Saturday, 17 September 2016

On Comments


I am loathe to censor the combox, other than what one might expect for profanity, or something against the Faith, or as in the specific case of one priest from my own city who engages in personal attacks against me, everything is published. I have only asked one person never to comment here again, Lionel, because he continually accused me of not believing that there is no salvation outside the Church, it didn't matter what the topic was, that was his comment. 

Alas, I hear you.

Please, we get the point. Make your comment and please cease the constant challenge back. On the matter of sedevacantism, please, there is no need to argue that matter continually on each post to explain the situation. 


Please keep the comment on the matter of the specific post. 

There have been too many rabbit holes and people are falling into them.

Look, when the comment exceeds the actual blog post, I even wonder why the writer does not start their own blog. It's not hard. Blogger is pretty easy, though if I were starting today, I might use WordPress. It is not a matter of time; because the time spent commenting here is not a little. Truly, start a blog, I'll link to it on the left column.

Friends, I'm really torn at this. I respect and appreciate all of you for even stopping by. I love my readers. I am humbled by your desire to comment here. 

Should anyone wish to discuss this offline, my contact email can be found at the profile page on the left side, just under the photo of St. Charbel.

Your thoughts are welcome.

As Mark would say.



Anonymous said...

Thank you Vox for limiting Mark Thomas's rantings and ravings, the never ending rants in defense of the indefensible had totally turned me off this blog. As soon as I would see his name tag in the com box I would immediately scroll down and down and down and down until I got sick of scrolling down from his never ending antagonizing rants and redirected my surf engine to another site that defends the truth without Mark’s ranting.. We are in very troubled times, C Jorge the anti -Catholic mega media star is causing so much scandal to the body of Christ on earth that one can only take a site where there is true peace and reflection on the cross our lord carried after Judas betrayed him. Pages such as yours gives witness to the betrayal of our lord in our time by one of his Judas apostles. Mark reminds me of the Gnostics that wrote the Gospel of Judas Iscariot. The Gospel of Judas portrays Judas's actions as done in obedience to instructions given to him by Christ. It does not claim that the other disciples knew about Jesus's true teachings. On the contrary, it asserts that they had not learned the true Gospel, which Jesus taught only to Judas Iscariot. Sound familiar?
Every blog that defends the one true faith against the smoke of Satan inside the Church has been given the authority by our lord to do so. As the great Archbishop Fulton Sheen said “Who is going to save our Church? Not our Bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to the people. You have the minds, the eyes, the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops like bishops and your religious act like religious”.
We love your blog page but Mark totally turns us off it, I’m sorry Vox I know you have attempted to be fair and balanced but with Mark’s rants your blog becomes nothing but shades of grey, which happens to be the devils favorite color. So indeed good move by limiting Marks comments..

DJR said...

And the constant posts about sedevacantism need to be curtailed (along with my responses, mea culpa).

We understand the theory.

What a certain person here does not articulate, although he believes it, is that some of the people who read this blog, if not most of them, unwittingly practice idolatry because they go to invalid "Masses" offered by invalid "priests" who have been "ordained" by invalid "bishops."

This would include anyone who attends even the old Mass offered by, say, an FSSP "priest" ordained by a "bishop" who was consecrated after 1968, which would be the majority of their priests, as well as priests of the ICK and other allegedly priestly organizations.

The people who attend the Masses of such "priests" are unknowingly worshipping a mere piece of bread because it is not the Blessed Sacrament. In other words, those people are idolaters and don't even know it.

That's the position espoused by sedevacantists.

Peter Lamb said...

Are "Mark Thomas" and "DJR" one and the same?

Unknown said...

Can't stand posts where people cut and paste entire articles they haven't written themselves...just give the link. Sede's especially ...OK we get it..enough already

Dorota Mosiewicz-Patalas said...

Ephesians 5:11

Having nothing to do with fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.

Vox, you expose evil in the Church. To many honest Catholics, including my elderly parents, this is very hard to face - one expects higher (not lower) moral standards from the clergy than from the average person. Why? - Because they received and accepted a calling from God to serve Him with their lives completely. The enemies of the Church celebrate this infiltration by evil, but covering it up is wrong. Yours is a taught task.

Even the rather obvious statements above would quickly be met with criticism and judgement of self-proclaimed non-judgemental people. Nothing obvious is obvious any more in this new world order, where talking about morality is moralizing, and should be avoided, as YES should never be a YES, and NO should never simply be a NO. They are in the business of making mess and creating gods, such as a god of surprises.

