridiculous. Voris has continually, aggressively defended Catholic teaching as for example when he took on Fr Barron about nobody being in Hell.

    Voris may be wrong in the view of many for not criticising the Pope, and he went way over the top in calling The Remnant “religious porn”. I think he was trying to say that websites like The Remnant are only for those strong in their faith and could cause the weak to turn to false solutions. Criticise him for that by all means, but do not put him in the same basket as Protestants or liberal Catholics. That is unfair and destructive.

    I think some of you need to listen again to Michael Matt’s comments about the divisions among conservative Catholics and how it is damaging the fight for the faith.

    I think some here are upset that Michael Voris has not joined SPPX, or that he won’t criticise the Pope. Some people have a tendency to instantly demonise someone if they don’t totally accept their view as to how to solve the crisis the Church is facing.

    This is unfair and counterproductive. Not all of us will see the solution to the crisis the same way but we need each other and we need to be in communication.

    • I am truly touched by your love and concern for your Father’s soul. You are to be commended.

      But Voris is still a tool. Refusing to criticize the Pope? O.K., that’s his choice. Shunning others because they don’t see it the same way? Jerky at best.

    • It seems to me that there is a third option besides “launching into an attack on the Pope” or letting error go uncorrected. Is it an “attack on the Pope” to simply say that Pope Francis’ words are being interpreted and reported by an anti-Catholic media, whose members are prone to taking words out of context in pursuit of their own agenda? (Although in some of these cases, I think this is letting him off much too easily) Is it an attack even to say that his communication skills need some work?

      I also disagree that the doctrine of papal infallibility is all that “nuanced”. It is a very narrowly defined thing, and even without going into great detail, it’s a simple matter to distinguish between a pope’s personal opinions, offhand comments, or even statements made in an interview (Catholic doctrine has never been defined via interviews) and solemn pronouncements of doctrine. Anyone who claims to not be able to grasp these distinctions is either not wanting to make these distinctions, or has some serious mental deficiencies.

      For example, if Pope Francis in an interview for some reason says that it’s going to rain in Cleveland on April 1 of this year, and it doesn’t rain in Cleveland on that day, does this disprove papal infallibility? Of course not — this is not a matter covered under this doctrine. And what about his infamous “Who am I to judge?” remark? Is it an “attack” to say that this was (at best) a very poor way to say that even he is not the final judge of the disposition of the souls of others? There is a very clear and large difference between this and “Whoa! The guy’s a flaming heretic!”

      Another thing to point out, especially in these post-Conciliar times (including especially the documents of V-II itself), is that ambiguity can never be infallible. Similarly, any papal pronouncement that requires a substantial “clarification” or extensive explanations (“Well… you see…. what the Holy Father really meant to say was…”) is likewise unlikely to have been an infallible pronouncement.

  22. After an hour of Adoration this morning, I had some more thoughts.

    What did those in earlier days do regarding newspapers and such? Phaley and others probably can tell us. I know Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton headed the American Ecclesiastical Review and The Wanderer was looked after by Walter Matt, but was there some set of guidelines?

    Being post VII and not having learned logic and such things, are we framing this argument correctly?

    With the excommunicated Catholics such as Pelosi and Cuomo constantly saying how good Pope Francis is don’t we have to speak up and explain why we’re concerned about his words and actions? He doesn’t even want to be called Pope, but rather just the Bishop of Rome.

  23. Adoro te, since pre-Revolutionary days, American newspapers, including certain Catholic examples, have been incendiary, polemical and downright nasty at times, to say nothing of deficient concerning facts. It’s perhaps one of the few actual “traditions” we have as a nation, along with a universal idolatry towards booze, federalized embezzlement of one’s neighbor and big bucks buckaroo-ism.

    Concerning the AER, as you know but other readers here might not, Msgr. Fenton did his doctoral dissertation under Fr. Garrigou-LeGrange, OP and foresaw what was coming as far back as the 1950s – warning any clergy that would consider his evidence and his arguments against what did, in fact, end up hijacking the entire intellectual apparatus of the Vatican and the Council, beginning in 1962. He was paid insufficient heed, attended the Council’s first session, returned home, in the words of John Vennari, a “broken man” and immediately resigned as editor of the AER, retiring to a New England parish where he soon after passed away. Msgr. Fenton’s prodigious scholarly output, defining Church doctrine with impeccable clarity and precision in the face of growing enemy forces (the very ones still lauded to this day by the conciliar popes and other conciliar movers and shakers still walking the earth), taken alongside the highly significant contributions of Fr. David Greenstock and Fr. Edward Hanahoe (also published in AER), constitute a memorial to the last days of Catholic theological genius at work in everyday life.

    One of the major intellectual gifts a wealthy Catholic might wish to underwrite would be a compendium of those articles, by all three priests, with a suitable commentary by a board of skilled traditional-minded theologians and scholars.

    If they read it and took it seriously, it would literally silence Bergoglio and his banditos. But they won’t and are most likely unable to ever do any such thing.

    As for the OLD Wanderer, it was a German Catholic paper of note and remains, I think, the oldest American Catholic newspaper in existence. Back in the 1960s, the Matt family, which published it, had a serious falling out and one of the relatives took off on his own and formed The Remnant which is today still published by his son, Michael Matt.

    As for standards, well – there you begin sailing into political waters, which has almost always been the case. The Council was, in my personal opinion, a very crafty political conspiracy involving all the usual suspects and its success in doing so much damage was largely due to the way it aped “authority” under the aegis of a newfound papalotry bent on shedding orthodoxy in the interest of ecumenism at any price. That fooled many good Catholics and still does.

    Which is why men like Mike Matt and John Vennari (who were definitely not fooled since they were of one mind and Catholic spirit with men like Msgr. Fenton – from the beginning) can invariably be relied upon for hard-hitting, honest, humbly stated and factually complete representations and explanations of current events in the Church and society.

  24. Looks like Michael is part of the circular firing squad.

  25. “What did those in earlier days do regarding newspapers and such? Phaley and others probably can tell us. I know Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton headed the American Ecclesiastical Review and The Wanderer was looked after by Walter Matt, but was there some set of guidelines?”

    The standard for me has always been Holy Scripture and the documents of the perennial magisterium. Whatever the local parish or diocese said had to be measured against Scripture and the Magisterium as it existed prior to 1962. After Vatican II it was obvious to me that there were differences in what the Modernists were saying from what the perennial magisterium had said, indeed what Holy Scripture said. I found a holy priest that had been ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1973 and found that he “spoke the Truth” regarding doctrine and the liturgy and I leaned more to the Remnant and Catholic Family News for keeping current on what was happening in the Church. But, my family, both immediate and extended, are split and some do not even practice the Faith despite my urgings to do so. So, it’s a personal commitment that one has to make in order to follow Tradition and you either have it or you don’t. If I hadn’t found this traditional priest years ago, I too may have been lost. I can say that the “institutional Church” offered little help in getting our children educated in the true Faith. And to this day, “the institutional Church” in the form of the local Ordinary withholds canonical recognition from this validly-ordained priest.

    The other part of the story is I attended parochial schools from grade one thru high school and a Catholic men’s college (at least it was at that time) and graduated in 1962 before Vatican II had done its damage. So, I had an advantage that even the rest of my family did not and was firmly grounded in the Faith. And I have a great amount of sympathy for those who are alienated from their Church by the very clergy that should be their shepherds.

Leave a Reply