Friday, April 22, 2016

Michael Voris Admits to Past Homosexual Lifestyle

The "Michael Voris" + "Homosexuality" labels at the bottom of this article mean something different than they have before.

Michael Voris has admitted to living a homosexual lifestyle and general unchaste life before his reversion to the Church. He says his is making the admission to preempt the Archdiocese of New York from discrediting him with his past.

This brother needs our prayers now. If you find his shows edifying, you might want to mention his whole enterprise, because the Bear would have to guess Church Militant's future is in doubt. No one is going to tune every day to The Vortex with Christine Niles. No offense to Christine, but Michael is not only the face of CMTV, but the heart and credibility: the "talent."

Everybody's got a past, some worse than others. The happiest news about this is that Michael says he escaped the terrible snare of a homosexual lifestyle some years ago. The Bear has written before about "Headlines in Heaven," and that, not his past sins, is surely the headline.

Michael asks forgiveness, as well he should, but on account of the scandal. Not whatever he did in the past that has been confessed and absolved. Frankly, the Bear couldn't care less about that, and can't even say he's shocked. Rough times, these.

There are really three issues the Bear feels are appropriate to raise at this early stage. If they're not, please forgive the Bear, as well.

It is hard for Bears to be delicate, so he'll just say this first one, because he thinks it is fairly in play.

The first is not everybody is the right person for every job, even if they are proficient and zealous. Perhaps his own life experiences may have contributed to his concern about homosexual elements in the Church. But some soldiers must admit that even wounds that have healed can linger as disabilities, and they must not lead the charge, however fearless they remain. They put their cause and comrades in unnecessary danger. The Bear has learned this in a much different context. Lots of people are likely to get hurt over this. Our common enemies are dancing with glee.

The second is related to the first. We must be careful to put very few eggs indeed into the basket of any Catholic celebrity. Any of them -- any of us, although we may do damage to fewer people -- may be snared, and some of us exposed, at any time.

But the worst part is that the Archdiocese of New York stands accused of planning to make Michael's sordid past public in order to discredit him to their own gain. It is well-known that Michael has been a determined critic of not only homosexuality in the Church, but specifically in the Archdiocese of New York. Not too long ago, he sat at a desk with his fellow broadcasters and himself threatened to name names there.

The Church is supposed to forgive our sins, then bury them. It does not blackmail us with them if we dare to speak out. The very idea is grotesque beyond words.

According to the Catholic Herald, an Archdiocese spokesman said, "“It is absolutely, 100 per cent untrue that the archdiocese was collecting and preparing to release anything concerning him personally or his website.”

Obviously, some serious threat brought Michael to this painful admission, but let's hope the plot -- if there was one -- was very limited, and appropriate action will be taken against anyone involved in such despicable tactics. Everyone eventually gets the right chance to do the right thing, so who knows?

This situation is what it is. We've seen similar scandals before, but we still can't really understand them. We still feel the same sick lump in our stomachs. This one is different in that it is all in the middle distance behind Michael, or so he says, and the Bear has no reason to disbelieve him. There are other issues, but those are for Michael Voris to deal with privately in the coming weeks.

Be kind.

St. Corbinian's Bear's ephemeris stands 100% in solidarity with Michael Voris and Church Militant TV during these very difficult times, and prays that God finds for Michael his best role for the Church, and also for Michael Voris.


  1. Agreed Bear, and the comments have been exceedingly kind toward him as they should be. I have no idea if someone in the diocese has threatened to "out" him, but he has made his statement and perhaps God will use this for some purpose. Maybe it will just fade away.
    CMTV has done some good. Michael Voris has as well. He has been the voice, often it seemed like the only voice, to identify real problems in our church. His apostolate has been a consolation to me and probably to many. He's sincere. We appreciate him and his dedication to the faith. Our church is a mess. That's obvious. One of the more disturbing aspects is the obvious zealous politeness that has overtaken men who should be speaking out again and again and again, in no uncertain terms, but they are not. Cowardice and careerism is rampant in our church. Priests and Bishops should be defending the faith, calling out error from the rooftops, naming names, and encouraging the sheep, but they are not. They are too busy admonishing Michael Voris for saying the things they should be saying.
    We're not in a good place.
    I hope Michael Voris continues his work unabated. We need him. May God support him and help him.

