You’ve Depended on Catholic Answers; Now, They’re Depending on You

It was circa 2001, I was working with Al Kresta, he was guest hosting on Catholic Answers Live—and it was my privilege to answer calls for the most popular nationally syndicated Catholic show on the airwaves.  Ten minutes before showtime, the phones lit up—ALL the lines—and it stayed that way for the duration of the two-hour show.  Within seconds after one call ended, the next hopeful caller would be on the line, waiting to pose a question for the show’s host and expert guest.

Have I mentioned that I LOVE Catholic Answers?  That largest lay-run apostolate of Catholic apologetics and evangelization in the United States publishes a bi-monthly magazine, and produces a radio show (6:00-8:00 p.m. EST, 3:00-5:00 p.m. PST).  That show, Catholic Answers Live, features some of the most prominent men and women in the Catholic Church answering callers’ questions on a variety of topics.  I have benefitted greatly from their wise counsel; and I know of many who credit their conversion or their reversion to the Catholic faith to the deeper knowledge they’ve acquired, just by listening to their car radio.

That’s why I was deeply concerned to see the nonprofit organization’s urgent appeal for financial assistance at this time.  Already, they’ve had to lay off staff; and the remaining staff have accepted sizeable salary cuts in order to keep the apostolate operating.  Still, more is needed.

Take a few minutes to listen to this urgent appeal by senior apologist Jimmy Akin.

There is a great hunger for Truth.  If you are a Catholic Answers fan, as I am, please think about what you can do to help keep this vital apostolate alive.

http://youtu.be/FNRsh6O0tR8

  • Chris

    You did not mention where to send donations!

    • gregoryvii

      I can help you with that, Chris. Send your donation to Our Lady of the Annunciation of Clear Creek at 5804 West Monastery Road, Hulbert, OK 74441.

  • James Battle
  • Jevive

    When they cease one-hour persecutions of traditionalists –then I will give again

    • Nate C.

      You are totally right Jevive. I think what Catholic Answers is seeing is the “fruits” of their negative attitude towards traditionally minded Catholics, people who they have much admiration for, but find nothing beneficial for themselves in their example of Catholic living.

      • Nate C.

        I think the biggest surprise for them was just how large the Traditionalist audience is, that a large portion of their loyal listeners happened to be these people they view as something outside of the core of faithful Catholics. Surprise surprise surprise..

        • Dick Hertz

          Karma’s a bit*h. Traditional Catholics = The Silent Majority!!!!!

        • David Bates

          Could you please give a specific example of what they’ve said which has angered you so much?

          • steve5656546346

            There are two responses at The Remnant. They objected to the first show much more than to the second.

          • David Bates

            I’m not really motivated to track down those videos/mp3s and listen to them. Could you just give the summary. What did Catholic Answers say which offended them so much?

          • steve5656546346

            No, I’ll not give a combox summary to a complex issue.

            What you may have missed is that there have been many, many more negative experiences among traditional Catholics in the forums.

          • David Bates

            If it’s too complex to explain then perhaps it should be too complex to condemn?

          • Allan Daniel

            Do the research yourself. If truth matters to you, find out the facts instead of swinging in the dark.

          • David Bates

            “find out the facts” is what I’m trying to do…

          • Allan Daniel

            Don’t be purposefully thick. The issue is too nuanced to explain in this format. Like anything else, if you want to know what it is about you need research.

          • David Bates

            Surely this makes my point? If the situation is as nuanced as you say then perhaps the condemnation of CA should likewise be a little more nuanced?

            And as far as research goes, the only thing that has been offered to me with regards to the sins of Catholic Answers (aside from hyperbole and name-calling) has been an article from The Remnant. I wasn’t impressed.

          • Allan Daniel

            Ok, you aren’t impressed.

          • Simon D

            I’m pretty sympathetic to the Traditionalist cause generally and the Remnant particularly, but I have no idea what you’re talking about and I think you’re doing our cause a disservice in the way you’re responding to David. Just answer the damn question! He asked a perfectly reasonable question; you don’t have to give him the full picture, just give him a summary! You make it look as though you have no answer to his question and that you’re gratuitously calumnizing CA, even when I am almost certain that you do have an answer and that I agree with it. So answer the damn question!

          • Trudy

            They ban you for life over trivial things like using a swear word in PM system and they deliberately ignore that it was said in jest (they call it “using PM system to abuse” which is a lie and the grin icon beside the message made it clear it was said in jest) and the words don’t even show up anyway because they’re blotted out.
            CA seems to ignore the human element behind the computer screens and they only seem to want cradle catholics back in the fold (“welcome home” is their mantra) but they ban inquirers for life if they put a foot wrong. They are very authoritarian and cultish. I’ll not donate a cent and I’m not going ahead with RCIA.

          • David Bates

            Text is a notoriously hard medium to discern tone, even with emoticons ;-). However, it seems your only complaint is that their forum administrators ban people who use foul language. Is that really that unreasonable? When signing up for their message boards you have to agree to the terms and conditions and the code of conduct is one of them. Their forums are extremely busy so I’m not surprised that the policy is strictly enforced – it would be unmanageable otherwise. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s basically automated. I’d hardly call that grounds for calling it authoritarian or cultish.

            I wouldn’t agree that Catholic Answers only wants cradle Catholics. I’d suggest this is evidenced by the vast amount of apologetic work they have amassed to answer Protestant objections. Also, in recent years the volume of material dealing with Atheism has also increased considerably. From a Catholic point of view, the Church is always “home”, regardless as to whether or not one was formally a baptized member.

            I wouldn’t let your experience on the CA forums hold you back from starting RCIA – Catholic Answers and the Catholic Church are not one and the same thing; you get received into the Catholic Church, not Catholic Answers :-) There are various apostolates in the Church with which I’m not too keen, but that just means I ignore them. If they help other people come to the Faith, then that’s great…but it’s not for me. My focus is instead on the Catholic Faith itself, which remains beautiful even Catholics mess up :-)

          • David Bates

            I had a quick google. If what I found was the response to which you were referring, I didn’t find any examples of “persecution”. All I found was an article which spent most of its time arguing that Protestants architected the Novus Ordo.

          • Allan Daniel

            Didn’t they have a very odd influence over forming the new mass?

          • David Bates

            Catholic Answers had influence over forming the new Mass?! CA wasn’t even formed in 1979! What do you mean?

          • Allan Daniel

            To my chagrin it was a copy paste gone bad.

    • RobW

      Amen. For them to devote 2 hours on traditionalists, when a much bigger problem in the Church is liberalism and modernism, was a bad move and very strange. The time of the comfy Catholic is coming to an end. The Church will become smaller and so will the need for “professional catholics”…thats just the way it is. Unless they go the route of Bottum and sell out.

      • thomasdeaquino

        Traditionalists are an easy target. Much easier than trying to deal with the institutional dissent against the rule of faith by large swathes of the Church’s hierarchy.

