Skip to main content

Skojec's attack on Bp. Gracida shows he has become Mark Shea

I couldn't stop laughing when I read One Peter Five publisher Steve Skojec's Twitter attack on Bishop Rene Gracida claiming he had "lost the plot" which means he stopped acting rationally.

I texted the Tweet to my niece saying "I got a good laugh from this."

She texted back:

Haha I can see why... Like the Democrats accuse others of what they are guilty of."

I have had email exchanges with both Bishop Gracida and Skojec:

The Bishop is a humble highly intelligent gentleman while Skojec in the last few years acts like a deranged mindless leftist Democrat who has "lost his plot" that is he apparently has lost the ability to think rationally. Here are some examples:

I made a long carefully reasoned post hoping to engage Skojec in reasonable argument and all I got in return were attacks on caricatures of my arguments, shrill mocking and the claim it was too long.

So, I put together five fairly short clear questions in dubia fashion for him to respond to reasonably and I got no response from him until when in his laughably ridiculous Twitter attack on Bishop Gracida and me said:

"Gracida has clearly lost the plot. His constant republishing of the increasingly rambling Fred Martinez makes clear his ability to act prudently is impaired."

In simple words, sadly Skojec has become deranged and "his ability to act prudently is impaired."

Or, in other words, like in some weird science fiction movie it appears that Skojec has become transformed into Mark Shea.

Philosopher Edward Feser's description of Mark Shea is strangely almost unbelievably a perfect characterization of Skojec:

"'Deranged' might seem an unkind description of Shea and his comments. Sadly, it's also a perfectly accurate description..."

"... Shea has, in several follow-ups now, given no response whatsoever to these points or others made in my earlier posts. He simply ignores the arguments and instead reiterates, with greater shrillness the same false and already refuted claims he made in his initial attack on Joe and me"

"... In blog post after blog post he tosses out strings of ungrounded assertions, attacks caricatures, hurls insults and abuse, seems content with the 'high fives' his rabid fans give back in response to critics who try to engage him substantively."
(Edwardfeser.blogspot, "A low down dirty Shea," March 24, 2017)

The only difference between Shea and Skojec is that he does most of his "insults and attacks" on Twitter. But, other than that, Skojec has weirdly been transformed into Mark Shea.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.

Comments

Charlie said…
Both Shea and Skojec are potent examples of what happens to people who spend too much time on social media.
Aqua said…
I remember commenting with Skojec before 1P5, back when he had just a personal blog. He was much more interesting, friendly, introspective in those days.

As Charlie alludes to above, Skojec has the hard but shallow shell of social media immersion. As a fellow Catholic, and as one who has followed him since the beginning, and even though I have been blocked and banned by him for a few years, I am really sorry to see what has happened to him. This is not how we Catholics were meant to be.

Popular posts from this blog

Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Francis teaches HERESY," now, the question is will he do a Skojec & a Schneider Cop Out

    Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation: "[T]he Pope... WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic , he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him , or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See." (The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306) Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Pope Francis teaches HERESY: Pope Pius XII condemned the heresy of Francis": Pope Francis on Feb 2 2022, taught, "that in Christ no one can ever truly separate us from those we love because the bond is an existential bond, a strong bond that is in our very nature...who have denied the faith, who are apostates." Pope Pius XII taught the exact opposite when he wrote of those: "who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or b

Wernz-Vidal: "One cannot consider as Schismatics those who Refuse to Obey the Roman Pontiff because they would hold his person Suspect or, because of Widespread Rumors, Doubtfully Elected"

    Pope Francis is tottering on the precipice of Hell. None of this means he isn't the pope, and such talk among the laity is scandalous in its own right. Not a single cardinal in that 2013 conclave has come out and said the election was rigged and Bergoglio isn't the pope, that he is in fact an anti-pope . If he is, a future pope can declare that, when Jorge Bergoglio will no longer be a pope. But if the very men gathered in conclave haven't made that public accusation,  anyone who is suggesting that better take into account that they too will have to give an account of themselves to Almighty God when they die . Such talk adds to the scandal of the "little ones," the simple, even potential converts, who, when they hear big-mouth Catholics on social media saying he's not really the pope, draw back from approaching the Church. Do any of us desire to stand in front Our Blessed Lord as the Supreme Judge and explain why, in our desire for more c

The Nuremberg Trial-like Excuse which Cardinal Burke has so Staggeringly, so Stereotypically Proffered on the Promised “Formal Correction”

Does Cardinal Burke think Francis is an antipope? On at least five occasions, Cardinal Burke has rejected the magisterial nature of official papal teaching (in one case, pre-emptively dismissing a hypothetical official teaching of the Magisterium): Cardinal Burke has rejected the official teaching of Pope Francis in the new Apostolic Constitution Episcopalis Communio concerning the possibility that a pope can raise the final synodal document to the level of ordinary magisterium, if the pope chooses. (We covered the Episcopalis Communio here .) The whole apostolic constitution on the Synod is problematic. … This idea that either the Pope on his own or the Synod together with the Pope can create some new Magisterium [i.e. a new teaching of the ordinary Magisterium], is simply false. The Synod is a consultative body, to help the Pope to see how best to present the Church’s teaching in time. It’s not able to create ordinary Magisterium. As a canon lawyer, Cardinal Burk