    1. The Bear sincerely hopes he has solid evidence to back up his claims against the Archdiocese of New York.

    2. There certainly is precedent to suspect that of the Archdiocese of New York. I call to remembrance the way Father Justin Wylee was treated there two years ago. Please see

    3. I would judge Michael's credibility as greater than the institution of the Archdiocese, so I'm not too impressed with a blanket denial.

    4. I concur, Bear. This is an extraordinary admission against interest by Mr. Voris and I think as such it bolsters the credibility of his claim that it was precipitated by some likely expose'.

      By the way, 'detraction' can be a grave sin and an offence against the 5th commandment: 'Thou shalt not kill'.

  2. How very courageous of him to publicly confess to past sins, which he should never have been called upon to do. How many of us would be brave and humble enough to do the same? I sadly, but sincerely, doubt that I would have the fortitude to do as much.

  3. God bless him. No need to do this for me. It's not my business what his sinful past entailed. Shame on the Archdiocese of NY to go after him so.

    1. I think he did the right thing. The experts always say you should get out in front of bad news, and he did that. Otherwise he would have been worn down by a pack of dogs. (Enough dogs will even bring a Bear down.) Hopefully this will staunch the bleeding.

      Like I said, I think three points were fairly raised by his statement, and, being a Bear, I said what I think, and it needs no elaboration.

      Bring in the polygraphers to the Archdiocese. Junk science, of course, but great interrogation tools. So is a Bear, actually. But, all we have so far is he-said-he-said. The ball was briefly in the Archdiocese' court, and they batted it back effortlessly with their public denial.

      Personally, I think Michael needs to continue to lay out both his case about homosexuality, but also really needs to back up his allegations. Which he may very well do. He has nothing to fear, now, at least. It may seem early, but I doubt to them. They've probably Hopefully we'll get a fuller story sooner than we might expect.

      I haven't been a regular Vortex watcher, but I've noticed he hasn't looked well lately, and he looks like Hell in this video, naturally enough. He needs to stand like a Bear now, conserving his energy, and -- this is hard -- listen to honest criticism to balance all the support he's getting.

      The tone of his piece didn't strike me as pitch perfect, but that's just me. I was glad to hear him bring up why he didn't disclose this before he embarked on his fearless, but high-profile, even sometimes strident mission against homosexuality in the Church and painted a target on himself and his organization. He said he didn't think it was necessary. I think he needs to get some clarity on that, again, in my opinion, but I'm just a Bear. I would not have brought it up, except he did.

      Simon Rafe was caught publishing some sexually questionable role-playing material a couple of years ago, if you'll recall. It's not like they never had to deal with someone's private life becoming a public issue. I supported Simon in that one, too, just like I support Michael.

      And all that's easy for me to say. Let's just say it would have taken a degree of heroism that few men possess to admit to what Michael admitted to, freely, and under no constraint, out of prudence for what it might do in the future. In no way am I faulting him.

    2. The larger issue with Simon Rafe went beyond his private website--that had a bit more than just role-playing fiction.

      It was that Rafe put a link to it on the RealCatholic website at the bottom as "webmaster". That is extraordinarily bad judgment, and quite frankly shouldn't have been done without approval from Michael--which I assume he didn't have, or at least Michael didn't preview Rafe's site.

      It was the link that led that atheist to write up the story leading to the whole hub-bub.

      That's part of what I'm talking about in regard to people with bad judgment. Sacramental confession absolves sin; it doesn't automatically bestow good judgment, except that a return to a state of grace can begin to repair what the Fathers called the darkening of the intellect via sin.

    3. I've noticed a change in his physical appearance as well. He has looked thin and just not robust as only months ago. Perhaps this has all taken a toll, as one could expect.

  4. Bear, I don't think you can call this a scandal. Scandal is an act that leads someone to lose the faith or commit sin. A confession of past mis-deeds prior to re-conversion hardly qualifies. As he said, he's never made it a secret that he had led a sordid life--one marked by sexual sin. Nobody would rightly be scandalized by this.

    Quite frankly, I'm not at all surprised, as I had suspected it for quite awhile. This merits a shrug on my part. It might however explain some of his fixation on Dolan and the Archdiocese particularly with his prior seminary time at Dunwoodie in NY.

    I do think he erred strategically (or perhaps more correctly, tactically) in a preemptive admission. Now the archdiocese gets to deny any smear attempt. Waiting until an attempted outing would have potentially done more damage to the archdiocese if they got caught at it.

