Friday, August 19, 2011

Michael Voris, again

I carried a piece the other day saying I didn't much like Voris' style but happily admitted lots of young people I admire do. One or two people left some comments which relate to a story linked on Sanctae Pater, in fairness I think it is worth looking at those links.
I was hoping to post a rather longer than usual video presentation of his, "No Bull in Madrid" which seemed to be saying much what I said this morning but it has now been removed. I am sorry about that, I thought it was quite good.
Instead, here is a video of his on the evils of Priscillianism!

9 comments:

Vincenzo said...

Father, it appears that RCTV removed the original video and re-uploaded it. The link is available here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwLrvpsMhvE&

Andrew Leach said...

While I won't comment on the merits or otherwise of various postures for reception of the Blessed Sacrament, I would ask: Is there not an error of logic implied in the video?

Priscillianists may have stood to receive in the hand, from a particular doctrinal stance; but it doesn't follow that everyone who does so is a Priscillianist and follows their heretical beliefs. At best the video is in error; worse it may be deliberately disingenuous in presenting that aspect of the heresy as its totality.

Ma Tucker said...

How very very interesting. RealCatholic Tv does very very good work. I suppose we should not be surprised that it comes under attack.

Ma Tucker said...

Andrew,
I think the kernel of the issue is the fact that a more outwardly devotional and pius action is replaced with a less outwardly devotional and pius one. How you dress the excuse for the change is completely immaterial. Human beings have great imaginations and can make up the most sublime and beautiful reasons for everything they do.

"Priscillianists may have stood to receive in the hand, from a particular doctrinal stance; but it doesn't follow that everyone who does so is a Priscillianist and follows their heretical beliefs."

This statement is quite right, and the video does not state otherwise. It simply points out that in the early church a certain action followed as a consequence of error. The remedy was a return to devotional practices and a rejection of the error.

Michael1 said...

I agree with Andrew as a matter of logic.

There are other false inferences in the broadcast: heresies such as Manichaeanism and Gnosticism are horribly over-simplified, and there is the common error of assuming that the 'correct' way to receive communion is on the tongue because that is how the Pope gives communion. There is - perhaps - an argument to be had, but the Pope's practice should not be used as the main plank of the argument.

Pope John Paul II was advised to give communion on the tongue for security and good religious reasons: there was evidence of some misguided souls attempting to keep hosts as souvenirs. Pope Benedict as Pope has followed the same practice. It would be interesting to know whether he did so as Cardinal Ratzinger, or whether his concern is simply pragmatic. It seems to be unwise and premature to draw doctrinal inferences from apparent practice when there has been - as far as I know - no official statement on the matter.

Marie said...

Reminds me of the Graham Greene short story where a communicant managed to retain the Host, took it home and proceeded to analyse it, to look for changes!

I can certainly see how the Pope would be advised to follow tradition.

Another Marie said...

Fr. Ray,

The YIMCatholic blog has an critical analysis on this video. When you get a chance can you offer some thoughts? Apparently, priscillianism is not quite what Michael leads people to believe it is.

http://yimcatholic.blogspot.com/2011/08/want-to-fight-truthiness-come-to.html

Half Way Across the Tiber said...

@ Michael and Andrew

Frederick William Faber's hymn speaks volumes on the "correct" way to receive Communion, which posture is acceptable etc......

But we make His love too narrow
by false limits of our own
and we magnify His strictness
with a zeal He will not own.

If our love were but more simple
we would take Him at His word
And our lives would be illumined
by the presence of Our Lord.

Richard said...

I assume Priscillianism is to do with Australians wearing women's clothes?