I hope it is by God's will that you write your articles. I also hope that you have no guilt over introducing some basic rules of conduct here. It is not true that all censorship is wrong, Some censorship is very good.

According to modernist thought I have been infected with, we have nothing but own experience from which to draw conclusions about truth. It makes me a sincere... but fool.

Fortunately God did not throw us in here without guidance, to rely on own stream of consciousness, own foolishness, as we try to figure out, why we are here, and how we ought to live. God gave us His Son.

If the purpose of your blog is to expose evil within the Church, in order to help others, who might be misled by it, to direct them toward Jesus Christ, you are doing the right thing, a noble thing.

If the purpose of this blog is to have people talk and (as Anonymous already mentioned) gradually expand the grey area to include black and white, you would be making a mistake by asking us to comply with your rules.

May God bless you.

Vox Cantoris said...

No grey Darota, no "lukewarm." I can say I am sorry to Our Lord for being too harsh, I could not stand the thought of Him saying, I did nothing.

Woody said...

It's your blog and you can curtail, or not, the comments to your whim. Are you too harsh? You are Vox. People either like your style or they don't. As for comments, some say the same thing over and over again. When you see their name, you know what they are going to say. Read it for your amusement or skip over it. I like blogs with comment sections, despite the comments people make. However, I like your blog and would continue to read it even if you put an end to the comment section or curtailed it greatly. It's your blog. Do as you wish.

Johnno said...

We are in a time where people will go to unimaginable lengths to defend the indefensible.

As this Papacy moves on it is going to get worse. Just the other day, on 1P5, commentors were engaging with a 'Mark Thomas 2.0' who was running with the argument that consciences are effected by people's feelings. Therefore to tell them certain moral laws are so shocking to their modern senses that in their shock they somehow have their mental capacities harmed and therefore this somehow makes them incapable of rational thought and therefore the conscience is affected, and therefore they are incapable of fully comprehending the moral law as Francis teaches, so therefore they still possess grace and can therefore continue to receive Holy Communion.

The man was a nutbag and kept at it stubbornly, and the further one dug the more heresy and error came out of him until it was clear that the absurd outcome of his logic was that the world was better off left in ignorance so as to remain in a state of grace (despite original sin), so we'd all be better off if the Church never existed, and that God never revealed Himself to the world, because we are all now doomed for having known Him.

Absurd! But prepare to see more of this illogic coming from nutbags and even from some learned men of authority that possess doctorates.

It's understandable... they're desperate to keep the peace. They don't want their precious little lives threatened. They don't want conflict! They don't want hostility! They want peace!

Well... so did Pilate...

I know I've also made it a habit to go after the Mark Thomas around here, so I myself have been contributing to some overly long posts. But as they say, progressives are fond of catch phrase sentences that require their opponents to write an essay to refute. And Mark Thomas has demanded the attention considering that he has indeed falsified quotes, committed the sin of ommission, in order to both protect heresy, and in order to falsely slander other good Catholics. Mark Thomas is not one of the fools like the guy on 1P5. He has shown that he is indeed aware of the consequences and nature of the argument. Instead he purposely pretends he doesn't so as to apply psychological pressure on those he converses with in order to get them to expend energy of explaining the alphabet to him, before even approaching the subject at hand.

I'm all for allowing free discussion with those of opposing views, providing they are HONEST.

Mark Thomas, if you've seen my confrontations with him, particularly when he selectively misquoted Chris Ferrara and the Remnant and then slandered them as "rubbish" based on this direct misquotation that he could not have made a mistake of considering what he quoted was contained within the very sentences he omitted, and goes to show we are not dealing with an honest man. Rather, a serpent, who doesn't even hesitate to misquote Pope Francis, the very man he defends against all evidence. So Mark Thomas requires additional effort on the part of commentors on top of his other bags of tricks.

In such a time, someone like him cannot be allowed to go around spreading error and FUD. Other people read your blog who do not comment. They can be influenced by Mark Thomas. I've been reading your blog too for awhile and had never/rarely commented. But I only started because I personally had enough of Mark Thomas. Someone had to finally engage him thoroughly. So I stepped up. I initially gave him the benefit of the doubt. He squandered that. And he's been given ample time to change. But he clearly is stubbornly persisting.