    In regard to your first point, I agree that not everybody is suited to every job. My criticism of Voris which I have stated before revolves around approach (videos that inflame anger--as opposed to unemotional clinical analysis), the circle the wagons mentality where it's become CMTV against everybody, and surrounding himself with people of very questionable judgment. Those elements aren't going away. But this "new" revelation doesn't even move the needle on my criticism meter.

    I have thought for some time that he would be better off leaving the journalistic aspect alone and concentrating on his catechetical work in St. Michael's Media, as I've never seen him as being emotionally well-suited for the journalistic side.

    1. I am using scandal in the ordinary sense of the word, but also if it does harm some people, harms his apostolate, gives ammunition to enemies, I think scandal is a perfectly appropriate word. "There's no way to make it sound like an achievement." It is definitely not, however, a scandal in the way Fr. Corapi's debacle was a scandal (although at least one of his faithful fans is lumping Michael in with him) since his was an on-going issue. On this, Michael's sins are in the past, where whoever was pressuring him is sinning right now.

      I have also felt queasy about Michael presenting himself as a journalist, with on-scene reports, etc. then flat-out apologizing for acting like a journalist when he said something that was pretty unobjectionable, as I recall at the time (don't recall what exactly it was.) But, that's his training and experience.

      The question of judgment is fair. He could have covered many stories while prudently leaving the one topic on which he was extremely vulnerable to others. But, maybe he felt he had a mission.

      Like I said, these are all issues he raised, so they're fair comment. I don't want to seem like I'm kicking the guy while he's down, because I've nothing against him, and he has accomplished much. As I hope he will in the future. Catholics get sin and forgiveness.

    2. Actually, I disagree that he is/was vulnerable on the gay issues. Quite the contrary, as he could never be accused of being "homophobic". In a sense then, it's an area where he would be *less* vulnerable than most, at least where it comes to the verbal bullying that is typically used to keep people quiet.

      The apologizing episode was in reporting on ++Burke's comments during a synod that were taken as criticizing the pope. Then Michael took the video down afterwards because he felt that he (Michael) was guilty of criticizing the pope for reporting on it.

      Just so it's clear to everybody: I've never questioned Michael's sincerity or love for the Church. It was just the approach of the Vortex (as opposed to St. Michael's Media) that I can't endorse. I have the same criticism of pretty much the whole Catholic blogosphere/newsphere from one end to the other. I do not think it is good to be inflaming already upset Catholics by reporting on every misdeed in the Church. It is enough to say: "things are VERY bad in the Church, pray up, do penance, and make reparation." God is in control, and He can handle it.

      I rather like Fr ?'s analogy of being on a ship in 70 ft seas and discovering there's a fist-fight going on in the wheelhouse. Jumping ship is not an option; all you can do is hold on for dear life. (With apologies to the Bear) I'd say nail your foot to the deck, but I prefer to be able to move quickly to avoid swinging masts and unsecured cargo. It's also convenient to be able to get to the rail once in awhile to vomit from seasickness. The Barque can't sink; God won't let it. But He will allow high seas, hurricane winds, and a fire in the galley. There are no lifeboats, and there is no gain in feeding oneself to the sharks. This is it. This is our appointed time to live in the Church. Future catholics will marvel that we were able to endure it.

      As a result of the state of the blogosphere and news sites, I've left the putrid smells and clamour of the city [blog central] and come to the woodland. I appreciate the Bear because as he revealed in "A Bear's Confession", he actually stops to think about the effect of his writing on his readers. Few others seem to.

      This is my last stop before I head out to the desert [no internet] and leave it all behind. I think Anthony's option--for those who can--is superior to the Benedict option. There is some peace to be had by not reading the latest weather forecast.

    3. This ephemeris is an elaborate trap to get people to stay in the plain ol' Roman Catholic Church. But don't tell anyone.

    4. All valid perspective, but here's another one. For decades now my husband and I have felt uneasy about where the church was headed. We noticed the drift about 25 years ago or more, and could see we had big problems brewing. Nobody talked. There was no blogosphere, and nowhere to go to get information of any kind. Still, we knew. We had EWTN, and they gave us some insights, but it was maddening not to know what was going on. Maddening to just suspect but never know more.
      There are clearly people who quick to despair and can't take bad news about the church. I get that. But we can't be the only ones who want the information, we want to know what is going on. Too long these men have operated in the dark, and it has profited them beautifully. We believe sunlight is the best disinfectant, and obviously we need disinfecting. To expand that analogy, if this situation were a wound, until it is identified and cleaned out thoroughly, it will only continue to fester and grow. We can't clean it out if we can't talk about it or we must fuss about being polite when talking about the church. We are all hamstrung by politeness when we need more plain words and some action.

