Michael Voris Applied for the Job of Host of Catholic Answers Live in February 2009

Biblical Evidence for Catholicism ^ | August 31, 2013 | Dave Armstrong

[Alex Murphy]

Isn't that a fascinating bit of information? I thought it might be of interest to my readers, seeing that Voris is now blasting Catholic Answers ("CA") regularly: his latest stunt (video of 8-29-13) being a cynical, derisive "expose" of the salaries made by several persons at CA (which -- I should note --  was already public information, since it is a non-profit corporation). Now he's making out that CA has taken a huge hit because they dared to do two shows on radical Catholic reactionaries, and he claims this is part of the reason why they are doing a big fundraiser at present (which they do -- like virtually all Catholic apostolates -- all the time: nothing new there at all).

This gives a bit of a different perspective or angle on things, doesn't it?: to know this little tidbit of information, because it raises the possible, feasible, speculative spectre of a bit of "disgruntled never-hired employee" psychology (not being hired, being almost as offensive as being fired). Mind you, I'm not asserting this (because that'll be the predictable criticism: I'm "judging his heart," etc.). But like I said, it is quite "possible, feasible, speculative" -- and plausible.

This historical fact was revealed in the discussion thread for Fr. Dwight Longenecker's critical article about Michael Voris. Karl Keating wrote in the combox (with characteristic delightful understatement):

After Jerry Usher retired as host of Catholic Answers Live, Michael Voris was in discussion with us about becoming the new host. We decided he was not the right person for that role, which later was filled by Patrick Coffin. We otherwise have never had any contact with Mr. Voris. He did not contact us before airing his videos.

Keating also flatly denied that the shows on radical Catholic reactionaries had anything to do with financial troubles:

We have no evidence that our May 31 show on "radical Traditionalism" resulted in any loss of donations. So far as I know, we weren't receiving donations from "radical Traditionalists" anyway, and nearly all "regular Traditionalists" who commented on the program to us said they appreciated it and thought it fair and helpful. (The August 12 follow-up show aired after our "summer slump" occurred.)

Curious about the timeline of all this, I found the date of when Jerry Usher stopped hosting Catholic Answers Live. I was on the show twice, by the way, when he was host: in October 2003 [hear audio file] and June 2006 [audio file] ). It was at the end of February 2009, according to his LinkedIn page.

I was also curious about Michael Voris' timeline. Had he started his current operations before he was desirous of being part of Catholic Answers and hosting its enormously important and influential radio show? In fact, he had done so. His biographical blurb on one of his web pages reveals that he  founded St. Michael's media in 2006. In 2008 he partnered with RealCatholicTV, which was basically the genesis of his current operation (a few more changes happened, technically and business-wise, but nothing dramatic, philosophy-wise).

Thus, we can assume that his present opinions (that I classify as RadCathR) were in place at the time he tried to get hired by Catholic Answers. That is one irony. But the greater irony and curiosity here is that, if Voris had been hired, he would have, presumably, been making the money at CA that he now blasts others there for making. Is that not rank hypocrisy?

Let's have some fun with this. Imagine Voris (in all his "prophetic" integrity and righteous indignation) hosting a show on Catholic Answers Live exposing the nefarious, money-grubbing ways of his own fellow employees and bosses, including his own outrageous salary, that he would then, of course, renounce on the air. He'd be fired the next day, but how good that would have felt to tell the truth; play the prophet! That was obviously his motivation to get hired by Catholic Answers, right?: to plot a conspiracy that would eventually expose the materialistic excesses and wickedness of that organization, and how they don't earn or deserve their money. Otherwise, why try to be hired by them?

Thus, it sure sounds to me like it could very well be a case of sour grapes. He wasn't able to be a player with the "big boys" of the apologetics world, and so now he blasts them, now that he has flourished in his own little enterprise. He knows better; he's the "cream of the crop" . . . we've seen this mentality again and again within Christian circles: both Catholic and Protestant.

Moreover, one of his prime and repeated claims is that Catholic Answers won't speak out against problems in the Church because this would alienate the "hand that feeds them": i.e., the bishops. But this is patently false, since, as Karl Keating revealed in his comment, cited above, that isn't their source of income at all:

Catholic Answers never has asked for, and never has received, grants from bishops. It always has been our policy not to ask the Church to underwrite our work. (Of course, when we send a speaker to a parish, the parish pays an honorarium and travel and lodging expenses.)

