Tuesday, 28 January 2020

Time to censor Bishop Robert Barron

Dear Bob,

It has come to my attention that you wish to take over as the new President of the Internet.

Please note, dearest Bob, that it has been tried.

He was found wanting and is no more to be found walking the corridors of power.

It can happen again.



https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/bishop-barron-wants-more-control-over-catholic-social-media

13 comments:

Tom A. said...

If the conciliar church were actually Catholic then they should censor Catholic media. But they are a false religion and thus have no authority over Catholic media.

M. Prodigal said...

Fame and fortune are extremely spiritually damaging to most priests who achieve it. Ven. Fulton Sheen was a big exception but then he was very faithful and made his daily holy hours and loved our Blessed Lady and Our Blessed Lord deeply.

Tom A. said...

And then he started saying the Novus Ordo and went all for ecumenism.

TH2 said...

Now that Rosica is out of the picture (temporarily?), someone has to take up the persecuting "Catholic media" torch and lay it on hard to the scoundrels dwelling down in the dregs of the Catholic blogosphere. Unlike the "in your face" approach of Rosica, Barron is more snake-like and subtle mannerism and tactics, which in some ways is even more pernicious. Maybe this newfangled ladder-climber - and, oh!, what a charmer he is - should retain the vilifying services of Monsieur George "show me the money" Wiegel... JPII - we luv you, Vatican II whoop dee doo, separation of church and state is so great, you Traditionalists are filled with hate!

Hope your recovery is going well, Mr. Vox

Anonymous said...

Spot on comment keep blogging!

Kathleen1031 said...

I really can't stand fascists. What they can't control they censor.
It's so off-putting. To think I once liked his "Catholicism" series. Boy, these times have certainly revealed who we can trust and who we can't.
Democrats have become familiar now with the idea that they can't win in the court of public opinion because their ideas stink, so all they have left is tyranny. It's unattractive in the secular world but in the church it's really hideous. What do you fear, Bishop Barron. Loss of position and status?
Hopefully that will happen to all you Francis-men.

peasant said...

Hey Asshole,
"Dear Bob" is not how we address a Bishop in the Holy Catholic Church. You may have won in a bout with a priest who was in error but that did not bestow infallibility on you. Bishops are the "law givers" in their diocese or area of jurisdiction, you therefore as a member of the laity need to obey and submit to the authority. We, perhaps not you, but we believe that the bishops of the Holy Catholic Church are the successors of the apostles who were taught by Our Blessed Lord and who first received the Holy Ghost resting on them as tongues of flame at Pentecost.

Johnno said...

I have many censor-able things to say about Mr. Eloquent Ambiguity's commie idea.

At least when the Church had the Index they had to explain and define why, something these suckers can't do, because this ain't about protecting us from heresy. It's about covering up their rear ends.

Vox Cantoris said...

My dear Piss-ant

Allow me to respond more fully on the calibre of these holy sodomite and malfeastant episcopal rats with the words of Michael Voris.

"So let's play Barron's little game with him here, shall we? Let's talk about the bishops sitting down and making their list of "baddies" on social media.
So which bishops is he talking about — Michael Olson in Fort Worth, who a lawsuit revealed wants to torture and kill a priest in quick-drying cement?
How about Michael Hoeppner in Crookston. Minnesota, who got caught lying on videotape deposition in a sex abuse cover-up case he had to pay millions to settle?
Or does he mean the lying, cheating Richard Malone of Buffalo, who is still a bishop, who got secretly recorded plotting a cover-up? Is he on the list of bishops deciding who earns the Good Housekeeping Seal of approval for Catholics on social media?
Let's stay in New York for a moment. Would Cdl. Timothy Dolan, whose list of crimes against the faithful is so long, it would take a four-volume set to cover just the last year, qualify? (Remember gays in the St. Patrick's Day parade, lying about gay-for-pay-hiring Fr. Peter Miqueli, a palatial pad he took for himself in upstate New York?) Does any of that disqualify him, or is just being in the "bishop club" the only box he needs to check?
How about Arthur Serratelli of Patterson, New Jersey — involved in more gay crap than a gay bar on a Friday night? Or maybe include Henry Mansell, who funneled a South American gay seminarian pipeline right into the seminary in Buffalo? Or perhaps it should be his long-time auxiliary, Edward Grosz, who covered up so much filth he has the nickname, "the blanket"?

