Friday, February 5, 2016

Bear Banned From Church Militant for Being Bear

The Bear has been banned by Church Militant, and his comments removed. Their objection is that the Bear's name draws attention to his ephemeris. Why would they object to a Bear having an ephemeris? Oh, sure, it's fine for humans, but, apparently, not for Bears.

Their explanatory email said, in part, "You must do so as a human being (not as a bear) and without bringing attention to your blog, which your Disqus screen name does." (Emphasis added.)

Frankly, this is blatant discrimination against Bears everywhere. "Not as a bear." Their very words condemn them. Apparently, the Bear could post as a muskrat, and that would be fine. The Bear is certain Pope Francis would condemn this speciesism if he were aware of this outrage.

The Bear will not change his Disqus name to bow to Church Militant's ugly prejudice against Bears. Nobody else seems to mind it.


  1. Your banning shows how egocentric Voris & Co. are. I suspect they were also afraid that people coming to their site might want to throw you a fish after visiting your site. They want are the fish to be thrown at them, IMO.

  2. Pantywaist Church Militant banned me months ago. They do some good stuff, so have their niche, but there's some really juvenile editorialising going on in that warehouse in Ferndale.

  3. I voted Bugnini #1 because when I think of the worldwide profound violence he did to souls with the smashing of the Latin Mass there just is no comparison. Dolan, though odious, is a featherweight in comparison. Michael has an axe to grind with him, however.

    1. I disagree. Cardinal Dolan did not sever the relationship between the New York Catholic diocese and Macy's, over the decision to allow the Gay Pride contingent to march under the gay banner in the "formerly" Catholic St. Patrick's Day parade, a very big deal in NYC. Nobody was allowed in previous times to march under their own banner. Gays now are, but oddly enough, pro-life groups were denied that privilege! Not a word spoken. Instead of using this as a time to take a stand and lead, the head of arguably our most influential and powerful diocese chose to ignore it as a teachable moment and by doing so he scandalized millions and gave a thrashing to church teaching.
      In addition, there has been a terrible situation going on at Fr. Rutler's former church, where parishioners have been mistreated again and again, and the most stunning icons removed by an indifferent new pastor. Cardinal Dolan could do something about this, but doesn't.
      Now, there is also a huge scandal of a gay priest and his lover, who have taken offertory monies and used it for their own purposes.
      The New York diocese is so large, whoever runs it has much influence, and the people in that diocese are hurt and scandalized over these issues, and there hasn't been much pastoral attention given to the people on these issues.

    2. Kathleen,

      The devastating counter to your argument is your own argument.

      Dolan is very publicly criticized for his actions and that criticism can be known by anyone that wishes to follow the happenings. Thus, Dolan's effect on the Church is mitigated.

      If you want to go after an American Archbishop, try Ireland who with his cronies won the battle within the American hierarchy over whether catholics in America should assimilate to American culture.

      Dolan et al are operating within the effects of that battle, and so anything attributable to Dolan et al should more properly be attributed to the lasting effects of Ireland.

      That's the problem with trying to list a top 10. How far back do you look for the original causes?

  4. I find their treatment of you so bizarre. I'll have to add it to the many things about Church Militant that I can't explain, such as their ongoing denial regarding Francis, and Michael Voris's hair.

    1. It's not a trivial thing to change your Disqus name. Easier just to drop a forum, which is no big deal. I just laugh every time I picture the moderator typing "not as a bear" in email.

      I wrote back: "It seems very speciesist to discriminate against Bears. And, make no mistake, the Bear is the genuine thing."

    2. You are so polite in your post to avoid the elephant in the Disqus(ion). [I'm sure bears are not afraid of elephants, but I reckon intelligent bears respect elephants].

      By dismissing Dolan and Wuerl, you're striking at the current cash cows of CM and inviting questions as to the usefulness of the current endeavors.

      CM has a circled wagon mentality, and thus would not want the villagers to encounter woodland creatures or their opinions outside the wagons. It reminds me of the movie The Village.