        The pews are emptying, Catholic schools are destroying the faith of young people, even senior cardinals question the infallible dogmas…

        …but it’s far easier to attack a small group of Catholics who practice the faith as it was done for millenia and who are repeatedly calumniated as “schismatic”, “rebellious”, “protestant” (the only time that word is used in negatively!), etc.

        • kalbertini

          There are no agreed upon list of dogmas.Nobody cares about the latin Mass & the church is the people of God(Vatican II).Pre Vatican II had sex in marriage a necessary evil tainted with sin,being with a woman occasion of sin but venerating the sainta was never occasion for sin even though trent & Vatican II acknowledged abuses.Democracy condemned(pius IX),Slavery moral(pius IX),co education immoral(pius IX),your just blowing smoke from your arse with your non historical nonsense

      • Churchill4President

        Well said!

    • David Bates

      I really am bewildered by the they-persecute-traditionalists charges. I’ve listened to those shows and they seemed incredibly even-handed. The same goes with the charge of liberalism.

      Perhaps something specific and concrete could help me understand your perspective. What exactly has been said to which you object?

      • Emily

        It was stated several time on each show that the EF of the Mass is offered at CA…I’m not quite sure why people think CA was attacking traditionally-minded Catholics, either.

        • steve5656546346

          Because “attachment” to the EF does not mean that one is a traditionalist. (That’s OK, one is not required to be a traditionalist to be a Catholic in good standing! :-)

          It’s hard to explain in a combox. Michael Davies books are probably the most readable detailed explanations.

          It comes down to this: at Vatican II, and after, the Church took a new appraoch in some very noticeable ways. Nobody denies that.

          And so, we were FORCED to choose between CURRENT authority and tradition (i.e., PAST authority). The choice did not concern dogma, but things more like approach. For example, is it really better to: be nearly silent concerning the PROBLEMS with other religions and Protestant churches; is ambiguity a problem; should hell be mentioned much at all; should the Church speak of the REASON for evangalization (to save souls) as did Christ and all the saints; should there be discipline within the Church (other than just concerning traditionalists)? That sort of thing.

      • steve5656546346

        It may indeed seem to you that they were even handed: it often depends upon whose ox is gored.

        If they were attacking your position in an “even handed” way, you might not think it so.

        The problem is that most non-traditionalists are not aware of the issues and the details: so they honestly don’t know when traditionalists are being misrepresented.

        • David Bates

          If you can give me a solid example of something that they said that’d be really helpful. At the moment all I see are lots of general comments about “persecution” but no solid example of the crimes Catholic Answers is meant to have perpetrated.

          • steve5656546346
          • David Bates

            I had a quick scan through, I’ll read it more thoroughly later, but if that’s it, I hardly think it’s worthy of the word “persecution”.

          • steve5656546346

            I never used that word.

            I believe that their first show, and their forums, tended to divide orthodox Catholics, and were unfair and inaccurate. I also thought that the article on CA “Meet the Mad Trads” I think it was, was pointless and inflammatory.

          • David Bates

            That word was used by several of the commenters here, including the person at the root of this thread.

          • TheWhiteLilyBlog

            Their line of reasoning in the show, the analysis itself, leaves the door open to all the innovations and abuses through their misapplication of the concept of obedience, and that is a darn pernicious form of persecution.

          • David Bates

            This charge is unfortunately extremely vague. I would suggest hardly deserves being labeled as “a darn pernicious form of persecution”. What is more, the same argument *could* equally be made *against* those of the more traditional persuasion, if one felt so inclined…

            As I wrote above, I’m sympathetic to the traditional forms of Christianity. I normally go to the Byzantine Liturgy, but I make a point of visiting an FSSP parish a couple of times a year.

            I think we all need to pause, take a breath, and return to this with renewed charity and good will. We’re all on the same side…

            [The Church is divided] “…because our love has grown cold” – Unnamed Orthodox Bishop around the time of the Council of Florence

      • Allan Daniel

        Their programing is milk-toast. They do a disservice by avoiding the issue of wholesale heresy in the church. They have become comfortable in an age when they should be uncomfortable. It’s beside the point, but I don’t think Keating is worth $250,000.

        • David Bates

          > Their programing is milk-toast.

          Personally, I think it’s good and, considering the number of people I’ve known who have either come/returned to the Catholic faith through their apostolate, I’d say that there’s plenty of faith to back up that assertion.

          > They do a disservice by avoiding the issue of wholesale heresy in the church

          I have two issues with this statement.

          Firstly, is this the purpose of CA? Are they chiefly an apologetics organization or a journalistic outlet? As I wrote in another comment, is it the responsibility for a fireman to build a new house for the people he rescues?

          The second issue I have with this statement is the hyperbole which rather undermines your point “wholesale heresy”…really?

          > It’s beside the point, but I don’t think Keating is worth $250,000.

          It’s rather hard to accept the assertion that the salary levels are “beside the point” when (a) Voris belaboured the point in his video (including graphics!) and (b) those who support Voris keep bringing it up too.

  • marie

    They already got my donation in the form of selling my name and address to every Catholic organization on earth after I purchased literature from them. For years I have been bombarded with tons of mail requesting donations. If CA goes under, I will endure the legacy of having purchased from them probably for life. Sorry, no hurry here to lend them a hand right now when they profited off selling my information without my permission.

    • http://devinrose.heroicvirtuecreations.com/blog/ Devin Rose

      As does almost every Catholic organization or religious community I have given to. It’s par for the course, and while annoying, is not that big a deal.

      • marie

        It might not be a big deal for you, but I am getting 3-5 pieces of Catholic junk mail a day, often containing religious items (or nickels glued to the paperwork) in an attempt to guilt me into sending them money. Because I don’t feel that the trash can is an appropriate place for rosaries, crucifixes, images of Our Lady and other whatnot, I have to open the mail, remove the items, and store them until I fill up the next Ziploc bag full and drop it off at my parish office. The nickels go in the Knights of Columbus baby bottle I keep year around for the respect life ministry. Having to deal with about 1500 pieces of Catholic junk mail a year for the past 6 years has become rather tiresome.

        The fact that this practice of selling private information is “par for the course” doesn’t make it an ethical practice, and a Catholic organization should not stoop to such violations of privacy to accomplish the ends of raising money.

        • http://devinrose.heroicvirtuecreations.com/blog/ Devin Rose

          Yes I get those same things: nickels, cheaply made crucifixes, letters from elderly nuns who allegedly can’t afford wheelchairs. My point was that many faithful Catholic organizations and religious communities sell their mailing lists to other Catholic causes. So if Catholic Answers does it, they are not unique. That said, I’m not a fan of the practice either. God bless!

    • wyllow

      I’m with you there. I gave them $15 in a one time donation over a year ago and every. single. day. I get at least 3 donation requests thru the post office for religious orders I’ve never heard of.