How about Donald Wuerl — would he be on the committee ruling which Catholic websites were "safe" for Catholics to go to? He lied about McCarrick and covered up that monster's crimes, so presumably, he knows a lot about good and bad. He might even be elected to lead the committee!
How about the former archbishop of Miami, John Favalora, who got bounced from his post by Pope Benedict for being waist-deep in gay filth, including recruiting for seminarians in gay bars in Miami via a gay publication circulated in the night clubs?
How about any of the bishops who are now being sued by faithful Catholics for defrauding Catholics all over the country of tens of millions through the annual Peter's Pence collection, which they falsely portrayed as going to the poor, which it didn't?
Would the USCCB's second in command, Detroit's Allen Vigneron, make the cut and be on the list — the same archbishop whose own staffers publicly say is terrified of all the homosexual priests in his diocese (the ones who say the "gay Mass" each Sunday night in his archdiocese, which he permits?)
Why not include Vigneron, who defames a perfectly good, traditional priest — Fr. Eduard Perrone — with charges that the supposed accuser admits never happened? Vigneron and his gay cabal running Detroit have known this for months, and yet he lets the defamation continue — that, while at the same time, he's busy stashing away tens (if not hundreds) of millions by shifting assets around like mad, hiding them. He seems like a good fit to tell Catholics which other Catholics are to be avoided on social media.
Or maybe it could be Wilton Gregory in Washington, D.C., who was put in place to cover Wuerl, who covered McCarrick? He certainly knows his way around from his days as Bernardin's gay frontman.
Or what about Michael Bransfield — even though he got caught by The Washington Post for homosexual assault of seminarians and thieving untold millions for a lavish lifestyle in the poorest of dioceses in the country? It seems like he'd do well telling all of us who is unacceptable to listen to.

Vox Cantoris said...

Continued ….

"Or how about Bp. Barron himself, who almost always has in tow a couple of body-builder producers who still to this day have up all over social media some pictures which leave little to the imagination. Hey, the past is the past, but have you ever told them to take them down now, or is that part of the Word on Fire online presence? What would people think if a priest had female workers who had pictures of themselves from a prior life scantily clad? Why does Barron get a pass on this?
Cupich seems like a good candidate because virtually everything he says is opposed by faithful Catholics online, so he probably already has a good working list of Catholic social media "baddies." Of course, Newark's ecclesiastical behemoth Joseph Tobin falls right in line with Cupich, since they were both advanced by McCarrick. They could work well with Wuerl in coming up with an accurate list.
They could be joined by Robert McElroy in San Diego, who never met a pre-born human whose slaughter he ever thought was a pre-eminent moral issue.
One wonders on this list of "baddies," who might be excluded, right? Will all the social media accounts of Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, Joe Biden and so forth — who are always touting their "Catholic" faith — will they get a pass and be given the green light?"

St. Benedict's Thistle said...

Thank you for your two-part comment, Vox.

If a heretical, even idolatrous hierarchy is considered Catholic, then so must everyone who calls themself Catholic. The understanding of what it means to be a Catholic will be destroyed unless the bishops take action...or the Lord returns.

Anonymous said...

Bishop Barron represents the worst of our enemies: intelligent, subtle, charming, and an expert alchemist who mixes with sweet mead a few drops of deadly doctrinal venom. His frequent presence on the Thomas Aquinas campus in Santa Paula, California---a glorious experiment in orthodox Catholic higher education gone sour in the name of being on good terms with the hierarchy---is the reason I no longer support that otherwise fine college.

Anonymous said...


"They make themselves up like little holy cards, looking up at heaven as they pray, making sure they are seen!"

Pope Francis