Opposing points of view are fine. Outright dishonesty isn't.

Mark Thomas said...

Vox, I hope that you will permit this post to appear on your blog as I wish to thank your publicly for your kindness to me, as well as reiterate the importance of your blog. If you prefer not to allow that, please know that I understand and most certainly wish you and your family peace and good health...the same to each of your readers.

I thank Vox publicly for his great love of Jesus Christ and His True Church. I also thank Vox for having always treated me kindly.

Vox, I apologize to you for having upset you. That was never my desire here. I hope that you will forgive me.

I have Christian love for Vox and his family and wish them peace and good health.

I was sickened when I first read about the persecution that Vox faced. I read about the stress that the threat of a lawsuit had placed upon Vox and his family. But since that time, Vox's blog has skyrocketed in importance within the Catholic blogosphere. Never would I wish to inflict difficulty upon Vox,

Vox, I don't have the financial means to travel to Canada, but at least via your blog, I would like to "shake" your hand and thank you for your service to the True Church as well as your generosity to me.

I also wish please to thank each person with whom I engaged in conversation here. You are my brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ. I apologize to each person here to whom I may have been discourteous.

I know that some who post here also post to Father McDonald's Southern Orders blog, which I discovered last year via Vox's links section. Deo volente, we will continue our discussions there.

We have to continue the holy fight to restore the Traditional Roman Mass to its rightful place throughout the Latin Church. Novus Ordoism, at least throughout the West, has failed to renew the Church as, in good will, our recent Popes and bishops had envisioned. (Although I understand that the Church in Africa and Asia continues to prosper in holy fashion.)

But I am very hopeful overall in that, for example, Bishop Fellay has revealed that His Holiness Pope Francis plans to create a "Super Diocese" for the SSPX and additional Catholics who wish to join the Super Diocese. The restoration of the TLM is unstoppable.

Finally, Vox-permitting...

This is my favorite post from Vox:

Those of us with Lebanese/Maronite heritage are familiar with Wa Habibi. But beyond literal Good Friday, Vox's post of Wa Habibi is important to me as I believe that Wa Habibi symbolizes the situation within the Church.

In many ways, it is Good Friday within the Church, particularly in regard to the Latin Church and the collapse of the Roman Liturgy. But let's recall that while the Church experienced Her Wa Habibi moment, just a few hours later, Holy Mother Church experienced Her glorious Resurrection moment.

While, in various ways, we are in the midst of a Wa Habibi moment, I believe that the Church is just "hours" away from Her glorious Resurrection moment.

-- Pope Francis and Bishop Fellay, Peacemakers, are on the path toward the establishment of a Super Diocese that will aid greatly the unstoppable spread of the TLM and Holy Tradition.

-- Each day, the TLM's growth throughout the world continues.

-- Our Lady of Fatima...2017 important anniversary that the Church will celebrate.

The true New Springtime will arrive. Keep the Faith.

Vox, thank you for the privilege of the many times that you permitted me to post comments to your blog.

Vox, thank you for your kindness to me.


Mark Thomas

P.S. Let us pray for Asia Bibi, her family, and all persecuted Christians.

DJR said...

Peter Lamb said... Are "Mark Thomas" and "DJR" one and the same?

The answer to that would be no.

DJR answers issues when addressed, and does so in an honest fashion and not in a deceitful way.

Mark and certain unnamed sedevacantists do not act that way because, when their viewpoints are challenged/questioned, they have to obfuscate.

Like that sedevacantist here who believes that most people who read this blog are unwitting idolaters but who never states that to them directly.

That's what that person believes, isn't it?

Novus Ordo Missae, or even old Mass offered by "priests" ordained by "bishops" who were consecrated post 1968 = invalid "Mass."

Which means no Blessed Sacrament, which means only bread, which means idolatry (even though done perhaps unknowingly).

And that's true even for most old Masses now (FSSP, ICK, et cetera).

Peter, isn't that what that person believes?

Vox Cantoris said...

Mark, you are not "barred." Just censor yourself, please.

Kathleen1031 said...

That's fair Vox. I visit this blog and read most comments. I am glad to have others in this dire time to commiserate with. It would be much harder to face these times alone. Back in the old days we had nobody to talk these things over with. We were always in the dark about things. Things are going to get much tougher before they ever get better. Thank God we still have the ability to connect with each other. We don't none of us know how long this may last.