  • gregoryvii

    Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of jerks!

    • Dick Hertz

      Let CA fold. We have enough liberals gutting Holy Mother Church.

      CA, no. Michael Voris, YES!!!!!!

  • Mona Lott

    The day they banned the topic of Michael Voris, I took them off my “favorite places.”

    I wouldn’t give CA a dime. Long live Michael Voris. Mike, you’re the BEST!!!!,

  • Mona Lott

    Anyone considering sending $$$ to CA: Your hard earned money would go to better use if you donate to churchmilitant tv, Michael Voris’ fine outlet. Conservative catholicism, yes! Liberals, NO!!!!!!!!

    • http://devinrose.heroicvirtuecreations.com/blog/ Devin Rose

      Sure give to him. And give to Catholic Answers. Both-and. Catholic Answers is not liberal. Seems like their show on “traditionalists” rubbed you and others here the wrong way. That’s understandable. I would suggest recommending they do a show discussing tradition and how there are different kinds of traditionalist, and what good things we need to re-discover in our Church’s Tradition.

      • steve5656546346

        My own view is similar to yours. However, I think that things are SO bad, and that the APPROACH (not doctrine or dogma) adopted at Vatican II and after is simply going in the wrong direction and is disastrous.

        As a result, I only donate to traditional Catholic organization, even though I freely admit that many non-tradtional Catholic organizations are doing some truly wonderful work…but that in the end, it doesn’t really work.

  • Mona Lott

    Let CA go under. Enough damage has been done to the church by looney leftists.

    • SusanL

      Very very foolish. Catholic Answers is hardly liberal. I gained a lot towards my conversion by listening to them. I disagree with you completely here.

      • michicatholic

        The written materials, programs and tapes might be really good. I don’t know because I don’t use them. On the other hand, the forum is a train wreck.
        I should qualify that. If a convert or a Catholic newcomer wants to find out what Catholics really think on a topic, then they should go there and ask. They’re likely to really find out. For that reason, it’s probably been irreplaceable to newcomers because getting a rational, detailed and honest answer out of most Catholics face-to-face probably isn’t going to happen on most topics. Catholics have this secret-decoder-ring born-Catholic thing apparently. [Can you repeat after Pope Francis? "The church is turned in on itself." Repeat until you get it.] It’s been important for me for exactly that reason because I’m a convert. But beyond that, eh.
        The general tenor in CAF is not liberal by any means. It’s not moderated well. Some topics are downright weird and immoral. And strangely, those aren’t the topics that they squelch.

      • Mona Lott

        They attack Michael Voris. Want more proof that they’re liberal??????

        • SusanL

          Actually, yes. That doesn’t qualify as proof to me.

        • David Bates

          So no criticism, under any circumstances, is ever warranted against Mr. Voris? All those who do so are automatically “liberal”?

      • steve5656546346

        I’m sorry to say this, but I agree with BOTH Mona Lott and SusanL: but I can’t explain why in a combox. :-)

        • Phil Steinacker

          I’ll take a stab at it, although it probably won’t mirror what you have in mind.
          There are a lot of non-liberal Catholics in the Church who are largely orthodox doctrinally but who are hostile to the Traditional Latin Mass, ranging from simple preference of the Ordinary Form to over hostility for tradition. It is true they are not liberals; they disagree with the progressives in the Church, too.
          I know a lot of these people at my parish. Many are my friends and we are allies on so many concerns, yet I have gotten some very tough comments when I reference Voris or email a link to his videos.
          Remember, opposing groups may attack another group or individual for different reasons. It doesn’t make them friends or even allies.

  • A new era in the Church

    Catholic Answers did great things in their day, no doubt. But we are in a new era. It’s not liberal vs. conservative anymore, or orthodox vs. heterodox. Traditionalists now have a seat at the table, or a respectable place on the spectrum. Catholic Answers has made clear that they don’t like traditionalists. (Mind you, I’m talking about regular tradition-loving Catholics, many of whom go to EF Masses at regular churches, but who don’t view Vatican II as the false New Pentecost that it has long been sold as.) We’ve been told that there are some Nicodemuses at Catholic Answers–or to put in another way, closeted traditionalist sympathizers. Well let them come forward with a proposal to transform the organization. Otherwise, nature ought to take its course and C.A. should go under. Catholic Answers’ fatal move was in not recognizing that many of its loyalists who used to call themselves “orthodox” have been evolving and are calling themselves “traditionalists” since Summorum Pontificum. I’d like to see you survive as a new champion for traditionalist thought, Catholic Answers, but I expect that I’ll see you leave the scene altogether.

    • RobW

      I used to listen to them on the radio. They made some good points but there was sometimes a hint of arrogance in the way they related to callers…just my opinion.

    • http://devinrose.heroicvirtuecreations.com/blog/ Devin Rose

      I don’t work for Catholic Answers, but they are in the process of publishing my book. And I certainly have “traditionalist sympathies” (of the non-schismatic kind). Someone here recommended donating to Our Lady of Clear Creek in Oklahoma. I’ve done that, and even invited them to open their next monastery in my diocese. Yet, I have respect for Catholic Answers as well, and they do for me. I think that things are being painted with too broad a brush with all these criticisms of Catholic Answers, and perhaps with their criticism of “traditionalists.”

      • Midwester

        Traditionalists are not schismatics. I assume you are referring to the SSPX. It might be news to you, but the bishops who were excommunicated are no longer. They have not formed a new church. What they are doing is standing firm, teaching authentic Catholic doctrine, and maintaining Catholic Tradition. Look at the mess created by the post-conciliar Church. I lived through that train wreck. Thank God that there was an Archbishop LeFebre to stand up to the liberals and Modernists in the Church.

        Catholic Answers chose to bash those who are trying to be faithful to the authentic Catholic faith. Shame on them.

        • http://devinrose.heroicvirtuecreations.com/blog/ Devin Rose

          Midwester,

          One problem with the word “traditionalist” is that it can mean a schismatic traditionalist or a non-schismatic one. People infer either meaning and then confusion abounds because no one knows which is being referred to. Hence I clarify when using the word. I was not referring to the SSPX, and I am familiar with their status within the Church.

          As I said, I have traditionalist sympathies. Probably more so than many who consider themselves traditionalists. What we need on each “side” is charitable understanding of one another and a desire for unity in the truth. The Church in the past decades has been in a sad state in many ways. One key to her recovery is the re-discovery of tradition: sacred music, reverent liturgy, Latin as a language and in the liturgy, and so on. That re-discovery will require traditionalists to help earnest, faithful Catholics (who are not traditionalists) understand how to recover that tradition. So my suggestion is that traditionalists commenting here realize their help is needed in this work.

          • Midwester

            I agree with you. Thank you for the clarification.

      • Dick Hertz

        By your own admission, they’re publishing your book. You have no credibility here. Kindly go away, thanks.