    5. "As a result of the state of the blogosphere and news sites, I've left the putrid smells and clamour of the city [blog central] and come to the woodland. I appreciate the Bear because as he revealed in "A Bear's Confession", he actually stops to think about the effect of his writing on his readers. Few others seem to."

      The Bear wishes more people would remind him of that.

  5. Those who have been forgiven much, know best how to forgive others. I hold nothing against Michael Voris. I greatly admire him; more now than before. He is a human-being with his own personal sinful proclivities. He is being sanctified through the Church. There is nothing shocking about this.

    The difference between Mr. Voris and those evil cretins of the NY Archdioscese he has been exposing of late is repentance. One does. The other doesn't. Voris repented and was redeemed many years ago. Not so the rotten sinners who revel in the pig slop and remain. He exposes active reprobates who wear Priestly collars who do not repent of their sins; who do, in fact, work mightily to infect others with their sin and lead many astray.

    I, like Michael Voris, was redeemed into the Church, out of a life of sin. Therefor, sin repels me. I know personally the power and odd, deceptive attractiveness of sin, in all its many flavors and colors. He may fall again to the power and deceptiveness of demons. So might I. But thanks be to God! Jesus stands there and beckons him and I and all to return. NOT to REMAIN. RETURN. LEAVE sin behind and pursue righteousness.

    Is this not what the battle is all about in our beloved Church; the definition of Mercy? False mercy involves a non-sacramental "mercy door" that leaves a person dead in their sins with false hope they are alive. True mercy is a solitary, Sacramental confessional with a box of tissues and wise counsel; a conduit to God's mercy that compels deliverance from death (sin) into life (righteousness).

    1. One more thing; for the sake of their souls, Archdiocesesan functionaries had better not be involved in exposing a penitent's sins. For their eternal souls' sake I hope that is not true. Oh my goodness! The gravity of such a thing before God! That would ensure an especially deep, consummately painful eternal pit of fire.

    2. God forbid. Michael has probably made enemies in more than one place. The idea of the Archdiocese of New York compiling information on him from who knows what sources is less sinful, but stomach-turning nonetheless. But, in all fairness, all we know so far is we have an allegation and a denial. We can all make our own determinations about credibility of the parties. I'm pretty sure Michael would not have made an allegation like that unless he had something to back it up, and we know he has been working sources (according to his comments) in the Archdiocese. But we'll just have to wait and see how the parties really wish to handle this. For all we know, the matter is over and done with, nobody has anything to hold over his head anymore, and it could be to Vortex as usual with the matter closed, as far as we're concerned. Which might not be the worst conclusion.

    3. I learned, from reading Dante's categories of sin, that there are many sins far worse than sexual sin. Sex sins are fairly high up in Hades; punished at a lesser grade than those more serious below. Dante actually placed the more "socially acceptable" sins far lower in his schema; such as greed, avarice, dishonesty and ambition. And in this case, betrayal (alleged).

      Fine clothes, fancy cars and nice houses, the best schools for the kids are a fine worldly veneer that distracts from the hidden poison emanating from a soul that may use these sinful means to attain pride of worldly place.

      The sex sin is obviously evil. Secret betrayal may never even be known .... in this life.

  6. Michael has lost a lot of weight because he not too long ago recovered from a horrible, horrible case of shingles. He told us this at our Retreat at Sea. That's why he looks worn out.

  7. Oh mah gah---Prince is dead and Voris is gay.
    Well---to his credit---Voris didn't run out and get married but remains a lay celibate according to a wiki bio. Sometimes you just get too messed up to maintain a normal relationship.

    Got my Pandora tuned to Prince now and it's doing wonders for my mood.

    Queen of Funk in Seattle

  8. This article is just one more reason for me to love and reasonate (?) with SCB. You done good bear. Michael Voris is zealous about the same-sex lifestyle because he knew it and knows the dangers and wants to warn others. Weak analogy, but me, a former smoker, would love a drag or two, but hate it at the same time and pray for others who I see smoking. They are just slaves to the cigarette. Anyway, thanks for sticking up for the guy. God bless you!

