Some thoughts on Comments

Since allowing "anonymous" comments on this blog a few years ago, the number of comments has increased significantly. Debate has been robust at times, to be sure. I have very few rules in the combox, they are posted where you leave a comment. I don't believe in a lot of "rules," but it did become necessary to moderate and not allow comments to be published, automatically.

There are a few commenters that some others find frustrating. I appreciate their insights and the insights of those who rebut them. In the case of one, he allows me to become more circumspect, no matter how frustrating he seems. I allow sedevacantists because, while I don't adhere to their position at all, I understand their pain and believe we need to speak together and reason together. They are Catholics every bit as much as the SSPX and those who attend regular parishes. All of us are upset about the state of the Church but we cannot keep attacking each other. We know where the enemies are, let's save the attacks for them.  

I wish to address another matter.

A commenter, under the "anonymous" name has been here for quite a while. A number of months ago, I wrote to him in the box to go away, that he "bored" me. He did for a while. 

A few weeks ago, he left a comment one night on a matter that could not have been known by anyone but a priest. I was already aware of the situation, so the news did not come as a surprise to me. What came a surprise was that a commenter to this blog also knew and would have the temerity to publicly state it. It was quickly determined that because he knew and because of the language employed, the commenter was a priest.

I did not post his comment (and will not discuss the matter). suffice to say, it was a disgraceful and sinful revelation about a brother of his, another priest. It was a disgusting and vile sin of detraction and gossip. It was an attempt on his part to destroy another and use me as the tool to do it.

He has found out that I am nobody's tool, and nobody's fool.

His comments became more numerous, and except for a few when he stopped attacking his brother and kept the comment to the post, I did not publish any of what he left. He became more angry over being ignored and STARTED WRITING IN CAPITALS, the equivalent of screaming. The more I ignored him, the more angry, he became. His comments will not be published, ever. It was not a difficult exercise through my StatCounter, to make some determinations.

One might say, "don't let him live in your brain." Yes, I agree. He does not. What does live in my brain is the fact that the commenter, a priest and alleged self-described canonist, is using my combox as a vehicle to attack a brother priest and disclose private information that is nobody's business. It is repugnant and it is evil.

When this writer comments on a priest, it is about what he might say or write or do in public; - there is a massive difference.  

As for my anonymous canonist friend, he knows what he can do.