    3. Interesting theory. CM and the Bear have a history, as the Bear has been critical in the past. Also the Bear was singled out for Terry Carroll's attentions, then dropped when the Bear said something critical about a Vortex epi. So it might just be personal. It would not surprise the Bear.

  5. I dream of a world without arktophobia. A change that should unite us all.

  6. I dream of a world without arktophobia. A change that should unite us all.

  7. I appreciate CM and Michael Voris. I'm glad they're out there doing what they are doing. Glad somebody is. Cardinals and Bishops clearly won't.
    I disagree with their pope policy and I was banned too. We need CM. They do us a service and they are a bug to the horrible prelates who seem determined to ruin our church, so, good on em, (CM), as far as I'm concerned.

  8. Voris made himself irrelevant by arbitrariness in criticism, and obnoxious by high-handedness in defending it.

  9. Let's all show our appreciation to the Bear by throwing him a few salmon.

    I was banned from CM sometime ago for suggesting that Pope Francis is off message and causing confusion. As a result I stopped my contributions and now the Bear is getting more salmon.

    Bottom line: It is a badge of honor to be banned by this self-important and humorless group who refuses to admit the mischief being caused by Pope Francis. So congratulations Bear.

    1. Well, the Bear certainly can't object to that. Thanks for the suggestion, Michael. "None for the Hair, More for the Bear."

    2. You are a master sloganeer Bear!

    3. Who do you think came up with, "Only You Can Prevent Forest Fires."

    4. wow, was that you? I loved Smokey, but who didn't.

  10. Bear,
    Allow me to explain to you what has been happening to me and why I feel that this particular post of yours has been a God-send to me.

    As I was reading this post, I glanced up at your captured comment to Church Militant's "The Rest of the Top Twenty" and saw your number 2 pick of "Brown (as the exemplar of so-called scholars who have all but destroyed belief in Holy Scripture). Well, all kinds of bells went off in my head. I was wondering if this could possibly be THE Father Raymond Brown that one of our priests praises so highly. I then went and searched the Church Militant site and found "The Rest of the Top Twenty" article and Father Raymond Brown was mentioned as a biblical scholar. Now I haven't been to the Church Militant site or the Vortex in a long time so I haven't been following Mr. Voris. I went back and read his take on Father Brown (new to me) and your comment and started to put two and two together. I had been taking Bible Study classes from this parish priest who admires Father Brown and his biblical scholarship but this past Advent, I felt more and more uncomfortable with what he was saying about The Gospel of St. John and other parts of the Bible that we were studying. I had no reason to doubt what this priest was saying, but more and more of just what he was saying didn't make logical sense to me. Throughout his course he mentioned that this is what Father Brown taught and that he was one of America's best biblical scholars. I listened, took notes but my heart (and brain) were telling me this wasn't right. In the midst of all this, last Fall, I found The Institute of Catholic Culture through a comment that one of your readers made to this blog (I think her name was Julia and God bless her for that) and I started to listen to the videos and audios on Scripture from the Institute's site. These programs are very good and I'm now understanding more of what the Bible is showing us about how we are to be God's children through Jesus Christ. But back to the point in question, Bear. It was through your brief comment about your number 2 choice that cleared up, for me, the whole mystery of why I felt so uncomfortable about the Bible Study class. Think about this, the only reason I saw your comment on Church Militant about Father Brown was because you were banned and you then posted the banned comment on your St. Corbinian's Bear's website! It's so crazy and ironic. So, at least for me, a real good came out of this. I truly believe that God was using you to help me, just like before when I was pointed to the Institute for Catholic Culture on your site. Keep up the good work, Bear. God is using your talents in ways you couldn't possibly have imagined. Thank you.

    1. @Laurel,

      Fr. Brown was infamous in stating:
      "It is lucidly clear that Matthew believed in Mary's bodily virginity before the birth of Jesus", but in doubting the doctrinal value of it concluded that "the scientifically controllable biblical evidence leaves the question of the historicity of the Virginal Conception unresolved."