  9. I am happy that Michael Voris got this off his chest. It must have caused him much anxiety over the years to know, that while casting stones at others for grievous sins and malfeasance, he himself was not without sin. And it would appear the only reason he outed himself was for what appears to be a clear threat of exposure. So this raises the implied question of the Bear. Will folks trust Michael after this? This is especially the case with Michael's kid glove treatment of Pope Francis. Anyone daring to criticize the Pope on Church Militant is banned. Such happened to me and I stopped sending him money as a result. For me I will pray for Michael, of course, but continue to be skeptical of his seeking after the truth. I think there is more to learned about Michael as to his posture about Pope Francis. It is a mystery to me.

    1. I doubt it caused him anxiety. He always acknowledged a sinful pre-reversion past, clearly stated again in this mea culpa. Now we are treated to specifics.

      He doesn't appear to be too bothered by it. He looks comfortable with this personal, public confession. He shouldn't have felt compelled to do so, but He places the outcome to his apostolate in God's hands and it's done. I was impressed by that.

      Funny, how it's just the sex sins that require the public expose. There are a lot of sins people cling to. Perhaps God even hates those sins more than these. Are we all just as willing as Mr. Voris to open the door on our various, specific confessional experiences to the world?

    2. Brian, I respectfully see a distinction between freely opening up from the beginning, and making a tactical decision to disclose in order to preempt a slur campaign. And that's as far as my very narrow comment goes. Again, Michael himself raises this issue.

      Neither you nor I have a reason to disclose our past sins publicly. He did. No doubt it was it tough tactical decision. But it was a disclosure, not a freely offered confession spontaneously moved from within. I am certain that it was no less difficult, and I am not faulting him. Still less am I holding his past against him. There is not a device in the world sensitive enough to measure my interest in anyone's genuinely repented past, sexual or otherwise.

      But the way I see it -- and this is not a criticism, but an observation by one who comes here every day to observe humans -- he decided to start his crusade carrying a ticking time bomb with him every step of the way. He himself asks whether he should have defused it from the beginning. (His answer is he didn't think it was necessary.) So its fair to have an opinion, and fair to comment by those of us who comment on things.

      If, for instance, one were an active Communist for a decade or two in the 50s and 60s, then saw the light and began a movement that included a strong anti-Communist campaign, and outing Communists, one might ask whether exposure of one's past would cause damage to one's credibility, and damage the movement. Keep the past secret, or disclose up front?

      Both the real and the hypothetical situations pose the same problems. Is it necessary to unburden oneself from the beginning, which would be very painful? Would it be best to risk "branding" oneself as Joe McCarthy the reformed Communist, or Michael Voris the reformed homosexual, or would that unnecessarily distract from your mission? When starting out, before you're well established, might it cause some people to be less eager to provide that initial support? Is it possible to make such a decision disinterestedly?

      I don't have the answers to these questions. I tend to see it as a prudential judgment regarding making homosexuality one of the main elements of your message, all the while knowing your own homosexual past could emerge at any moment, with unpredictable consequences. I imagine there is not a man in a thousand who would subject himself to public disclosure like that unless he had to.

      Michael Voris has proved himself to be a fearless advocate for truth, reform and full disclosure, except in regard to the Pope (another issue entirely). We see courage all around us. We have young people in Afghanistan who show courage. It is one of the best words we have. It just bothers me a little when the entire Catholic blogosphere is talking about Michael Voris' moral courage in disclosing his past. I just think there is an important distinction between courage and doing something painful because your hand is forced.

      If that makes me a bad Bear, so be it.

      It changes nothing. Michael Voris reaches a segment of Catholics, and he's a committed and talented man serving in a classic prophetic role. For whatever reason -- he says it was to preempt a disclosure of his past by the Archdiocese, the Archdiocese flatly denies it -- he felt compelled to disclose an embarrassing part of his past from before his reversion to the Church. He needs our support and prayers, regardless on how he handles his comments section or ignores the clear and present danger from the Pope. He's still one of ours, even if he's not exactly one person or another's cup of tea. I fully support him and his apostolate.

      At the same time, he is (by choice) a public figure who made certain decisions along the way, and discussed details in a public broadcast. We are all entitled to our opinions on all of the above. Including Michael's expressed reservations.