        • http://devinrose.heroicvirtuecreations.com/blog/ Devin Rose

          Dick, by your own admission, you have been using profanity and acting as if karma is true. Karma isn’t a Catholic belief, quite the contrary. So if anyone has less credibility here, it is you.

          That said, this isn’t your blog, and you don’t make the rules. You can be rude all you like–again, not a Christian virtue–but you won’t bother me any. I’ve dealt with rude people on the internet for a long time, including Catholics, sadly.

          The point is that they are publishing a book of someone who has traditional leanings.

          • Dave Armstrong

            I’ve attended Latin Mass for 22 years, and they published a book of mine, too. Patrick Madrid is on the show a lot. He attends the TLM, etc. It’s one of the silliest bum raps I’ve ever seen.

        • steve5656546346

          Mr. Hertz, that is not a valid agrument. As a traditionalist, I will not support Catholic Answers for reasons too extensive for a combox. Therefore, I disagree to some degree with Mr. Rose. But we are all fighting against an enemy, and I’m not for forming circular firing squads. To the contrary, I am very pleased that Mr. Rose is a traditional Catholic, and I am very pleased when I find others discovering tradition: even when they disagree with me on many things.

        • Midwester

          Was this necessary? What a boorish, uncharitable comment.

      • steve5656546346

        Point taken, Mr. Rose: but I think that Catholic Answers also painted with too broad, and too inaccurate, of a brush.

      • Montenegro

        Hi Devin. One point in your comment caught my attention. You say you invited the Clear Creek Monks to “open their next monastery” in your diocese. Unless I am gravely mistaken, a lay person cannot “invite” a religious order to “open shop” in their diocese. Only a local ordinary may invite a religious order into his diocese. Following such invitation, it may take many years for the order to consider founding another house. It is the same with the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, if I am not mistaken – they only become active in a diocese upon invitation of the local ordinary.

  • RobW

    For them to devote 2 hours on traditionalists, when a much bigger problem in the Church is liberalism and modernism, was a bad move and very strange. Maybe others that go after traditionalists such as Mark Shea will take notice. Shea actually lumped traditionalists who are concerned with Obama and children watching Harry Potter with holocaust deniers…unbelievable.

  • Dick Hertz

    It’s so freakin’ satisfying to see liberals put in their place. Michael Voris for Pope!!!!!

    • steve5656546346

      Don’t forget, ANYBODY can blow up. I like Voris a lot. But all Catholics fighting the good fight are in need of our prayers (including Catholic Answers).

      And then, we must decide to whom we will and will not donate.

  • dan

    See how Catholicism is built on itself and not biblical truth and therefore it lack giving true answers .

    • SusanL

      You really need to rethink things and study why the Catholic Church says what it says. The Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth. 1 Timothy 3:15.

  • Paul Morphy

    I was deliberately banned from Catholic Answers Forum, yet that website still have the gall to email me begging letters seeking donations.

  • john654

    I read some of the comments, It’s so sad to see the neo-protestant traditionalist bad mouth Catholic answers. The devil truly hates the Church. “Rad trads” are mean, nasty, angry, protestants, playing dress up, looking holy for all the world to see. They live in the flesh and make a mockery of obedience.

    • A new era in the Church

      Clueless, john654. Clueless.

    • Mona Lott

      Time to refill your prescription, Johnny Boy.

      • john654

        The “Trads” will be real happy if EWTN, The Fathers of Mercy, the Nashville Dominicans, St. Josephs communications, and all of the Catholic apologist, ETC, have hard times too! OH, I can’t forget Pope Francis! That’s because, Rad-Trads are EXACTLY like protestants: Disobedient!

    • thomasdeaquino

      You have learned well.

    • steve5656546346

      You obviously don’t understand the issues at all, and a combox is no place to explain them. I would suggest that you do some reading, or be silent.

      Your bile matches anything you could possibly be objecting to.

      As to obedience, obedience to whom? Am I not allowed to agree with virtually every Pope who ever lived?

  • Judith77

    Voris = hate for anyone not in his club. No doubt about it.

    • Christine Niles

      Oh give me a break.

      • SusanL

        But that’s what it looks like from here.

        • Christine Niles

          No, SusanL, it does not look like that from here. The comment claims that Voris himself “hates” anyone not in his so-called “club.” That is a flat-out falsehood. It’s also called calumny, a grave sin against charity.

          • David Finkelstein

            I remember a particular charitable Voris commentary where he was careful and thoughtfully describing the burden those with SSA have. I was very favorably impressed. Can Voris make mistakes? – of course – but I trust his sincerity and love his passion. He’s not a hateful man IMO

          • SusanL

            The way I read it might be different than the way you read it, Christine. (and it could be taken two different ways). I took it as: posters who are pro-Voris have hate for anyone not in his club. (shrugs). From reading a lot of these posts, that’s the way it looks to me. Not meaning you in particular but a lot of these posters are definitely hostile.

            btw, I know you posted this 3 days ago but I just got the email alert on it. Unless someone is responding to what I wrote, I’m staying away from this. As of a couple of days ago, it was getting ugly here. (definitely not meaning you, Christine).

            Let there be peace.

    • Anita Lay

      Typical “progressive Catholic.” Shouldn’t you be hugging a tree, complaining that requiring ID for voting is “discrimination” and preaching that sodomite marriage is OK because all that matters is “love.”

      I hope you don’t breed.

      Better yet, I’m going to PRAY that you don’t breed.

  • Another Martha

    I was also banned (temporary) from CA for posting a link in the news section about the (then) very hot “rent boy scandal” in the Vatican. I was told that it was too much of a sexually graphic story for CA (the Australian news story had NO graphic details)!! Now, if you have never been on their forum, you must know that on a daily basis extremely graphic discussions about masturbation, oral sex, and any other sexual topic you can image under the guise of “is it ok if my wife and I…” are allowed in the open forums. Repeatedly I’ve asked for them to put these discussions in a sequestered area away from minors (as much as is possible on the internet) with a great deal of other members agreeing with me. All requests have been ignored. But I am convinced that it is because there was also a link from the Michael Voris coverage in my news post that lead them to ban me for over a month. I’ve since been reinstated, but really don’t care anymore. That’s sad to me, because I’d been a very active member there for many years.

    I truly hope they can take this financial crisis as a learning opportunity to take a long hard look at what they are doing wrong — and fix it. There are a lot of things I think they do right and well, they are not evil by any means. But I feel very strongly that a great deal of the staff has truly lost their way. And that is sad for them personally, and as an organization that (hopefully) is on the same team as the rest of the good apostolates out there trying to save souls.

    • Anita Lay

      Hehehehe, you said “long and hard.” BANNED!!!

