“If you have doubts, Catholic writing is not your calling. Sorry to burst your bubble…”

Mundabor with some ideas, most of which I agree with:


Catholic Writing: Some Modest Suggestions

“So you want to write about Catholicism, because you love Christ and His Church and want to give your little contribution in these disturbing times. Congratulations. More power to you. High five, and all that.

“I would like, here, to give some little, very personal suggestions about how to make it work. There are people still reading this blog after eleven years, so perhaps I know one thing or two. So there we are:

  1. Get a day job
  2. Write anonymously
  3. Get your ego out of your blog (more detail at the link below)

4. Get your issues out of your blog

“Believe me, young boy (or girl). People really, really don’t care about your back ache, or the flu you had, or the moods of your cat. They don’t relate to your “daily journey”, and don’t want to read tedious accounts about how the quarrel with your dog, Hannibal, made of you a better dog-owner and, by reflection, a better Catholic, teaching you how we can learn from the wisdom God has given to dogs. The same goes, cela va sans dire, for your finances. People click your blog for inspiration, not to hear you whine. Ask for prayers, and let your readers pay you with them. These are the only finances your blog should be worried about.

5. Have a strong and well-formed faith, or avoid wasting your time.

“Catholic blogging is for people who, bluntly stated, know what they write and have no doubts. If you have doubts, have the decency of not writing. No doctors prescribed you to write a blog, and everybody has his own calling. If you have doubts, Catholic writing is not your calling. Sorry to burst your bubble, pal, but you are making tiramisu’ with mascarpone gone bad here, so don’t ask other people to eat your dessert. Writing about your doubts is even much, much worse than having them, as it violates points number 3 and number 4, besides helping the devil. This is, to keep the metaphor, making tiramisu’ with dung instead of cocoa, eating it in public, and ask people to give a thought about eating it, too. How some people lack the basic decency of understanding that what counts is the Church, not their damned, ego-driven doubts, is beyond me. Again, every time I read this stuff I think this is the devil at work, leveraging on the writer’s ego. Believe me, points 2 and 3 are very, very smart.”

More here: https://mundabor.wordpress.com/2021/06/05/catholic-writing-some-modest-suggestions/

We don’t always seem eye to eye, and he is one of the most persistent Francis is Definitely Pope partisans out there. But Mundabor, whoever he is, knows his stuff, and he was one of the biggest reasons I started this blog. “Warrior Ants,” was the call to arms. His straightforward style is a thing of beauty. Blessed First Saturday to all.

16 thoughts on ““If you have doubts, Catholic writing is not your calling. Sorry to burst your bubble…”

  1. When Mundy’s right, he’s RIGHT.
    ….and when he’s wrong (on the most crucial and central issue of all)….boy oh boy is he wrong.

  2. I don’t read him anymore – he’s rife with cognitive dissonance: “Francis is definitely pope but he’s a heretical, evil clown”. He comes off as an empty vessel just spouting insults…

    1. I loved reading Mundy’s stuff….especially when he was having trouble with his English syntax. He was trying so hard and he has really come a long way. Kudos to Mundy.

      Plus, he could take a punch without wincing and counter punch without missing.

      A couple of times I’ve had to apologize to him for my a little too spontaneous response to some of his “blogs” and his acceptance has been most charitable….plus, I think he loves the USA more than many of its citizens.

      However, I’ll have to echo Edison Frisbee and admit that I don’t read Mundy with any regularity because of his acceptance of Jorge Bergoglio and the evil clown mantra.

      “But oh boy when he’s wrong he’s wrong…” Good point. But at least he takes a stance.

  3. Mundabor has done more damage to the Holy Office than just about any other living blogger – by giving active example to otherwise orthodox Catholics on insulting the Vicar of Jesus Christ with the most vile, heinous insults imaginable, and demonstrating that obedience to the Holy Father is a matter of choice.

    If he is Pope … act like it!

    If he is antipope … do something about it!

    Whoever is Pope is the living Vicar of our Lord Jesus Christ with Divine protections guaranteed.

    Whoever is antipope is a fraud and imposter in the most important human Office in heaven and earth.

    One must be respected, listened to attentively, corrected if necessary – God’s St. Peter until the end of time.

    The other is evil and the most mortal possible threat to our souls and the life of the Church – a Judas.

    Mundabor mixes these two up. He insists one is valid (he will not tolerate discussion on that topic) yet still holds all the characteristics of the other – the Holy Office can also be an Evil Office.