The whole truth is always far more fascinating and revealing, isn't it? Michael Voris as a "Catholic Answers Wannabe" as recently as February 2009? Who woulda thunk it? I think it's hilariously funny. I always appreciate ironically absurd humor.

So now we observe a sort of love-hate relationship between Voris and Catholic Answers: he "loves" the organization because it does great apologetics work (as he continues to admit even now), but he "hates" it, too (in this speculative scenario) because he couldn't be part of it, himself. Now, he has chosen to lie about:

1) The nature of the CA shows on radical Catholic reactionaries (making out that they trashed mainstream "traditionalists": a completely different group).

2) How CA is supposedly fundamentally compromised and won't speak out against liberal, heterodox dissidents or problems in the Church, because this would dry up financial support from the bishops.

Demonstrably wrong on both counts! So why does Voris keep reiterating these lies over and over? If he never listened to the two shows in question or never read the articles about them, how could he make such a comment? That would be journalistic irresponsibility and incompetence. On the other hand, if he had done so, then one can only conclude that he is deliberately lying, which is even worse.

Take your pick: incompetence and shoddy, "hit piece" sensationalistic journalism  (a la The National Enquirer) or a desire to lie about a fantastic Catholic apologetics organization: one that I am very proud and honored to be associated with (radio appearances, articles in their magazine, book published by them).

His follow-up Vortex video of 8-30-13 is even more ridiculous. It was clearly at least partially damage control for the previous one. He was saying (paraphrase), "it's not about how much money people make. No one cares about that . . . "

Really? So he puts out a video, revealing exact salaries of people by name, then he wants to walk that back and claim that he wasn't objecting to how much money apologists and other lay public Catholic figures make (now that there is an uproar in many venues online about that very thing, with people expressing the usual class envy and "anti-apologetics" tendencies)?

That's an insult to everyone's intelligence (i.e., anyone with an IQ higher than a pencil eraser). You don't reveal someone's salary (and tell yours in comparison) if you are not objecting to it in some fashion. He clearly was, and -- quite obviously -- it was intended to cause a big ruckus, just as his lying (yes, literally lying) about the nature of the two Catholic Answers Live shows on RadCathRism was meant to do harm to CA.

Catholic Answers has made it crystal clear again and again, both in the shows, follow-up shows, and in articles and on their forum, that they are opposing radical Catholic reactionaries only, not legitimate mainstream "traditionalists" (those who love the TLM, etc.). For Voris and others to deliberately misrepresent that is unconscionable. But they keep doing it. The truth always triumphs in the end. Lying only harms the person who is promulgating the lie in the long run. God is not mocked. He sees what is happening; and He alone knows the true motivations and intent of people's hearts. We don't. We can only speculate. But lies can be demonstrated and proven by counter-factual information, to be what they are.

Radical Catholic Reactionary-ism constantly exhibits an exclusivisitic, sectarian, "we're the cream of the crop and the other guys are second-class" mindset. It's spiritual elitism, pride, and pharisaism. It's a regurgitation of the historical error of what is called "rigorism" (Donatists, Novatians, Montanists, Jansenists, etc.).

The overall worldview or mentality is what causes so much damage. Michael Voris is in all likelihood a fine person and good Catholic, but he is better than his worldview. This is the problem. People adopt certain premises and conclusions following from them, and then it's off to the dog races. One falsehood breeds another.

The devil has a field day. He loves to exploit this sort of thing. Get otherwise good Catholics fighting tooth and nail against each other . . . Even when apologists like myself (and other commenters) roundly condemn this because it's wrong, we get accused of doing the same thing that we are opposing with all our might (because people don't make crucial distinctions).

Because of his prior false and confused presuppositions, Voris winds up doing a video like this, that even has many of his own "followers" upset and wondering why in the world he is stooping to such low levels (read some of the comments on his own Facebook page).

