The only thing I’ve ever disagreed with him about was when he apparently endorsed the position Francis wasn’t a valid pope, but even the morality of doing so is debatable, and I give him the benefit of the doubt he did so in good faith. In general, when following his criticisms of Francis, I can honestly say he was not “bashing” or “attacking” the pope. His approach always seemed rather moderate to me, and compared to certain bloggers or YouTubers who certainly did “bash” the pope.
Yet these leaked recordings indicate his theological views are primarily why some people objected to him, more than personal problems with his leadership, which was the pretense. It is not in reality mainly because he questioned if Francis was a valid pope, or concluded in the negative, or criticized the pope, it was because of his overall traditionalist Catholic theological positions on the Crisis, which neither aligns to the standard de facto policies of Ecclesia Dei traditionalism (silence to maintain Latin Mass approvals) or conciliar conservatism, or of actual sedevacantism, of which he certainly does not subscribe. It is because he fundamentally took an SSPX-style, recognize and resist orientation, similar to Michael Matt or Taylor Marshall.
Or Bishop Schneider or Cardinal Mueller.
His main critic who came forward, the director of advertising, she has only been with the company for four years vs. the CEO’s and Co-Founder’s time of 28 years. She says their donations and views have gone down, threatening the viability of the company. But she very strongly objected, apparently on behalf of those agreeing with her in her department, to the traditional Catholic viewpoint of JHW (and those agreeing with him). The problem is she is not even a Catholic, but Eastern Orthodox, which renders her opinion to be irrelevant in the discussion. She is afraid for her job and not on board with traditional Catholicism. As, it seems, are some others working under JHW. She came across more like a disgruntled “Karen” than a sincere whistleblower. I mean, if you take a job with a Catholic news agency, you ought to know what their theological approaches are before taking the job, otherwise if you disagree just do your job, or leave.
I heard nothing egregious. No allegation of sexual misconduct, theft, felony, harassment, embezzlement, or the like. What was alleged by two people in the leaked audio was personal opinion and subjective observation, not backed up with hard evidence. Nobody “came with receipts” as the saying goes. I heard nothing about documents, audio recordings, video recordings, or similar hard evidence to prove anything.
I have consistently had a very good impression of JHW, as have bishops, bishops like Bishop Strickland or Bishop Schneider associated with him. Outside of the popesplainers, I’ve never seen any characterization of JHW as a “mad trad” or “ pope basher.” It must be asked, if JHW was such a problem at LSN for so long, then why did the Board not deal with him long before? Why did it take so long to take decisive action? Their narrative therefore doesn’t pass the smell test.
Did JHW have a tendency to be controlling? A dysfunctional leader? To go around the Board? Maybe he did, and maybe he didn’t. I have no opinion against him because these leaked audio recordings are without merit to draw actual conclusions. It sounds like damage control to ultimately save their jobs. It is internal and none of our business. But they and whoever leaked those recordings made it our business, hence a necessary public defense of JHW.
God knows what kind of leader JHW was behind the scenes. Whatever wrong he may have done (or not) behind the scenes cannot be reliably known by these recordings. By mere accusations by a few “Karens” grinding their axe. Dysfunction and certain irregularities are not uncommon among the leaders of any corporation or organization, by the way, including good ones.
The Board’s vote to fire him was 5 to 4. Had they first heard JHW’s defense with his own survey and witnesses, instead of just one side, to give him enough time, then he certainly would have had more votes, or just one more vote, and still retain his position.
Oh and here’s a brilliant idea. Why did you all apparently not first sit down with him and discuss the problems, hash it all out over time, agree upon new guidelines about content and approach, and give the man chances, considering he is the heart of the organization? That or agree to disagree on approach and go your separate way in a respectful, civil way. There would be no LSN without JHW. None of you would have jobs or paychecks unless he had labored for decades to build up LSN.
In conclusion, like using the internet itself, these internet Catholic apostolates and news outlets are in a sense a “necessary evil.” It would not be necessary if the Church was in a normal state of orthodoxy, proper Catholic worship, and reliable leadership. Therefore the unfortunate reality is we need lay leaders like JHW, for better or worse. If LSN is a sinking ship, I don’t blame JHW. I blame those who align themselves knowingly or unknowingly with the ape of the Church, whether on staff at LSN, or those who might actively follow it. JHW made it an oasis for traditional-minded Catholics for years, one of the main news outlets for promoting Catholic Tradition. The problem is that it apparently was not originally founded with that mission, and not everyone was on board with that becoming the de facto mission.
At any rate, just as I finish this, the headline has been posted. JHW has been restored to his position (for now, will see how that plays out)! Justice has been done. Prayers for him and LSN that any internal problems can be overcome. We are all broken in one way or another. In the end we are restored by Christ through the traditional Catholic Faith!!