Johnno said...

Mark Thomas -

No thanks, I don't accept that 'apology.' For one, if you're going to apologize then two things matter -

1. Who are you apologizing to.

2. What are you apologizing for.

And let me tell you directly to your face that 'discourteous' is not one of your crimes. So even when apologizing here you still continue to lie and pretend you don't know what you've done and still haven't made reparation fro the things you actually did.

And it's certainly not me you have to apologize to, though I would accept one for having to waste time on you.

You want to be sincere? Okay, let's start with just ONE of your sins - Bearing False Witness and Slander.

The victim - Chris Ferrara & The Remnant. Whom Ark Thomas deliberately misquoted through omission of context in order to promote his lie, and then subsequently proceeded to slander.

The evidence for everyone to see is in Vox's post here under the comments section:

The Don Bergoglio Mafia friends of the Ratzingoglian Papacy

Go read Mark Thomas' chain of posts up to the point where he misquotes the Remnant article on purpose and then slanders them and Farrera as garbage, his words. Then rebuttals of him towards the bottom.

So Mark, let's see your sincerity. Apologize to these people specifically, and specify what you are apologizing for. We won't tolerate ambiguity anymore.

And another thing Mark, you can patronize us all you like about TLM. But that Mass is MEANINGLESS without the DOCTRINE behind it! Our actions and our beliefs go hand in hand. Thus the movement behind the restoration of the Mass is not just about outward trappings, it is about THE FAITH & MORAL LAW that the Mass REPRESENTS! We do not divorce doctrine from dicipline here! This is what the fight is about. It's for all the marbles!

I don't care ONE FIT if Pope Francis decides to order every priest to say TLM tomorrow if he also insists that they give Holy Communion to Public Adulterers, Lutherans, Active Homosexuals, Abortion-supporters etc. If that's the case you can keep the fancy lace and the Ad Orientem. I'll go to the Novus Ordo Priest that knows not to abuse the Eucharist.

Get that through your skull. Discipline and Ritual are MARRIED to the Doctrine & Divine Law. Undermine one and you undermine the other, just as to corrupt one spouse is to trouble the other spouse. That's why the Serpent when through Eve to get Adam. The Discipline, like Eve is subordinate to the Doctrine like Adam.

DJR said...

Johnno said... We are in a time where people will go to unimaginable lengths to defend the indefensible.

In order to understand where Mark is coming from, people need to know that Mark believes that popes are chosen by the Holy Ghost.

His belief is rooted in one of the prayers of the Catholic Church for the pope.

Obviously, that has a direct impact on his thinking when discussing anything having to do with any particular pope.

Mark Thomas said...

Vox Cantoris said..."Mark, you are not "barred." Just censor yourself, please."

Thank you, Vox. I appreciate your kindness very much.


Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

DJR, I believe (but please correct me) that you are the DJR with whom last year, on Father McDonald's blog, I engaged in discussion about the election of Popes. We disagreed as to the extent of the Holy Ghost's involvement in the election of a Pope.

I believe that you are Eastern Catholic. Is your eparchy Byzantine?

From the Roman Liturgy:

"Almighty and eternal God, You guide all things by your word, You govern all Christian people. In your love protect the Pope you have chosen for us."

To also understand where I'm coming from, I believe in the Church's Credo in which I am called to believe that "in the Apostolic See the Catholic Religion has always been preserved immaculate."

Finally, when God's holy priest offers the Sacred Mysteries, he commemorates His Holiness Pope Francis as the orthodox guardian of the True Religion. The Church — Triumphant, Militant, and Suffering — says "Amen" to the priest's holy commemoration of Pope Francis.

DJR, everything that I just noted about Church teaching expresses that which I believe about Pope Francis' orthodoxy.

Thank you.


Mark Thomas

— Let us pray for Asia Bibi, her family, and all persecuted Christians throughout the world.

DJR said...

Mark Thomas said... We disagreed as to the extent of the Holy Ghost's involvement in the election of a Pope.

From the Roman Liturgy:

"Almighty and eternal God, You guide all things by your word, You govern all Christian people. In your love protect the Pope you have chosen for us."

And I pointed out to you how that prayer was never meant to be understood in the literal manner you're taking it.

Pope Benedict also made public statements correcting that idea.

I also pointed out to you a prayer that we say in the Byzantine Rite (yes, Ruthenian) that is not meant to be taken literally because, if taken literally, it would deny the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception, along with denying the sinlessness of the good angels.

