:) Great link, Doc. For a very long time Shea has been the Yosemite Sam of the Patheos Posse and he is forever leading them into box canyons where their bleating echoes tickle their own ears.
M.J. only reads Shea when some rational blog links to him but when he does read Share he sees that nothing has changed although he leads the ultramontane papolatrist league in public apologies for his rancid rants.
O, and has anybody done the sums of the many times he has personally lied about another but refused to debate them?
He did such a thing to Dr E Michael Jones- lied about him - and then refused to debate him publicly.
There are many reasons Shea has for refusing to debate those he publicly insults....
Ferrarra's material actually has scholarly backbone. "The Great Facade" may upset, but only because its conclusions are hard to dispute. Shea just shamelessly name drops to buttress his credibility sen as he name calls. As for Ferrara calling Saint John Paul II the Great a covert Moslem, I can't imagine you actually have a citation for that one.
I don't think anyone (ANYONE) ever claimed that John Paul II was a secret Moslem. What traditionalists (Catholics with sound sense) have trouble with is the imprudent carelessness of such actions, especially such as "Assisi I" and "Assisi II." They are not limited to John Paul. Benedict XVI had his moments, such as praying in the Blue Mosque facing Mecca, just as Francis has had his moments, with Jews, Moslems, and wacko Pentecostal charismatics.
The problem is that these gestures corrode Catholic Faith among would-be Catholics, suggesting to many that all religions are, deep down, alternative ways to heaven, which they're not, suggesting, in other words, that other religions could possibly be "just as good as home-grown Catholicism." That is hardly good for the Church.
Gary SimmonsMark Shea 8 hrs • Edited • How many times have you been "exposed" now? Can you truly be stopped? Like • • 2 people like this. • Mark Shea it's all good. They go to my blog to perseverate on my sheer evilness. I make money on pageviews. 8 hrs • Like • 9
The concern with JP II's et al's actions was not that they were closet Muslims or what have you, it was indifferentism and syncretism. The difference between Shea and Ferrara is that Ferrara actually employs reason and logic, Shea just employs "because, Pope!" and insults, as do most of the Patheos crowd.
"Evilness"? A rotund scribbler affecting Chestertonian poses in his photographs and espousing things that would make the original chaw his cigar in two? But at least he's candid here about what he's willing to do for money.
9 comments:
See this in relation to Shea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8TxPoRoH8I&google_comment_id=z13igjdxfwzzd12hb04chrsidorxvltowxw0k&google_view_type#gpluscomments
Other than "Beautiful!," no comment necessary.
Shea vs Ferrara?
What's the difference?
Both make emotive appeals to play to their readership.
Both are intrenched ideologues.
Reno's criticism's where spot in regards to Maureen Mullarkey. They where also kind and charitable.
BTW if we believe Ferrara should we have believed Pope St John Paul II was a secret Muslim for kissing a Koran?
Well how did he become a Saint then?
:) Great link, Doc. For a very long time Shea has been the Yosemite Sam of the Patheos Posse and he is forever leading them into box canyons where their bleating echoes tickle their own ears.
M.J. only reads Shea when some rational blog links to him but when he does read Share he sees that nothing has changed although he leads the ultramontane papolatrist league in public apologies for his rancid rants.
O, and has anybody done the sums of the many times he has personally lied about another but refused to debate them?
He did such a thing to Dr E Michael Jones- lied about him - and then refused to debate him publicly.
There are many reasons Shea has for refusing to debate those he publicly insults....
Ferrarra's material actually has scholarly backbone. "The Great Facade" may upset, but only because its conclusions are hard to dispute. Shea just shamelessly name drops to buttress his credibility sen as he name calls. As for Ferrara calling Saint John Paul II the Great a covert Moslem, I can't imagine you actually have a citation for that one.
I don't think anyone (ANYONE) ever claimed that John Paul II was a secret Moslem. What traditionalists (Catholics with sound sense) have trouble with is the imprudent carelessness of such actions, especially such as "Assisi I" and "Assisi II." They are not limited to John Paul. Benedict XVI had his moments, such as praying in the Blue Mosque facing Mecca, just as Francis has had his moments, with Jews, Moslems, and wacko Pentecostal charismatics.
The problem is that these gestures corrode Catholic Faith among would-be Catholics, suggesting to many that all religions are, deep down, alternative ways to heaven, which they're not, suggesting, in other words, that other religions could possibly be "just as good as home-grown Catholicism." That is hardly good for the Church.
From Facebook
Gary SimmonsMark Shea
8 hrs • Edited •
How many times have you been "exposed" now? Can you truly be stopped?
Like •
• 2 people like this.
•
Mark Shea it's all good. They go to my blog to perseverate on my sheer evilness. I make money on pageviews.
8 hrs • Like • 9
The concern with JP II's et al's actions was not that they were closet Muslims or what have you, it was indifferentism and syncretism. The difference between Shea and Ferrara is that Ferrara actually employs reason and logic, Shea just employs "because, Pope!" and insults, as do most of the Patheos crowd.
"Evilness"? A rotund scribbler affecting Chestertonian poses in his photographs and espousing things that would make the original chaw his cigar in two? But at least he's candid here about what he's willing to do for money.
Post a Comment