    • Simon D

      I was banned a few years back when (IIRC) I asked a question about Archbishop Bugnini. I was a candidate; they seemed to think that I was a Traddy muckraker. After a brief and obnoxious conversation with the forum mods and a contemptuous dismissal by the forum admin, I was banned, and technically remain so. Well, as one reaps, one sows. If their survival required nothing more than a word from me, they would not get it. They can proceed to whatever fate awaits them with my blessing; I will lift neither finger nor prayer in their defense. And I do not think that the world will be any worse for the collapse of a show on which the most common response to questions is an insulting “well, if you google it or go to our website….” Gee, one really wishes a caller would respond—google it? I never thought of that!

    • James M

      “Now, if you have never been on their forum, you must know that on a
      daily basis extremely graphic discussions about masturbation, oral sex,
      and any other sexual topic you can image under the guise of “is it ok if
      my wife and I…” are allowed in the open forums.”

      ## Happens all the time.

      “Repeatedly I’ve asked for them to put these discussions in a sequestered
      area away from minors (as much as is possible on the internet) with a
      great deal of other members agreeing with me.”

      ## That would seem to be a good solution. Their moderation is big-time sucky though.

  • JoeWetterling

    I’ve never heard or seen Catholic Answers be anything other than fair-handed. I don’t always think they handle every call or article *perfectly*, but none of us do. Do I think they cut a call short that should have continued? Sure, but I don’t know what’s going on behind the scenes there. Do I think they’ve misunderstood a question and not given the answer *I* would? Sure, but they’re not infallible and neither am I.

    Did they attack Catholics who love the extraordinary form or chant or traditional Catholic practices? Not at all.
    They spent a few hours on the topic of those who take traditional preferences so far as to deny any other Church teaching — that if it doesn’t suit my likes, then it must not be from God.

    They’ve addressed too-liberal practices often as well — things that do (or don’t) make a Mass invalid; or priests teaching incorrectly during Mass or in private meetings on contraception, marriage issues, etc.

    • steve5656546346

      And, precisely, what Church teaching do traditionalists reject? What NEW DOGMATIC declaration has been made by the Church at Vatican II or since?

      • JoeWetterling

        I didn’t say “traditionalists” reject anything. That’s my point — neither has Catholic Answers said that or anything against “traditionalists”.

        They spent that time on “radical traditionalism”, which is a different term that happens to include the same word To steal a line from a Joss Whedon movie (ironic choice, I know), “its like the difference between an elephant and an elephant seal”.

        What I said is that some (“radical traditionalists”, as CA put it) take their love of tradition so far as to say something new is *illegitimate*. For example, a “traditionalist” who loves the extraordinary form and only goes to that form weekly or daily is fine, commendable even. One who decides that, therefore, the ordinary form must be an invalid Mass and no sacrifice — they are who CA (and I) would take issue with. A traditionalist that accepts the recent popes as popes and the recent councils as councils and the ordinary form as… the ordinary form (even if they prefer the E.F.) is just fine. No issue.

        As to what dogmatic declarations were made at Vatican II: two dogmatic constitutions, Dei Verbum and Lumen Gentium. I haven’t said anyone rejects them, and I’d hope no one does.

  • Jacob

    I agree with Mona Lott, MIchael Voris is the new superstar of the Catholic Media for the devout young Catholic, Catholic Answers is part of the dying Vatican II crowd. Send your $10.00 a month to ChurchMilitantTV.com Don’t give Catholic Answers ANY money

    • SusanL

      My daughter is 20. How is she part of the “dying Vatican II crowd?” I’m a convert. And I’m not part of any dying crowd. If only for the uncharitable, un-Christ-like posts I’ve seen here, I’m going to make a donation to Catholic Answers. Catholic Answers is doing a lot of good in this world. Thanks for convincing me to donate.

      • Cassandra

        Susan, if I said something “uncharitable” about Voris, would you donate to him, too?

        • Guest

          No.

        • SusanL

          No. (that was a bit ridiculous, don’t you think?)

      • Deborah

        Susan, why not pull away from “uncharitable, un-Christ-like posts” on both sides and for the love of the Lord in your heart, give a donation to a “Lazarus” that you may see in every day real life while saying a prayer for everyone caught up in these mutual attacks.

        • SusanL

          I’m not quite sure what you’re talking about concerning “Lazarus.” Christine, I do pray a lot and I am doing a great deal of charity…to the point that it sometimes hurts. I am very distressed that people are taking such shots at Catholic Answers. I believe that it is unjustified and mean-spirited (by quite a few posters). I’m not giving a money to Voris because I don’t know him and right now I have so much to listen to and study, etc etc etc that I don’t want to spend the time checking him out. Maybe some day but not now. I’ve seen one or two things on Youtube but I haven’t seen anything as of yet to warrant this sense of “hero worship” that I’m seeing here.

          • Nate C

            “I don’t want to spend time checking him out”, sorta sounds like a problem with your thinking Susan.

          • SusanL

            Not really, Nate.

          • john654

            SusanL, your heart is in the right place. Don’t try to argue too much with “traditionalist”. They are an angry bunch. They concern themselves with externals. They live in the flesh and are mean! They are protestant, and lip service Jesus’ Church. If you talk to them about the Holy Spirit they will go “Hay Wire” on you. Faith is in their head. They are stone cold dissidents, false teachers!

          • steve5656546346

            John, you honestly seem angry to me.

          • john654

            steve5656546346 You think I “seem” to be angry. What was your first clue? Of course I’m angry. I’m 62 years old and I had to deal with all the vicious abuse in the Latin Mass when I was young, all the attacks, against the Pope, from Protestants growing up. Then the liberal jerks in Calif for 25 years, and now the insidious Rad-trads. You bet I’m angry and I’ve told more than one of you neo-protestants where to get off. Often in public! Kiss my spiritual ass, “friend”. I’m done!

          • Phil Steinacker

            John, you are speaking falsehoods, friend. Be careful you don’t receive Communion without confessing this – really!
            There are some angry trads, this is true. While I don’t defend the uncharitable ones, I understand the hurt they carry at having been persistently attacked when all they were trying to do was protect Catholic Tradition from being destroyed by those who lied about what Vatican II actually says about liturgy (for example, but not only). Of course, ambiguous language deliberately inserted by liberal bishops gave their allies at home the leverage to tear down the Church and destroy the beliefs of the faithful. Catholics born after 1960 or converts from Protestant churches have no memory of what has been taken from them.
            Back to your over-generalization. Those who’ve succumbed to bitterness are not serving Christ (and need our prayers – really) any more than you are. But you need to know that since the Latin Mass was restored the number of weekly Traditional Latin Masses scheduled nationally has grown from 31 to over 450. Also, the single largest demographic populating these Masses is also the fastest-growing demographic: teens and young families 20s to mid 30s. These folks don’t carry memories of abuse and betrayal, and therefore they’re not angry. You have just maligned them and given Susan an incorrect impression of other Catholics.
            You are engaging in reading hearts by accusing them of concern with externals, being mean, and being Protestant.
            And speaking of anger, you appear to have been drinking the David Koresh Kool-Aid yourself. Could it be that you are one of the new-conservatives who can barely conceal their contempt for traditional Catholicism?
            If I was a mind reader like you I’d be sorely tempted to proclaim it as loudly as you condemned traditionalists.
            But I’m not, and I remember that Jesus taught that trying to read someone’s heart is an act of judgment of the divine kind, and is reserved to Him and not you or me.
            What you’ve done here is no small thing. If I had posted such vitriol I would – once I calmed down – feel compelled to find my priest before Mass tomorrow and confess.