      As for immunizing him against future claims of "homophobia," that's not going to happen, if only because homophiles are not operating on any sort of logic.

    3. I agree, as usual, with your commentary about Mr. Voris. It would, in fact, have been beneficial for us to know earlier about his past sins to provide context for his expose of perverted Priests in the NY Archdiocese. Well said, and thank you.

      But I still maintain my own opinion about Mr. Voris also. His past is not relevant to his present since he has repented, confessed and re-verted into the Catholic Faith.

      So then, what? This is a prudential decision that could go either way. He chose his way. He could also have chosen the other. Either would be fine before God and man.

      As we discuss what Voris did, and perhaps should have done differently, I put myself in his shoes and wonder what would I have done? What would I do now? How would I like it? I have been attacked and flamed in relative obscurity on the Internet. That's hard enough. What if, in addition, my sordid past were to be fully investigated by my verbal opponents, and a bloated dossier of my sins released to the public. Now, those sins are deeply personal, fully confessed, and a personal spur to holiness on my part. But what if, without context, they are thrown against the wall with intent to harm me personally and spiritually. Now ...... There they are for my wife and kids and mother and father and Priest and friends and co-workers and strangers to parse and ponder. What would I do?

      What Mr. Voris did I think.

      Again, I agree with you. An excellent analysis. You and your blog are very thought provoking for sure. But I just think there is more to this. And in his year of mercy, I sure have an over abundance of it for Mr. Voris who manfully took up the gauntlet, looked the world in the eye, and owned up for what he had done.

      A fine example for us all. Again, I can't thank you enough for your own apostolate with this blog. I really enjoy it.

    4. Excellent comments on Michael Voris. I knew about Michael's past early on along with many others. It was a ticking time bomb one for someone who called out the sins of others as Michael did. His confession was done under duress. Better that he had done this from the beginning. Now that this is out of the way he needs to fess up as to who is keeping him from speaking out about the Pope as not doing so weakens Michael's credibility. My opinion is that the answer is Opus Dei.

  10. Good post, Bear!

    I have not read through all the comments above, but I have always thought that Michael Voris had been homosexual or done homosexual things, and frankly, I never gave a damn. So freaking what! I am a drug addict and an alcoholic (recovering). How the heck is my past any better? Or the past of any of us? The Big Book of AA says on page 69:

    "We all have sex problems. We'd hardly be human if we didn't...."

    Anyone out there without sin able to cast the first stone? Therefore, as for Michael Voris, Acts 10:15 and 11:9 applies:

    "What God has cleansed, you must not call common."

    Regarding the Archdiocese of NY, now that its plans of calumny are laid waste, of course it denies a conspiracy to defame and ridicule Michael Voris and CMTV.

    PS, I think some things Michael Voris has gotten into - like geocentrism - are nonsense and I do not always pay attention to him. But he is a good man and his Apostolate is doing the Lord's work.

  11. Took major gonads to do that. I tip my hat to him.

  12. What Kathleen1031 said in the first comment -- and I will add that I rejoice that Michael's courage has, if anything, enhanced his credibility wrt the scourge of disordered sexuality (both within and outside the Church). I especially rejoice that it has also frustrated the plans of any who had hoped to use his past to neutralize Church Militant.

  13. I second that chuckle. Wonder where that colloquialism comes from? Sounds like edgy lingo from the gay subculture, no?

  14. Michael,
    Your outstanding humility will attract numerous graces for your mot fruitful apostolate. OK so satan is hitting back-you are far too successful to escape his wrath
    Iam amazed he hasn't done his signature attack before
    Father John George
    Sydney Australia
    After 40 years of anti Satan priestly ministry, I have been reduced to a bed ridden thalamic stroke/colostomy rehab[ho hum!!!!!]

  15. Sorry for typos-am hemiplegic paralysed

  16. If I admired and respected Michael before, now the admiration and respect and may I even say love, has increased exponentially. When I watched the video of his announcement about his past, I was so incredibly moved by his humility and the way he gave such glory to the Lord by praising the Lord for His boundless mercy and grace in rescuing him from the lifestyle Satan had him trapped in. I think Michael is the prime example of a truly faithful, vibrant Catholic, who would give his life for his Faith. He is my hero right now.

    1. No anonymous posting, please. That's the only rule here in the woodlands. I'm going to give you the opportunity to re-post non-anonymously before I take this down.


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...