      You have to extremely careful in who you read especially these days. It's a good practice to investigate the author before you read the text. You can learn a lot by who endorses and criticizes an author. But sometimes you also need to know who those people are. I use a process of backwards vetting I call "chain of authority" or "chain of trust" (which is how internet SSL certificates work). The Bear would recognize this as "chain of custody" in material evidence. If there's a missing link, it's a problem. This is a lot of work.

      There's a reason why St. Philip Neri is famous for saying, "I don't care who you read, as long as their name starts with St."

      As a general rule it's better to avoid recent and living authors because there hasn't been time to be fully vetted. The wonderful thing about Catholicism is that it doesn't change, so a classic from 100 yrs (or a 1000 yrs) ago is still good, and usually superior.

    2. Here's something I'll killed for saying, but I would rather read a good Protestant study bible than the USCCB's abysmal NABRE. At least the Protestant bible will accept the divine inspiration of Holy Scripture (and I can process St. Paul in a Catholic manner). The NABRE carries this gem of a note: Matthew depicts Jesus riding the donkey and the foal at the same time on his entry into Jerusalem because he didn't know about Hebrew parallelism. Well, so much for divine inspiration, and St. Matthew was an idiot besides. And the Protestant bible will have great maps.

      NABRE is a good translation, but the notes entirely spoil it and are a danger to faith.

      No, I don't really recommend reading a Protestant bible. For one thing, you'll be missing some books.

      Instead: Douay-Rheims with Haydock's commentary is archaic and has some unhappy translations, but is sound. Lepanto Press sells a fairly nice hardcover without the notes. Catholic Treasures sells a really big repro with notes (although they're pretty tiny for older eyes). You could definitely smite someone to death with it.

      Navarre study Bible, the one-volume New Testament. (You can also get a 12 vol. NT, but that's expensive. You can also buy OT volumes, the Pentateuch, Minor Prophets, etc.) It is conservative plain old Roman Catholic Church with detailed commentary, often taking up more of the page than the text. Originally an Opus Dei project. (That may or may not be precisely true, but is more true than not.)

      Another very conservative Catholic Bible with commentary is the Catholic Study Bible from Ignatius, so far only in NT, edited by Scott Hahn. Do not confuse it for the USCCB's NABRE study bible.

      Navarre uses the RSV (that's what it says, not RSV-CE) and Ignatius Catholic Study Bible uses RSV-CE2 (same as RSV-CE, except tweaked to keep Catholics from freaking out over the RSV-CE's perfectly correct translation of Isaiah 7:14 and a few other places).

      The Navarre bible even has the Latin on every page, rather subtly done, so it doesn't distract you.

      I know many don't like the RSV line because it was an ecumenical plan from the 50s and the United Church of Christ holds the copyright. All of them, RSV, RSV-CE and RSV-CE2 are accurate, appealing translations. The RSV-CE use archaic language (thee, etc.) when God is addressed. Personally, the Bear likes the RSV best. For just a reading Bible, St. Benedict Press has a fairly nice faux leather version with ribbon, and the usual front matter like register of deaths, etc.

      A decent Catholic commentary is, well, A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture (1953) by Dom Bernard Orchard et al. I have it electronically, but Lulu has it (not sure if all volumes are ready) and there is a copy on Amazon used for $130. Naturalistic explanation are provided for a few OT miraculous events. Generally good.

      Avoid Jerome commentary and other modern ones like the plague.

    3. To be clear, Bear likes the RSV-CE best, but all permutations of the RSV are nearly identical. Oh, one other benefit. Since I read the Bible to my mate while she knits, RSV-CE has pronunciation helps. A small, but welcome item.

  11. The New English Translation of the Septuagint, AKA NETS, is more than worth a look. The CCHS has plenty of good stuff, especially its essays on matters other than commentary proper. I'm very grateful for Father Brown's massive scholarship though. The 1970 NAB has good essays on inspiration, the history of the formation of the canon, etc.


Moderation is On.

Featured Post

Judging Angels Chapter 1 Read by Author

Quick commercial for free, no-strings-attached gift of a professionally produced audio book of Judging Angels, Chapter 1: Last Things, read...