He knows he blew it (it seems clear to me), which is why he started walking it back with his next video. Can he ever retract and admit that he was totally wrong, though? I've never seen it. I sure hope so. But in any event, it's his reputation and his apostolate . . . he'll be harmed more than anyone if he continues on this very troubling trajectory.    

[see also the vigorous Facebook discussion about this post and related issues, including my analysis of "how much money is too much?" for Catholic lay workers and apostolates] 

[Alex Murphy]

I was...curious about Michael Voris' timeline. Had he started his current operations before he was desirous of being part of Catholic Answers and hosting its enormously important and influential radio show? In fact, he had done so. His biographical blurb on one of his web pages reveals that he  founded St. Michael's media in 2006. In 2008 he partnered with RealCatholicTV, which was basically the genesis of his current operation (a few more changes happened, technically and business-wise, but nothing dramatic, philosophy-wise). Thus, we can assume that his present opinions (that I classify as RadCathR) were in place at the time he tried to get hired by Catholic Answers. That is one irony. But the greater irony and curiosity here is that, if Voris had been hired, he would have, presumably, been making the money at CA that he now blasts others there for making. Is that not rank hypocrisy?

Let's have some fun with this. Imagine Voris (in all his "prophetic" integrity and righteous indignation) hosting a show on Catholic Answers Live exposing the nefarious, money-grubbing ways of his own fellow employees and bosses, including his own outrageous salary, that he would then, of course, renounce on the air. He'd be fired the next day, but how good that would have felt to tell the truth; play the prophet! That was obviously his motivation to get hired by Catholic Answers, right?: to plot a conspiracy that would eventually expose the materialistic excesses and wickedness of that organization, and how they don't earn or deserve their money. Otherwise, why try to be hired by them? Thus, it sure sounds to me like it could very well be a case of sour grapes. He wasn't able to be a player with the "big boys" of the apologetics world, and so now he blasts them, now that he has flourished in his own little enterprise. He knows better; he's the "cream of the crop" . . . we've seen this mentality again and again within Christian circles: both Catholic and Protestant.

[Arthur McGowan]

Anybody with one eye and one ear could tell years ago that Voris is a very, very angry, bitter individual, for some reason.

[Alex Murphy]

Anybody with one eye and one ear could tell years ago that Voris is a very, very angry, bitter individual, for some reason.

If you've seen his hair, you know the reason.

[ClaytonP]

Anybody with one eye and one ear could tell years ago that Voris is a very, very angry, bitter individual, for some reason.

People who are complacent towards evil and enjoy the good life while the world decays constantly says things like that towards people who dare to call out the problems that everyone wants to ignore.

"Chill out man, its all good."

[Salvation]

five

[Rashputin]

"5"

Yeah, and forgot the important part in every one.

Just following orders

Silent No More

ChurchMilitantTV

And last but not least, where you can go later today to see what has the "Church of Nice" so upset that even their sleeper cells are working overtime to slander Voris.

Someone with an ingrown toenail must be really worried about having their toes stepped on later this evening. That or they're just really, really, ticked off over their faithful supporters knowing how much they're paid to not get out of step with the "right people".

[Salvation]

So true. Maybe they are even here.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Michael Voris wants to work at Catholic Answers?

I am disappoint. That means he's just another evolutionist/higher critic. I guess that means you can stop being afraid of him now, Alex. Catholic Answers doesn't want "fundies" in their church. So you (and I) are safe from any nefarious "sprinkle 'em and then if they try to back out burn 'em at the stake" plots you might have imagined.

[A.A. Cunningham]

If you've seen his hair, you know the reason.

Another example of your true Christian benevolence, Al.

[Alex Murphy]

Another example of your true Christian benevolence, Al.

Can I call you Betty?

[ebb tide]

Karl Keating wrote in the combox (with characteristic delightful understatement):

After Jerry Usher retired as host of Catholic Answers Live, Michael Voris was in discussion with us about becoming the new host. We decided he was not the right person for that role, which later was filled by Patrick Coffin. We otherwise have never had any contact with Mr. Voris. He did not contact us before airing his videos.

After the above comment, I think Keating is a petty, vindictive little man.

[Legatus]

After the above comment, I think Keating is a petty, vindictive little man.

SOY SAUCE!

I can't remember the details but google probably has the answers... Catholic answers even.