I'm impressed with this guy. He's spot on on so many things. Take a look. This one first.

http://themattwalshblog.com/2013/09/15/dear-parents-you-need-to-control-your-kids-sincerely-non-parents/

It looks like his blog is really taking off. He's a few days shy of one year blogging and mentions having something like 5.5 million views in October. A post of his from a month ago on stay-at-home-moms has over 11,000 comments.

.

This wimp is taking women for a ride.  He doesn't believe what
he says, he just says it to be popular.  He knows how to push
your buttons and you like your buttons pushed, so he pushes.

He says he's an "introvert" and he's stuck in his tiny world and
people interrupt his subjective bliss with their small talk -- but
then he rambles on and on with small talk (just a little more on
one topic at a time) and women swoon over it.

That's all it is.


.

.

This wimp is taking women for a ride.  He doesn't believe what
he says, he just says it to be popular.  He knows how to push
your buttons and you like your buttons pushed, so he pushes.

He says he's an "introvert" and he's stuck in his tiny world and
people interrupt his subjective bliss with their small talk -- but
then he rambles on and on with small talk (just a little more on
one topic at a time) and women swoon over it.

That's all it is.


.

My husband likes his blog too. "Taking women for a ride?"  :sad:

You make me sad, Neil. He's very good.

He's a "christian" at the very least, and has a brother in some religious order, which would lead me to believe he might even be (at worst) a novus ordo catholic.

I just read most of the post from yesterday and thought certainly that he was NO Catholic when he used Father Kolbe's story as his example (there are not many protestants who would do that). But, then there was this:

many Christians in this country, in this day and age, are too afraid to even put “Christian” under “religion” on their Facebook profiles.

After writing that, it would be pretty hypocritical for him to be Catholic and not say so.

Quote from: Neil Obstat

.

This wimp is taking women for a ride.  He doesn't believe what
he says, he just says it to be popular.  He knows how to push
your buttons and you like your buttons pushed, so he pushes.

He says he's an "introvert" and he's stuck in his tiny world and
people interrupt his subjective bliss with their small talk -- but
then he rambles on and on with small talk (just a little more on
one topic at a time) and women swoon over it.

That's all it is.


.

My husband likes his blog too. "Taking women for a ride?"  :sad:

You make me sad, Neil. He's very good.

I haven't read much of his stuff, but I skipped over the two pages
that were linked in early posts here and I was not impressed.  

He has a cute style, and uses words well, has a certain charm and
wit about him, but it's all about feelings and subjectivism and his
impressions of other people (kind of like this post, actually!).  Much
of what he says is true, but it's his ruminating over emotions that
attracts women, it seems to me.

This appeals to a feminized culture, because it's not rooted in any
substantive doctrine.  Rather dressed-up psychobabble.  He seems
to be trying to defend being "introverted" but he's willing to come
out in the open as it were and share all these "introverted thoughts"
of his -- which in itself isn't very introverted, is it?  

That kid that just shot up LAX the other day they say was an
"introvert."  Classmates of his attest they never heard him say one
word in all the years he was in high school.  Hey, maybe he should
start a blog -- in prison!  If he lives, that is.

Try an exorcise, take one of his articles that you like, and remove
from it all of the mention of feelings he has about encounters with
other people and his consequent analysis and judgment of them,
and see what's left.  There won't be much at all, and it won't be
very interesting, if not unreadable.

.

Thanks for sharing, parentsfortruth.

The story of Maximillian Kolbe is a muddied one. There are plenty of saints out there for me to venerate that are real martyrs, and confessors. I question all of the post Vatican II saints that have come down the pike, not just Maximillian Kolbe.

I recognize Padre Pio as a saint, for instance, in spite of the fact that the newchurch has declared him one. There are so many believable accounts by so many different people about what he did that there's no reasonable question about his sanctity.

I doubt "Mother Teresa" was a saint, and I doubt "Jose Maria Escriva de Baliguer" was a saint either, among others, just to name a few.

By strict definition, Maximillian Kolbe didn't die for the Faith in the accounts made, which is why Paul the Sick made him a "confessor" rather than a martyr. Curious, considering Paul the Sick's Jєωιѕн ties. JPII was the one who "overruled" his decision and proclaimed him a "martyr." If the account be true, he died in someone else's stead, which doesn't make him officially a martyr, because martyrdom means you died for the Faith. I don't believe the stories coming out of Auchwitz, for obvious reasons.

And as I said, someday we'll know the truth about him, just as we'll know the truth about the other so-called "saints" that these last popes have proclaimed. But until then, I doubt the voracity of the official story about Maximillian Kolbe. I might be standing on my own here, but that's just my irrelevant opinion.