          • john654

            SusanL,
            Like I said, “Don’t try to argue too much with “traditionalist”. Again, Traditionalist, like Phil Steinacker, (see his post to me) are absolutely amazing. Keep your eyes on the Eucharist and be obedient to the teachings of Rome. Avoid bad company!

          • Deborah

            Hi Susan,
            I’m Deborah, and I made the above comment in an attempt, if a clumsy one, to help sooth the distress all the angry comments were causing you. I could tell that you love the Lord and his Church deeply and suggested what I usually do when online controversy gets mean and senseless – I pull away and pray and do something “simple” for the Lord like personally give some small help to somone in need that I may encounter in daily life (or something like that) rather than organizations. It helps to get my heart and mind back in focus on the Lord. Sorry if it came across badly. God Bless.

          • SusanL

            Thank you, Deborah. Yes, I had to step away from this forum because I was getting too angry about the whole thing. I appreciate your kind words.

          • steve5656546346

            What you are seeing is distress at Catholic Answers taking such shots at traditional Catholics: both the recent shows, and in their forums.

          • SusanL

            Well, I can’t speak for the forums (is that simply the posters or is it the administrators?) but the I’ve never heard that on the radio programs.

          • Phil Steinacker

            Steve, I’m aware of what you’re talking about, and agree. However, I can see a real disconnect for many Catholic converts unfamiliar with traditionalist views and who lack an historical perspective of the overt hostility and abuse by progressives and neo-conservatives targeting tradition over the past 45 years.
            Most of us have long ago formed our awareness of those groups and individuals by their doing everything possible to destroy tradition in the Church. It wasn’t only progressives who howled when Benedict restored the Latin Mass; neo-conservatives also joined the chorus, but converts struggle with recognizing the problem because on so many highly visible points groups like CA are doctrinally orthodox.
            Since most but not all converts are largely unfamiliar with the Traditional Latin Mass they’re not going to get the subtlety of the attacks. Hence David Bates sincerely wants to understand but can see only a few remarks which don’t seem earth-shattering to him, and I understand why. He lacks history and therefore context. Same is likely true for Susan.
            They simply haven’t had to contend with the with varying levels of condescension and opprobrium – both subtle and not so subtle – which we have experienced.
            David and Susan, unfortunately it is very challenging – both logistically and in the consumption of emotional energy – for anyone to do exhaustive research to present you with the cumulative impact of the abuses and wounding to which the traditionalist community has been subjected over 45 years. We don’t need to keep handy quick reference points suitable for entry as evidence exhibits to convince you of the legitimacy of our position regarding CA.
            Yet I see and understand your quandary. All I can tell you is the CA – while not the only party guilty of such nastiness – has certainly brought this on themselves over time. They are guilty of all the double standards practiced on the CA Forum that I’ve seen described here.

        • SusanL

          Wow. I thought I answered this. Maybe I did but to the wrong poster. lol. If I did, I’m sorry.
          Anyways, I am pulling away unless someone responds to what I wrote and then I get an alert (three days later but…).

          I donate quite a bit to locals around here but I’m definitely going to donate to CA. No doubt about it.

  • Stmykearchangel

    Sorry CA gets none of my money till they stop bashing Trads!

  • Stu

    I don’t want to see Catholic Answers fail. They have been a force for good in the Church and even for me personally in learning from a steady stream of listening to their Catholic Answers Live program. And while I am sympathetic to their plight, I also believe they have stepped on the toes of so-called “traditional Catholics.”

    Long ago, I used to post on their forums. But when it became clear that the moderators had a very heavy hand for anything related to promoting traditional aspects of the Faith, especially the Extraordinary Form, I grew disinterested and simply walked away. I similarly listened to their program in May that caused such a stir. Was it perfect? No, of course not. But I understood that they did their best and that the topic can be difficult. But it was Patrick Coffin’s defense of the show (“Meet the Mad Trads”), in the wake of some legitimate criticism that really threw me.

    I’m a fan of Patrick Coffin. I like his presentation and humor and thought he was a true upgrade to the host position. But that article was like Jekyll and Hyde and to me was really enlightening. It was divisive and served no purpose in promoting the Truth. It gave no hint that there was any introspection on their part and instead set out to attack. I found especially ironic that calling of one group “High Church Protestants” all while bemoaning other Catholics being called “neo-Catholic.” And like with the forums, I have since just drifted away from listening to them and found other suitable Catholic programming.. And at that time, I was really on the verge of becoming a donor.

    I do hope their dry spell passes.

    • steve5656546346

      Yours was the best post yet!

  • Baptismal Vows

    Here is my take on this – Come on folks! I personally enjoy Catholic Answers and Church Militant TV. These ministries offer a great service to the Church. Faithful Catholics can and should support both. There is no contradiction or disparity between the two. In an environment of liberal and secular hostility toward the Church it is baffling to me why faithful and orthodox Christians (Catholics) argue with each other on these points. All Catholics should be united. The real battle is the fight against satanic influences against our culture and youth. Sure the Triditine Mass is the most powerful weapon at our disposal, but the Trads shouldn’t discourage others, but rather encourage.

  • Fred

    Someone on Creative Minority Report who was upset with Catholic Answers linked to the discussion here. I just got off my butt & donated to CA. For the life of me, I don’t understand the criticism of their handling of the topic of radical traditionalism. I heard those shows. They were specifically talking about those outside of communion with the church SSPX & sedevacantists — not traditionalists within the church. It was a fair subject and handled fairly. CA is a great apostate and I will continue to support them.

    • thomasdeaquino

      “those outside of communion with the church SSPX…”

      This is the problem. They are Catholic and therefore not out of communion with the Church. It is for this relentless calumny of faithful Catholics that I wish Catholic Answers a speedy demise.

      • David Bates

        I would suggest that Mr. Staples draw careful distinctions in this area, particularly with regards to canonical status.

    • steve5656546346

      They were not talking accurately, and painted with too broad a brush.

  • AquinasMan

    What traditionalists fail to grasp, is that, 50 years later, the Novus Ordo is part of Tradition, whether they like it or not.

    I lament that there are factions which are so off the reservation of the left, they have made the Church almost unrecognizable in some quarters. They will answer for their disloyalty to Rome. I lament that some “traditionalists” are now isolating themselves into a virtual Catholic ghetto over their pride. They will also answer for their disloyalty to Rome.

    As for me and my family, we will follow Peter.