    And so, the spectacle of a purported orthodox Catholic hurling the most vile insults (and graphics) you can imagine against God’s Vicar – living representative of God’s Heavenly Kingdom on earth.

    If an occupant is Pope – respect him as visible representative of God Almighty on earth; your Father who protects you from danger and evil in the world.
    If an occupant is antipope – he is an evil clown and the worst of all traitors and usurpers; he kicked your Father to the curb and moved into your house,

    1. Aqua, yes you are correct. It’s one or the other. I stopped reading him a year or two ago. He blocked me from posting there, even when I agreed with him six months or more before that.

  4. Mark, in reference to “ … he was one of the biggest reasons I started this blog. “Warrior Ants,” was the call to arms“.

    I, for one, very much appreciate what all Catholic bloggers do as a public service to the Faithful. There are a very few good ones – orthodox, dependable, interesting, enlightening, educational, wise (as in getting the answers to hard questions right) – yours is one (imo). And I would just like to say thank you for having more than just good intentions. Mundabor apparently put out the challenge some time ago and you did, and do, something about it. So, thank you!

  5. Wow, some pretty high and mighty attitudes here.

    Dante put a pile of popes in Hell.

    It’s a time honored tradition in Rome to give a bunch of lip to the pope in posters plastered over the city.

    Maybe those up on their high horses decrying arrogance aught to give a thought or two to the beam in their own eyes.

    1. Regardless of “time honored traditions in Rome,” true popes are due true allegiance, because they are guaranteed to not teach error in matters of faith and morals. Guaranteed by our Lord Himself.

    2. Kathleen: “A pile of Popes”. So – which Popes did Dante place there, and why? I think there were only three. I think none of the three were arch-heretics promoting blasphemy and heresy from St. Peter’s Throne. There was an abdicator, a simoniac, and a traitor.

      Dante reserves some of his worst approbations against the Papal quitter – the resigned Celestine V: “The last time a pope *resigned voluntarily* was 1294. The great poet Dante Alighieri was so angry about it that he put the abdicating pope, Celestine V, into the antechamber of his Inferno” (end quote). He was placed there for the mortal sin of abandoning Our Lord, 727 years ago the last time this happened. Shows you how serious that act of Papal abdication *should* be – “retirement” is not possible within the Holy Office. This Papal selection of Dante shows there are two choices only for a Pope to leave – (1): Resign the Office and (allegedly) choose hell forever, or (2): die in Office.

      Pope Nicholas III: “condemned to spend eternity in the Third Bolgia of the Eighth Circle of Hell, reserved for those who committed simony, the ecclesiastical crime of paying for offices or positions in the hierarchy of a church”.

      Pope Boniface VIII is mentioned in Dante, but does not occupy a place in hell: “This Pope not only betrayed Dante’s beloved White Guelphs, but had Dante personally exiled. … The only reason Dante didn’t include him was that at the time of Dante’s writing, Pope Boniface VIII was still alive”.

      I disagree with you that Popes can and should be ridiculed (“lip”) for their crimes and sins and deviations. Our Church is a Monarchy with the Holy Trinity at its Head, and the Pope is the living Monarch who directly represents Jesus Christ our Lord. It is a symptom of the age that we ridicule our Monarch provided to Holy Mother Church by God, by divine design.

      BTW, in my short research, I came across this interesting page of 10 real people occupying Dante’s conception of Hell, and a brief summary of the crimes and sins that placed them there. Fascinating reading, to me.

      https://listverse.com/2016/10/18/10-real-people-condemned-to-dantes-inferno/

  6. Wow.

    Entire novels in response in record time and neither actually read what I said.

    Seriously.

    Did it even occur to you that I did NOT say ANYTHING about my personal position.

    That you haven’t the faintest idea what I think about the topic.

    I was commenting on the hubris of the commenters (NOT this blog owner btw).

    And so the result is a big rush to confirm my impression.

    Just. Wow.

    1. Kathleen: My takeaway …
      1: People are arrogant (high and mighty) around here
      2: There are a pile of Popes in hell.
      3: People give lip to Popes in Rome via posters.
      4: Arrogant people are hypocrites.

  7. “Mundabor fan-girl outraged over differing opinions…teases she may have her own viewpoint…news at 11.”

  8. Just wondering why you advise to “write anonymously”? Are there specific reasons why you suggest this?

Comments are closed.