Tuesday, September 11, 2007

Blog Updates

Voice in the wilderness has just passed 60 posts since its conception back in April. There have been some recent updates, one of the most notable of which was the decision to invite Philip Candido, AKA: Athanasius, of Athanasius Contra Mundum to contribute to VITW a series on Archbishop Lefebvre and the origins and development of the SSPX from the indult/SSPX perspective, which will be coming up sometime soon, hopefully, considering that we've left it at his discretion as to the date of its production. Also, there has been the addition of a few posts to the series on the Ottaviani Intervention, which is still somewhat in the works, that has been one of the major post series's and objectives of VITW in its topic of the Traditional Catholic movement. We have also the addition of several posts regarding Protestant beliefs, such as sola scriptura and sola fide, which has bearing on the modern ecumenism of Vatican II and its subsequent theologies and exegesis, two Protestant heresies that must be as G. K. Chesterton says, "whatever may be said for it [error], the most important thing to be said about it is that it is erroneous", described as the errors that they are. There was also the coverage of the Motu Prorio, back in July, and the reaction of bishop Fellay, superior general of the SSPX, and the document on the clarification on the doctrine of the faith also produced in July, including a commentary on it and its effects. This being to keep you up to speed as to what's been going down and, also to introduce what is about to transpire out here in the wilderness.
In Christo,



Anonymous said...

"In Alcuin's Shadow" This is the first right-side link that I followed.

How does a "protestant" link apply to your objective - which is ??????? (not sure).

Can you restate your purpose so that it is succinct?

Leo said...

"This site may link you to other sites on the Internet or otherwise include references to information, and documents provided by other parties and might contain material that VITW may not necessarily agree with, viewer discretion is advised. These other sites and parties are not under our control, and we are not responsible for the accuracy of information or any aspect of the content of such sites, nor are we responsible for errors or omissions in any references to other parties or their material. The inclusion of such a link or reference is provided merely as a convenience and/or for educational purposes and does not, therefore, imply endorsement of, or association with, the site or party by us, either express or implied."

"A Voice Crying in the Wilderness is dedicated to the promotion and defense the faith of our Fathers, that is, the Catholic faith. It focuses on the Traditional Catholic movement since the Second Vatican Council, and is also where we will document events and persons of interest that pertain the Catholic remnant, providing news and commentary on today's Catholic world, faith, and morality.

Anonymous said...

Interesting question and response.

So how do the links get on your blog (from one not being versed in internet manipulations)?

Sounded like legalese to me. So you can't control which links appear on your blog? Or is it that you can't control content of the links?

Leo said...

Could provide us with something to address your comments as, I'm not in the habit of discussing things blindly.

"So how do the links get on your blog (from one not being versed in internet manipulations)?"

I place them in the sidebar.

"Sounded like legalese to me. So you can't control which links appear on your blog? Or is it that you can't control content of the links?"

It was legalese, common sense clearly demonstrates that I cannot be responsible for other people's content, but some people, strangely enough, don't have that common sense, and would like to hold me responsible for the content of another site. It is there to inform readers of this blog that simply because we post a link, does not mean that we endorse the content on the other end of that link, sometimes they are posted to prove a point, at other times as a reference, at other times as a means of illustrating a thesis, at others because some content of interest may be present there, does not necessarily mean that we agree with their positions, however, it may be posted because we wish to present the views of one side of a story, which may, or may not be the only available side, for discussion, or rather, consideration's sake.

the link you mentioned did not contain blatant Protestantism at the time of its being posted, nor does that mean that it was being posted because we endorse it, it could mean that this is one perspective that might be of value to considerations and discussions present here, for instance, I might link to a site devoted to sola scriptura just to present what those protestants are saying during a discussion, say, if I were refuting it or the like, or if I were using it as an example as an exercise of logic.
I post the links, but I cannot control the content of other sites.
For instance, I post things about Protestantism, for some people who are not familiar with it, it may appear that I am smearing Protestantism by exaggerating what Protestants believe, that is, until they see the evidence that what is posted is indeed true, and no mere exaggeration or the like. I may place something for consideration, or deliberation on any given topic, my views are clear from my posts, the opposition's from their words, two sides of a discussion indeed, clearly represented, thus the phrase "viewer discretion is advised" for it should be apparent that what one views onthe internet is their affair, and if something appears that they are not in agreement with, they should exercise common sense and either abandon it, or debunk it.