Off and on over the last few years, a friend of mine has sent me several of Michael Voris' videos. I'm not sure what to make out of this character but he, for some reason, makes me uncomfortable. For years, it's been my understanding that he criticizes bishops nonstop. But, the pope: hands off. If one is going to do a favour to Catholics why not tell them the whole Truth instead of pretending that everything is just peachy in the Vatican.

In my mind, this whole "Vortex" business smells of Vatican II hypocrisy. The whole crowd seems like N.O. Catholics pretending to be "traditionalists". It's no small wonder then, that Voris and company have this huge high-tech studio in Michigan which is funded by some millionaire who, some have said, has laid-down guidelines of what can be reported and not reported. I don't know if any of this is true, but still and all, being a Traditionalist, the whole thing has a bit of a dead fish odour.

Comments?

While I have various problems with things that Michael Voris has said, it is important to accurately describe his issues with ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ behaviour.  Here is a description in his own words:

I have never made a secret that my life prior to my reversion was extremely sinful. I have said many times — in public — that I was in a state of mortal sin, and had I died, I would have been damned. I also revealed these sins were of a sɛҳuąƖ nature and that they occurred over a prolonged period of time. I did not reveal the specific nature or details of the sins, because when I returned home to the Church, I did not think that a full public confession of details was necessary in order to start proclaiming the great mercy of God.
Perhaps that was a wrong assessment. I don't seriously know. Perhaps along these years I should have been revealing of greater detail. That, I now think so, but more on that in a moment.
Whatever the matter, I will now reveal that for most of my years in my thirties, confused about my own sɛҳuąƖity, I lived a life of live-in relationships with ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ men. From the outside, I lived the lifestyle and contributed to scandal in addition to the sɛҳuąƖ sins. On the inside, I was deeply conflicted about all of it. In a large portion of my twenties, I also had frequent sɛҳuąƖ liaisons with both adult men and adult women.
These are the sins of my past life in this area which are all now publicly admitted and owned by me. That was before my reversion to the Faith.

https://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/limiting-god

He repented of his sins and turned away from them.  He has not been an active ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ during the time he was involved in Catholic ministry.  

The whole crowd seems like N.O. Catholics pretending to be "traditionalists". 

One sometimes sees this position called "neo-conservative".  Unfortunately that can be confusing since this term can also refer to a political position.

Why are you telling me something I already know? I've watched that video. I still stand by what I wrote in my first post. I see from your spelling you must be from the UK: correct? if so, Iechyd da!

I thought that people unfamiliar with the situation might be confused by Last Tradhican's words:

He admits to being a flaming ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. What more do we need to know.

This could be misunderstood as saying that Mr. Voris is still an active ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ.  As a person with a lot of sins in my past,  I like to make a clear distinction between past repented sins and current ones.  My assessment of his "ministry" is similar to your own.

I am not from the UK; I'm Canadian.  

I thought that people unfamiliar with the situation might be confused by Last Tradhican's words:
This could be misunderstood as saying that Mr. Voris is still an active ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ.  As a person with a lot of sins in my past,  I like to make a clear distinction between past repented sins and current ones.  My assessment of his "ministry" is similar to your own.

I am not from the UK; I'm Canadian.  

"My assessment of his "ministry" is similar to your own".

What cheek! I don't have a "ministry" and if I did, it wouldn't be anything like Voris' I can assure you of that. Furthermore, I don't need to be taught about the distinction between past sins that are forgiven and current ones. YOU like to make distinctions as though I'm so stupid that I do not. You seem to be a rather haughty person, sniff, sniff.

"My assessment of his "ministry" is similar to your own".

What cheek! I don't have a "ministry" and if I did, it wouldn't be anything like Voris' I can assure you of that. Furthermore, I don't need to be taught about the distinction between past sins that are forgiven and current ones. YOU like to make distinctions as though I'm so stupid that I do not. You seem to be a rather haughty person, sniff, sniff.

Well if that's your reaction when I  tell you that I agree with you, I don't want to see what you would do if I were to disagree.  

He repented of his sins and turned away from them.  He has not been an active ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ during the time he was involved in Catholic ministry.  

I'm not sure that I believe that.  I don't completely trust him to be sincere in the views he promotes on his show and never have.  He strikes me as an actor who started up this show as a way to make a career of it for himself.  And, if that's the case, his alleged repentance can be questioned as well.  Basically, my general impression of him ... just a gut feel ... is that he is not to be trusted.  Reformed active ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ is like a reformed alcoholic or reformed crack addict.  I wouldn't let my kids near him.

I'm not sure that I believe that.

"I'm not sure that I believe that".

It's interesting that you should say that since I was provided with some links by Nadir. In watching the one where this Shoebat, who appears to be a bit looney, was interviewing Voris about Milo being on his show. Why in Heaven's name would Voris have an unapologetic poofter like Milo on his program? I listened to Voris' squirm as he tried to justify his reasons for doing so. Seems a bit suspicious to me, what?