Finally, this is from the revised Rite of Ordination (Roman Rite, 1968), English version:

Invitation to Prayer

17. Then all stand, and the bishop, without his miter, invites the people to pray:

"My dear people, let us pray that the all-powerful Father may pour out the gifts of heaven on this servant of his, whom he has chosen to be a priest."

Later in the rite:

b. In Eucharistic Prayer I, the special form of Father, accept this offering is said:

"Father accept this offering from your whole family and from the one you have chosen for the order of priests. Protect the gifts you have given him, and let him yield a harvest worthy of you. [Through Christ our Lord. Amen.]"

Those words were said at the ordinations of hundreds of homosexuals, some of whom were obviously active at the time of their ordinations.

If your view were correct, which it's not, that would mean Our Lord is actually choosing practicing sodomites to be His priests. Hundreds of them.

And not only is Our Lord actually choosing sodomites to be priests, but His Church, at the same time Our Lord is choosing these sodomites, has a rule where they are forbidden to be ordained.

That rule was promulgated by the pope in 1962 and has been reinforced under a different pope, so obviously you cannot be correct.

God "chooses" popes insofar as He ratifies/recognizes the choice of those elected. Ditto for priests.

However, there are many, many men who should never have been ordained, even though the Church publicly stated that God had "chosen" them.

Aside from Saint Peter, who was directly chosen by Our Lord, the Catholic Church does not teach that God directly chooses a pope, any more than He directly chooses that homosexuals become priests.

The idea that God "chose" the immoral 18 year old John XII as pope is belied by the facts surrounding his election and lifestyle.

Peter Lamb said...

"God "chooses" popes insofar as He ratifies/recognizes the choice of those elected. Ditto for priests." - Amen.

"Aside from Saint Peter, who was directly chosen by Our Lord, the Catholic Church does not teach that God directly chooses a pope,..." - Amen.

Mark Thomas said...

Vox, it is not my wish to clog your blog with useless back-and-forth replies to insults. I won't don't that now. But I hope that the following one-time reply to the following claim in this thread from Johnno is acceptable to the manner in which you wish me to conduct myself here.

Johnno, said/claimed the following about me:

"Mark Thomas - No thanks, I don't accept that 'apology.' For one, if you're going to apologize then two things matter -

1. Who are you apologizing to.

2. What are you apologizing for.

"And let me tell you directly to your face that 'discourteous' is not one of your crimes. So even when apologizing here you still continue to lie..."

I agree with Johnno in that to the best of my recollection, being "discourteous" here isn't one of my "crimes."

Had Johnno paid attention, I said..."I apologize to each person here to whom I may have been discourteous." "May....may...may have been discourteous."

I don't recall that I was discourteous to Vox's readers. However, I offered...and sincere apology to anybody to whom I may have been arrogant and discourteous.

There have been people here, particularly Dorota, who accused me of having treated in arrogant fashion Vox's readers. I also recall vividly that on September 1, 2016 A.D., two commenters here, I believe that one was Dorota, accused me of arrogant conduct.

Hmmm...Johnno said that such is not the case with me.

However, in that Dorota, for example, accused me of arrogant, discourteous well as an additional commenter on September 1, 2016 A.D., I apologized sincerely for any such conduct here.

I renew my apologize to anybody here I may have treated in arrogant, discourteous fashion. I also thank Johnno for having insisted that I did not act in arrogant, discourteous fashion here.

Vox-permitting, I have spoken my piece in regard to Johnno's claim and don't see the need to respond again to Johnno's claim in question.

Thank you.


Mark Thomas

Vox Cantoris said...


Let's move on!

I don't want to censor, please be respectful of that fact.

Eirene said...

Well well Vox. Despite your post being as clear as day they are STILL at it!
What was it, DJR and Mark Thomas that neither of you didnt understand about no more back and forth and keeping your comments relevant to the post?
Are you both so addicted to seeing your comments that you can ignore this plea from Vox for precision instead of rambling of the cut and paste variety?
Just STOP IT and we will all be happier. I m late commenting on this post because I couldn t bear just scrolling down and down for half of my valuable computer time so I gave Vox a miss. Main reason I m back is the Remnant article re. George Soros. Needed to see if Vox had picked it up!
Of course he had! Good on you Vox, the best attack hound we have ! Thanks