Perhaps Father Longenecker can tell us all how much money he makes from blogging at Patheos. Perhaps he can advise us how much money he puts into their bank by writing for them – a webpage that puts the one, true, faith of Catholicism on an even par with Protestantism, Hinduism, Paganism, witchcraft and atheism! Is that something that a faithful Catholic priest or layman such as Armstrong or Shea should be supporting? What does Father Longenecker do all day? (Hey Father Longenecker – thanks for the publicity!, Vox Cantoris, 5-27-16)
I can reveal how much I make writing for Patheos day in and day out. I have before. It averages out to 94 cents an hour, and adds up to $150 a month.
Anyone else out there wanna jump on that gravy train? Bust your rear end day in and day out to try to spread the truth of the fullness of the Catholic faith and get less than a dollar an hour of honest wages for it? Who could pass that up? It’s so utterly obvious, isn’t it?: that money and only money motivates folks like me and my friend, Fr. Longenecker . . . we have so much money we don’t know what to do with it. Anyone out there need some? I have a big underground cave in my backyard filled with gold coins.
One of the commenters on this idiot-blog (“Connecticut Catholic Corner”) wrote:
It is my personal belief the Longenecker purposely says things for the $$$ it will bring him. He rarely seems to do any research into the subject he is ranting about and instead prefers to toss out names that will bring traffic to his Patheos blog- again for more $$$$.
[Taylor Marshall — who probably makes more than $250,000 a year — recently made the same claim about me]
Yes! That 94 cents an hour / $150 / month gravy train again! I work for two days in order to make what my son makes in two hours on his job. I get book royalties, too, and other income, but the point is that the time spent at Patheos (the great bulk of my time in a week) is not big-time cash.
I’m sure Fr. Longenecker’s experience at Patheos is not that different from mine. Nor is writing about these pharisaical, pathetic reactionaries something that attracts lots of hits in the first place. No one cares about them. I even get a lot of criticisms for giving them any attention at all.
Again, I can give actual numbers from my Google Analytics statistics. They think they are so super-important and a means for folks at Patheos to “get attention” and notoriety that we don’t deserve at all. Steve Skojec has said this repeatedly about myself and others.
This is a self-deluded lie: delusions of grandeur. The truth is that my recent article about Steve Skojec got a dinky 384 views so far, or almost seven times less than my most-read article this month, that has 2644 views, and the 15th highest total for the month. Big wow. Whoop-de-doo!So these clowns lie about how much money we supposedly make at Patheos, and they lie about our occasional articles about their nattering inanities bringing us truckloads of all this imaginary income.
Fr. Dwight Longenecker chimed in:
I don’t usually discuss this, because it is nobody’s business, but one of the promises I made to my parish and my bishop when I went to work as a parish priest of a small parish in the most socio economic part of Greenville is that I would take no more financial remuneration from the parish than a celibate priest of this diocese is entitled to. So do I need to work extra hard to bring in some extra cash with three college kids and one in high school? Yup. I’m not complaining. Just sayin’.
I wrote elsewhere:
My own papers devoted to the reactionaries are just a tiny portion of my entire output (some 1400 articles). Yet these clowns are so delusional they think that the bulk of my attention is devoted to their crazed antics. As an apologist I literally deal with scores of major topics and hundreds of sub-topics.
These nitwits are one of those topics. But for anyone to think that it is some sort of major or exclusive focus of my work, only proves that they know little or nothing of my work as a whole.
If, say, my articles about reactionaries were one-hundredth of all my articles, that would still be 14 articles. And then the reactionaries would conclude that I am “obsessed” with them, etc. :-)
I think I may have written about 50 articles altogether. If so, that is still but 3.6% of my output: hardly an “emphasis.” True emphases of mine would be articles about sola Scriptura, or Luther, or the Eucharist, or defense of the Blessed Virgin Mary and the communion of saints, etc.
(originally 5-29-16 on Facebook)