His main critic who came forward, the director of advertising, she has only been with the company for four years vs. the CEO’s and Co-Founder’s time of 28 years. She says their donations and views have gone down, threatening the viability of the company. But she very strongly objected, apparently on behalf of those agreeing with her in her department, to the traditional Catholic viewpoint of JHW (and those agreeing with him). The problem is she is not even a Catholic, but Eastern Orthodox, which renders her opinion to be irrelevant in the discussion. She is afraid for her job and not on board with traditional Catholicism. As, it seems, are some others working under JHW. She came across more like a disgruntled “Karen” than a sincere whistleblower. I mean, if you take a job with a Catholic news agency, you ought to know what their theological approaches are before taking the job, otherwise if you disagree just do your job, or leave.
I heard nothing egregious. No allegation of sexual misconduct, theft, felony, harassment, embezzlement, or the like. What was alleged by two people in the leaked audio was personal opinion and subjective observation, not backed up with hard evidence. Nobody “came with receipts” as the saying goes. I heard nothing about documents, audio recordings, video recordings, or similar hard evidence to prove anything.
I have consistently had a very good impression of JHW, as have bishops, bishops like Bishop Strickland or Bishop Schneider associated with him. Outside of the popesplainers, I’ve never seen any characterization of JHW as a “mad trad” or “ pope basher.” It must be asked, if JHW was such a problem at LSN for so long, then why did the Board not deal with him long before? Why did it take so long to take decisive action? Their narrative therefore doesn’t pass the smell test.
Did JHW have a tendency to be controlling? A dysfunctional leader? To go around the Board? Maybe he did, and maybe he didn’t. I have no opinion against him because these leaked audio recordings are without merit to draw actual conclusions. It sounds like damage control to ultimately save their jobs. It is internal and none of our business. But they and whoever leaked those recordings made it our business, hence a necessary public defense of JHW.
God knows what kind of leader JHW was behind the scenes. Whatever wrong he may have done (or not) behind the scenes cannot be reliably known by these recordings. By mere accusations by a few “Karens” grinding their axe. Dysfunction and certain irregularities are not uncommon among the leaders of any corporation or organization, by the way, including good ones.
So unless JHW did something gravely illegal or gravely harmful to staff, this is private. Which means we give JHW the benefit of the doubt. He was as CEO, Co-Founder, and the very face of LSN, in the public sphere an extraordinary leader of excellent moral reputation in the traditional Catholic movement, the universal Church, as well as the Pro-life movement.
The Board’s vote to fire him was 5 to 4. Had they first heard JHW’s defense with his own survey and witnesses, instead of just one side, to give him enough time, then he certainly would have had more votes, or just one more vote, and still retain his position.
Oh and here’s a brilliant idea. Why did you all apparently not first sit down with him and discuss the problems, hash it all out over time, agree upon new guidelines about content and approach, and give the man chances, considering he is the heart of the organization? That or agree to disagree on approach and go your separate way in a respectful, civil way. There would be no LSN without JHW. None of you would have jobs or paychecks unless he had labored for decades to build up LSN.
In conclusion, like using the internet itself, these internet Catholic apostolates and news outlets are in a sense a “necessary evil.” It would not be necessary if the Church was in a normal state of orthodoxy, proper Catholic worship, and reliable leadership. Therefore the unfortunate reality is we need lay leaders like JHW, for better or worse. If LSN is a sinking ship, I don’t blame JHW. I blame those who align themselves knowingly or unknowingly with the ape of the Church, whether on staff at LSN, or those who might actively follow it. JHW made it an oasis for traditional-minded Catholics for years, one of the main news outlets for promoting Catholic Tradition. The problem is that it apparently was not originally founded with that mission, and not everyone was on board with that becoming the de facto mission.
At any rate, just as I finish this, the headline has been posted. JHW has been restored to his position (for now, will see how that plays out)! Justice has been done. Prayers for him and LSN that any internal problems can be overcome. We are all broken in one way or another. In the end we are restored by Christ through the traditional Catholic Faith!!
Will see how this plays out. From a bird’s eye view, it is over for JHW at LSN. This seems more like a legal back step by the Board, and temporary.
That is barring he and his supporters somehow restructuring the Board of Directors, making traditional Catholicism and its critique of the Crisis part of its new official mission statement. He could always fight this legally. He is a Co-founder. He built LSN from the ground up. The Board apparently, allegedly broke its own policies how they ousted him, and now there is this leak that could be argued to be legally defamation. JHW could negotiate a legal take over of LSN, under pressure of a huge lawsuit and settlement. Since that recording was made during the Board meeting, and since that means it likely was created by one of the anti-JHW board members, then it stands to reason that the leak would have originated from a board member, and if so could constitute defamation in which the current Board could be likewise liable. That is LSN itself could be held liable.
A perhaps more likely positive outcome would be for JHW to negotiate a settlement that allows him to take some of the equity, equipment, donor contacts, and staff, of LSN, to start his plan for a new non-profit Catholic news apostolate with the freedom to speak the whole truth, anchored squarely within traditional Catholicism.
(I will keep this up a few days then file it away in my summer writings file in the top left. I want the focus of my blog at least through August to be on the subject of preserving the Latin Mass in the parochial “mainstream,” as I advocated for in the last 15 or more blog posts)