    • Stu

      That’s a lot of generalization.

    • thomasdeaquino

      And what do you do when Peter fails to pass on the remote rule of faith? Such a scenario is entirely compatible with Christ’s promises to his Church.

  • A new era in the Church

    With their apologists all making over $100,000 in the fiscal year ending 06-30-2010, and their president making over $200,000 in the same year, I would say that they would do just fine if they stopped treating Catholicism as a lucrative business. It’s embarrassing. In this economy, many people would be happy to be making half the amount of the apologists’ salaries. See page 8 at following link. Hat tip commenter at Harvesting the Fruit blog.
    https://bulk.resource.org/irs.gov/eo/2011_05_EO/95-3754404_990_201006.pdf

    • SusanL

      I have no problem with them making that amount. Is San Diego cheap to live in? Now if they came to live in my neck of the woods, $200,000 would be living pretty well. $100,000, while a good salary, is not outlandish. And I’m sure they’ve earned it. No…I don’t begrudge them the money.

      • Becky

        I live in a similar priced area and we live off MUCH less. While I do think CA does some good work I think their salaries are outlandish.

      • wyllow

        Michael Voris stated his salary from Church Militant is $40,000 per yer. A cost of living caclulator; http://money.cnn.com/calculator/pf/cost-of-living/ shows that same $40K in Detroit would need to be $54K in San Diego. So yes, it’s higher but $100K per year? That’s excessive.

  • Rob West

    I deeply feel CA needs to go away. They should even change the name “Catholic Answers” because they surely do not provide traditional, orthodox, Catholic Answers. CA has chosen to adopt the attitude of what we’ve all come to know as the church of nice. They do not speak out against the evil going ons in the church, especially the evils that are currently being perpetuated by our Catholic bishops. I don’t know about the rest of you but I can no longer listen to CA staff apologists on the radio pushing their brand of the church of nice and expecting the rest of us to fbut into it. I have cut them off entirely and I’m sorry it had to come to that. Hopefully, it is good bye to CA, so their liberal brand of Catholicism will not infect anyone else.

  • KOJohnson

    It all comes down to doctrine and discipline. You either teach the Catechism and the Code fully and accurately, or you don’t. You either refer every question to a point in those sources, or you don’t. Any Catholic apologist needs to stick immovably to doctrine and discipline, well understood and fully and accurately expounded. There’s no “liberal” or “conservative”, no “traditionalist” or “modernist” in the Church: there’s only accurate or inaccurate, correct or incorrect, right or wrong. That’s all that there is to it.

  • Anita Lay

    Voris rules! CA drools!

  • Anita Lay

    The mere fact that they seek to quash threads about the Great Michael Voris, is reason enough to hope CA closes up shop. I really despise leftists.

    • David Bates

      Apart from quashing threads about Mr. Voris, what qualifies someone to receive the title of “leftist”?

  • SueC

    This makes me so sad. CA is what led me to the Church and blew away all my misconceptions of the Church that had been ingrained in me in my 34 years as a Protestant. So sad to read these comments. So much for unity huh?

    • steve5656546346

      Well, that is precisely the objection, Sue: so much for unity!

      Traditional Catholics are part of the Church and are needed for unity: bashing them is divisive when it is done in a way that is inaccurate or paints in too broad of a brush.

      • John Flaherty

        Except that SSPX in particular has never precisely sought unity with the rest of the Church. If anything, they’ve historically either claimed that the rest of the Church isn’t Catholic, or that “the seat is empty”, or that Rome needs to reconcile with them, or some other excuse.

        I’ve only seen an interest in honoring the pope within the last few years, and even that hasn’t acknowledged his authority.

        You can’t bash someone else about being divisive when your own bunch is the one doing most of the dividing.

  • john654

    If you have the “Spiritual Guts” to watch a short video, “Home Movies” of a obedient Catholic community that LOVES the Latin and Novus Ordo Mass, and is OBEDIENT to the Church, ENJOY! (Video is about 10 years old?) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugNlaex5IwI

  • john654

    This Video will REALLY make the “Trads” MAD! Catholics having fun! The Brothers in the video are now both OBEDIENT Priest.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrULsr2RUj8

  • john654
  • daisy

    Catholic Answers spent two hours bashing traditionalists, a group that is far larger than the SSPX and now begs for money? Nuts to that.

    • David Bates

      Could you give us a specific example? Do you have a quotation of something said or written by Catholic Answers that you think is unfair?

  • Overstated much?

    Hyperbole is fun isn’t it?
    So is internet fighting when you don’t have to talk to anyone face-to-face, right?

    CA offended a few of you who thought they took a personal jab at your piety and now you want to throw them under the bus. Don’t donate to them, that is your choice. But, the calumny and bashing of CA isn’t warranted or deserved.

    They have done more for Mother Church than anybody else. They saw some problematic tendencies in some traditionalists (including me) and pointed them out. That sounds like true charity to me – (log in your eye Catholics) and not a “persecution” or any other such exaggeration.

    Please lay of the rhetoric.

    • A new era in the Church

      Be a Catholic Answers sycophant if you want. That’s *your choice*. A lot of people–liberals, moderates, conservatives–like to bash traditionalists and call them names, but these same attackers can’t take a punch when the traditionalists hit back in defense of continuity in our tradition. The truth of the matter is, Catholic Answers, and the sycophants who defend them while accusing others of “calumny,” accept a hermeneutic of rupture in numerous doctrinal areas. I used to like Catholic Answers a great deal 10-15 years ago, when the Church was on shakier ground and cracking the whip of basic orthodoxy was more necessary. But now we are in a different place in the Church and beyond orthodox vs. heterodox; we’re now grappling with questions of how faithful we’ve been to our full Catholic tradition. We know what side Catholic Answers has come down on in this debate. We’ll vote with our wallets and have our say. You can vote with your wallet and have your say. But spare us the nonsense about logs in eyes and accusations of calumny when you disagree with someone.

      • David Bates

        Bash what though?! An example quotation please of their supposed evil.

        • steve5656546346
        • Susan H.

          David, one example of a statement that Patrick Coffin made which I found offensive was that traditionalists tend to focus too much on “trivialities” like which way the priest faces at mass. Pope Benedict didn’t seem to think this was trivial at all.

          • David Bates

            I went back and listened to the shows.

            Tim and Patrick had been speaking about the distinction between the *teaching* of Vatican II and the *implementation* of Vatican II in the years that followed the Council. They contrasted the response of Poland to that of other countries. Tim then mentioned the sizable role played by the Church in Poland in bringing down Communist rule:

            “If the Church in Poland was obsessed with minutia, and which direction the priest is facing and so on, it becomes a hall of mirrors, and a hell of mirrors. The Church in Poland seems to me, [to have] revolutionized Poland because it was focused on Jesus and on the message of His Gospel” – Programme #2, 23:01

            I’m not Patrick, so I can’t speak for him, but I don’t believe for one second that he thinks that liturgy and rubrics are unimportant. I interpreted his words in this way…

            I would suggest that here he was praising the Polish Church’s obedience to the Council and their implementation of it. In particular, I would say he is praising their evangelical attitude, their fidelity to core Gospel values and their commitment to being salt and light, when they could have instead just spent a lot of time and energy arguing about rubrics.

