Author Topic: JONE LANE BANNED FROM IA (Read 1867 times)

Änσnymσus · « **on:** September 24, 2012, 10:35:46 PM »

It seems that John Lane has been banned from Ignis Ardens. He had predicted that the deal would not go through and that following the General Chapter it would be difficult to be signed even in the near future. For some reason he has turned into an ardent defender of Bp Fellay, accepting as truth, whatever BF says.

In one of his posts he mentioned his friendship with Fr Black, the outgoing superior of Australia. Fr Black is a very senior priest of the Society, and I wonder if he has given John Lane some "insights" on the current situation as well as on the pedigree of the opponents of Bp Fellay who have now gone public. If this is the case then his position is understandable, for there must be priests who will take take action if and when a deal is signed.

NB. TITLE SHOULD BE JOHN LANE AND NOT JONE LANE

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #1 on:** September 24, 2012, 11:07:08 PM »

There's something bizarre in describing the "pedigree" of priests.

John Lane's main problem is that he's a Fellayite sede, which is a fundamentally self-contradictory position

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #2 on:** September 25, 2012, 08:41:59 AM »

To me his problem is that he focuses too much on whether the deal was or is going to happen, rather than all the scandalous things that have happened and continue to happen from Menzingen over these last few years. He has to ignore so much of what Bishop Fellay (& co.) has said & done. What about the continuing watering-down of the SSPX by Menzingen? There are so many more issues than just "was or is a deal going to happen?"

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #3 on:** September 25, 2012, 03:27:56 PM »

"I wonder if he has given John Lane some "insights" on the current situation as well as on the pedigree of the opponents of Bp Fellay who have now gone public"

And how, pray tell me, this is not pure speculation?

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #4 on:** September 25, 2012, 05:48:52 PM »

Why does anyone care that John Lane was banned from IA? He is a nothing more than a pompous, self-promoting, pseudo intellectual sedevacantist. If one misses him and wishes to read his thoughts (which are presented as facts), just visit his forum.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #5 on:** September 26, 2012, 09:27:17 AM »

pride goeth before a fall

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #6 on:** September 26, 2012, 09:49:07 AM »

John Doe who?

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #7 on:** September 26, 2012, 10:10:50 PM »

Why would he move from being a spokesman of the sede movement to a crass apologist for Bishop Fellay? I wonder what his fellow sedes think of him now?.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #8 on:** September 26, 2012, 11:06:48 PM »

Quote from: Guest

Why would he move from being a spokesman of the sede movement to a crass apologist for Bishop Fellay? I wonder what his fellow sedes think of him now?.

Well at least Charls was taken out with him. Sometimes one has to take the bad with the good.

I don't see that he has "moved" anywhere. Looks like Clare got in over her head and decided to shoot the messenger.

His fellow sedes think of him about the same as they did before, I would think.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #9 on:** September 27, 2012, 08:17:24 AM »

Quote from: Guest

It seems that John Lane has been banned from Ignis Ardens. He had predicted that the deal would not go through and that following the General Chapter it would be difficult to be signed even in the near future. For some reason he has turned into an ardent defender of Bp Fellay, accepting as truth, whatever BF says.

In one of his posts he mentioned his friendship with Fr Black, the outgoing superior of Australia. Fr Black is a very senior priest of the Society, and I wonder if he has given John Lane some "insights" on the current situation as well as on the pedigree of the opponents of Bp Fellay who have now gone public. If this is the case then his position is understandable, for there must be priests who will take take action if and when a deal is signed.

NB. TITLE SHOULD BE JOHN LANE AND NOT JONE LANE

I will say that some of John's recent statements [jurisdiction in the NO church/his disagreement with Stephen Heiner et al.] have been a bit perturbing. He has heard nothing but "R & R" sermons for decades. Perhaps they have started to take a sublte effect.

It took years for me to get rid of the N.O. poisen and he has ensconssed himself in the "R & R" poisen for decades. The una cuм Benedict Mass might be techincally okay to attend but the sermons are certainly dangerous.

One can only guess. I have no idea. He does want to convert the SSPX and I guess he is trying to do it with honey. We have to be careful not to become too sweet or we might change into something repulsive.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #10 on:** September 28, 2012, 12:58:35 AM »

In one of his posts on his forum John Lane said that Fr Gregoire Celier had "resigned". Resigned from the Society or just from his post as Secretary to the SSPX French District? Does anyone know?

Sigismund · « **Reply #11 on:** September 28, 2012, 09:33:01 AM »

Quote from: Guest

"I wonder if he has given John Lane some "insights" on the current situation as well as on the pedigree of the opponents of Bp Fellay who have now gone public"

And how, pray tell me, this is not pure speculation?

When you begin a statement with "I wonder" it is pretty clear that you mean it to be speculative.

Author Topic: JONE LANE BANNED FROM IA (Read 1867 times)

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus