Let me be even more up front and say that I don't care much for Patheos. I have a problem with Catholics who blog for profit. I know that some of the folks who visit me here are faithful readers of that site and I'm not knocking you, believe me. It's just that I am not inclined to help lay people profit from that which many fine bloggers do for nothing except their own personal satisfaction and the off chance that a soul may be helped by what they write. I haven't read a word on Patheos that could hold a candle to the gems one Mr Richard Collins puts forth on an almost-daily basis.
Every so often, there is a dust-up. It seems to involve a gentleman named Mark Shea quite frequently. I honestly would not know him if I fell over him. (Nothing personal Mark, but there are many other fine but less notorious Catholic bloggers and only so many hours in a day.) Anyway, I saw from a link somewhere that there was something Mark posted about Father Corapi. But when I read Mark's piece, it contained no news at all, so why did he go there? What purpose does it serve, except to fire more potshots at a man who clearly is in need of our prayers?
I don't care for Michael Voris, but I know nothing of what kind of Catholic he is outside of The Vortex. No one's ever forced me to read or listen to him, so except for mentioning here and there that I personally don't find him useful, what more is there to say? I don't care for some of Father Z's politics, but so far as I can tell, he's a sound priest in good standing. No one has ever held me at gunpoint and made me read what he writes. If he and Voris hang out together, why should I care? Don't we all tend to gravitate toward those with whom we think we have something in common? And if someone finds what they say and do offensive, like when they look longingly to the day when the biological solution takes out some hippie priests, why go on about it? Repeating this stuff only gives it credence it may not deserve.
There are clearly bloggers who get under my skin. That's why you don't see their blogs listed here. I don't devote blog posts to them, mock them or otherwise call attention to them. I don't respond to them or their loyal followers when I'm the subject of their derision. I never understood why people would profess to dislike or be offended by a blogger and then call more attention to them simply by writing a post about them, even if it is denigrating. For some, negative attention is better than no attention at all. It boggles my mind.
When I decided to start blogging again, I honestly thought about not allowing comments, lest I become obsessed with stats and the like. To do so, however, would deprive me of the friendship I enjoy with a small but faithful group who visit here. I am trying to keep the blog posts down to a minimum. There are many more things I'd like to write about but then I think there is a danger in making this about me and not about my struggle to do His Will. Does that make sense?
I enjoy the insight that other bloggers share about their journey to Heaven. At Terry Nelson's urging, I have discovered Heather King. I don't get the artsy part so much but anyone who quotes Matthew Chapter 6 AND spent a year walking the streets with the Little Flower is at least partially simpatico with me. Far as I can tell, she writes what she does without taking aim at other bloggers. And Magnificat thinks enough of her writing to have used her work in this month's issue as the reflection on the Feast of the Conversion of St Paul.
That's the kind of achievement more of us should work toward.