            Personally speaking, my parish is an Eastern Rite parish where the priest prays “Ad Orientem”. It is easily one of my favourite things about the older liturgies. I wasn’t offended by Patrick’s words, particularly given what he has said about liturgy in other shows.

    • steve5656546346

      Traditionalists commonly point out the problem of being traditionalist: you can see cautions and reminders on most traditional web sites, and hear them at most any traditional conference.

      But never in my entire life have I heard even one non-tradtionalist Catholic do ANY self examination about what the particular dangers might be of NOT being a traditionalist. Of being a conservative, or neo-conservative, or whatever term describes but does not insult. Is that not odd?

  • thomasdeaquino

    I would not give them a penny. Their coverage of the Society of St Pius X has been woefully ignorant and deeply uncharitable.

    • David Bates

      As I have asked everyone else who has posted such comments, could you please give a quotation of something CA have said to which you find fault?

      • steve5656546346

        See The Remnant web site…

        • David Bates

          I’m sympathetic to the more Traditional forms of Catholic expression, I am. I belong to an Eastern Rite Church so I’m used to receiving rather confused looks from fellow Catholics.

          However, I’m getting a little suspicious here… Is it really that hard to produce some concrete evidence for the supposed evils of Catholic Answers?

          Someone else mentioned The Remnant, but the article I came across spent 90% of the time arguing that Protestants invented the Novus Ordo. What are all these horrible things that Catholic Answers have been saying? Here’s the kind of thing I’m looking for:

          “People who like the Extraordinary Form of the Mass are smelly” – Patrick Coffin, 08/29/2013, Show: “Traditional Catholicism is Boring”

          …or….

          “Why do all the women wear silly doilies on their heads?!” – Jimmy Akin, 08/28/2013, “What’s with the Rad Trad Weirdos?”

          • steve5656546346

            I’m not sure why you would limit what is objectionable to comments like you have illustrated. Misrepresenting others and misrepresenting the issues is objectionable enough.

          • David Bates

            I was just giving an example, that’s all. There’s a lot of talk here about the horrendous evils of CA, but it never seems to get into specific, concrete examples. Without this, it makes it hard for me to take the complaints seriously.

  • daisy

    If they can’t run their business with a profit it needs to fail. That’s the bottom line. Don’t try to make me feel guilty.

    • David Bates

      Apostolates don’t need to be supported? Ouch.

      • steve5656546346

        I presume that the point is that financial ability is like vocations: when it is not there, that indicates a problem.

        • David Bates

          I find that logic extremely shaky. Large numbers of apostolates are funded (at least in part) by donations and will have occasional shortfalls for which they must campaign, particularly during tough economic times.

  • Josh

    If anyone would like to hear the sermons of catholic traditionalist priests, you can visit audiosancto.org to see what traditional catholicism is. You will see what has been stolen from you in the great majority of catholic parishes in the United States for the last 40 years.

  • Jim

    I for one cannot stand Catholics Answers. I try to listen to it. I really do try. I turn it on. I find lame or offensive or both, and usually filled with misinformation, such as, the Latin Vulgate is not the Bible, an opinion as opposed to the fact stated by Ven. Pius XII in his encyclical stating that the Vulgate can teach no error for it is true scripture. This reminds me of the sunrise morning show where I once heard on a zero degree commute across the tundra to my work, “Here comes Encyclical Man.” Followed by, “Nobody seriously reads those!” And, “There is nothing worse than a Catholic who can quote encyclicals.” The hosts of the morning show were being dead serious. Or, how about the time that they answered, “No, Catholics do not fast from meat on Fridays anywhere.”

    I just cannot listen to their broadcasts, and I try hard to listen. I really do. I also try really hard to make my ends meet. I cannot afford my house. Maybe I should get a job at Catholic Answers. Getting paid like they do would be like living in a Fantasy Land.

    • David Bates

      > “the Latin Vulgate is not the Bible”

      Who from Catholic Answers said this and when? I’m rather doubtful that this is the full quotation.

      Your other comments concern a show with which I have no familiarity, although I suspect there’s more to those quotations. My guess is that the first quotation was said sarcastically and that the second, at worst, missed out some qualifying words.

      • wyllow

        What is your personal stake in Catholic Answers, David? You have commented on nearly every post in this discussion.

        • David Bates

          I have no particular stake in Catholic Answers, financial or otherwise. However, I care about truth and fairness.

          If someone is going to attack an apostolate, he or she must be specific and provide concrete evidence. Unsupported pronouncements will not do, neither will loose paraphrases of things said on air, devoid of all context or qualification.

          I responded to most of the posts because many were both accusatory and vague. I wanted to see if there was any substance here, whether those who said such things would be willing to back up their claims and hyperbolic language.

          • Paul Morphy

            “I have no particular stake in Catholic Answers, financial or otherwise.”

            I have my doubts as to the veracity of that statement.
            Anyhow it is very reassuring to read all the critical comments about CA’s website. Robert Bray and Tom Casey are doing their level best to censor their website.

          • Dale

            Paul, if you visit David’s blog you won’t find any mention of Catholic Answers, nor any link to them. He does, however, express in interest in apologetics. He explained his posts in this discussion as being motivated by a concern for truth and fairness. I would take him at his word.

          • David Bates

            > I have my doubts as to the veracity of that statement.

            That sounds like an awfully nice way of calling me a liar. On what basis do you doubt my claim?

  • Churchill4President

    I despise Catholic Answers. They have a Novus Ordo agenda that permeates their live radios shows and their discussion forums. I will never donate a PENNY to them. They continually protect heretics and homosexuals which is a disgrace. Some of their so-called “apologists” are just rude and nasty people.

    • David Bates

      How have they they “protect[ed] heretics and homosexuals”? An example please.

  • Allan Daniel

    I will not support Catholic Answers until they show they realize the desperate straits the Catholic Church is in. They do a good job at answering questions to enable people to enter the church. But once these souls arrive they find a sinkhole of corruption, indifference and even heresy. Much if not most of this scandalous behavior is glossed over by Catholic Answers.

    • David Bates

      Do you think it is the job of a fireman to find housing for a family after he’s saved them from a fire? Would you say that those who pray outside abortion clinics must also adopt as many children as possible?

      Likewise, is it the job of Catholic Answers to be both an apologetics apostolate *and* a watchdog organization concerning the US Bishops?

  • kathyschiffer

    Note: I had to delete a comment here, and want to explain why. The individual had a good and important message, but failed to say it without breaking house rules and spotting it with obscenity.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X