That's what I thought. No sources.
Calumny is a sin.

Interesting that you would leap to dispute that Rose was a jew rather than condemn his statements about Our Lady of Fatima and St. Francis, maybe the greatest of all Catholic saints. It says a lot about your allegiances. 

Idiot. I, also, asked for your sources about his alleged statements on Marian apparitions & St. Francis. Once there is proof, I will render the condemnation. Do you even logic, brah?

Have you heard of an internet search engine? This took 5 whole seconds to find regarding his statements on St. Francis. You must have attended public schools.

https://www.orthodoxethos.com/post/francis-of-assisi-the-pseudo-saint-part-ii

Jay Dyer used to be a Dimondite, and was even going to join their "monastery" at one point.  He was a sedevacantist for years. He knows their position and it's arguments far better than the Dimonds know Orthodoxy.  He won't debate them, but I forget why. I want to say that they never responded to his request to debate years ago, but I could be wrong.  I also believe they refuse to debate him in return, probably saying he is "of bad will," which appears to be their evaluation of anyone more educated than themselves.

Ubi Petrus, however, who has several refutation videos of Dimondite claims, has publicly challenged them to a debate recently. I would certainly watch it, but even just watching the Dimond videos vs th Ubi videos, it shows that Fred and Bob are seriously outclassed.  A debate against Bishop Sanborn would be far more interesting.

The Ex-Catholic Orthodox that masquerade as Catholics and try to introduce doubts about the Papacy and legitimatimacy of the Catholic Faith in the weaker and less educated people on sites like this are trying to calm their own screaming conscience. There is a crisis in the Church and because they cant figure everything out by relying on their own intelligence and not trusting that Christ will care for His Church, they jump ship. To cope with their conscience that bothers them, they have to go on the Internet, regurgitate arguments that have been dealt with many times, and try to drag other Catholics to Hell with them to make themselves feel better.

I'm not gonna comment on anything else on this thread because I said I wouldn't argue for Orthodoxy here, and I stand by that promise.  With that being said this is just an incredibly uncharitable assumption IMO.  It seems far more reasonable to believe that these Orthodox are trying to bring Catholics to Orthodoxy because they believe its true, even if it is in fact mistaken.  Just as is the case the other way around.  I don't assume that Orthos who convert to Catholicism are trying to drag souls into hell on purpose.  Why would I assume that?  

Now, TBH, I do think as far as it goes that advocacy of Orthodoxy is outside the scope of this forum (the only reason I am a member here is because I was Catholic in good standing when I joined).  But even there, I would assume people are just in their view putting their concern for souls over the rules of the forum.  Assuming they actually want people to go to Hell is *really* uncharitable, and I doubt it.

Jay Dyer used to be a Dimondite, and was even going to join their "monastery" at one point.  He was a sedevacantist for years. He knows their position and it's arguments far better than the Dimonds know Orthodoxy.  He won't debate them, but I forget why. I want to say that they never responded to his request to debate years ago, but I could be wrong.  I also believe they refuse to debate him in return, probably saying he is "of bad will," which appears to be their evaluation of anyone more educated than themselves.

Ubi Petrus, however, who has several refutation videos of Dimondite claims, has publicly challenged them to a debate recently. I would certainly watch it, but even just watching the Dimond videos vs th Ubi videos, it shows that Fred and Bob are seriously outclassed.  A debate against Bishop Sanborn would be far more interesting.

Yeah. No. Jew Cryer was never a Dimondite. Nor a Sedevacantist. Nor a would-be member of their monastery. And he refuses to this day to accept Br. Peter's debate challenge. The douche even lost to that self-proclaimed Walmart Thomist. 

Yeah. No. Jew Cryer was never a Dimondite. Nor a Sedevacantist. Nor a would-be member of their monastery. And he refuses to this day to accept Br. Peter's debate challenge. The douche even lost to that self-proclaimed Walmart Thomist.

Lol.  Just making stuff up, huh?  I'm happy to ignore the awkward and filthy name calling, but why deny the fact thay Jay was a sedevacantist and a feeney/dimondite?  That's just weird.  Is this kind of like denying that the bishop of Rome can be a heretic when it's literally staring you in the face?  I understand the latter: denying reality when it falsifies religious presuppositions is common enough.  But why deny a simple fact about someone's history, especially when that fact is rather embarrassing to begin with?

Is this even a suggestion. Dimonds would destroy jay and he would just start  about how they don’t have the nous or don’t understand the transcendental argument or something gotta agree with illyricuм sacrum here, he couldn’t even beat Christian b fagner in a debate