Quote from: Canute

Hobbledehoy, the groups Father Ramolla takes care of seem to be very small. The bulletin for his Columbus group gives the attendance at around only 30, so it's not like he's running a big outfit like Saint Marys. Since the different hate sites have been around for 1-2 years, it is not credible that Fr. Ramolla doesn't know who is running them or the awful things that they are saying.

It is no big secret to anyone now that the man behind the awful Pistrina site is Craig Toth. That site has been up for a year and a half at least, but Father Ramolla allows Toth to be a MEMBER OF THE CORPORATION for his mission in Columbus.

I think that's pretty bad. Having someone like Toth around in a small church group where you have to socialize with him gives your blessing to all the horrible things he is doing.

Several points:

1) You do not know how much legal control Father Ramolla has of the layboard when it comes to extra-ecclesiastical matters, nor can you know what exactly is happening at Columbus. Nor do I, for that matter.

2) I do not think he has given his "blessing" to Toth. Again, that's mere speculation, and not very logically consistent; although I understand why you would arrive at such conclusions.

3) I think it odd that some posters here at CathInfo are so scrupulous about "detracting" and "calumniating" clerics and even anonymous laypeople, and yet seem so ready to rashly judge Father Ramolla and not give him the benefit of the doubt that is demanded by charity and reverence to the clerical state, considering the dire circuмstances and challenges he and the other traditionalist clerics have faced and are facing. For, if one is to demand the benefit of the doubt for Father Cekada, for example, why not for Father Ramolla.

4) Father Ramolla has cut all ties with Toth. Whether or not he remains at the layboard of St. Anthony's is probably out of Father Ramolla's control. I do not know for sure.

If you read what the RC-Corner site has to say, you would see that to these lay agitators Priests and Bishops are mere "Sacramental ATM's" to be used at their convenience.

Quote

He should have been thrown out on his butt a long time ago.

Agreed, though I would not personally avail myself of such language. He is as cancer that has been diagnosed too late, it seems.

All I know is that the St. Albert's board has had a complete turnover in two years' time.  There have been some resignations, but there were also instances where Fr. Ramolla removed members, one of whom has threatened legal action (not sure how effective this would be in a voluntary organization.)  I suppose it is possible that Fr. doesn't have that power in Columbus, but I think it is unlikely.

Even if Fr. has no control over Toth, he has certainly benefited from his work on the internet done on his behalf.   In early December, Tom Droelskey indicated in an email that Fr. Ramolla was planning to publicly disavow these sites, but it has obviously not happened.

Maybe one of the Bishops high paid Jєωιѕн lawyers helped with the Hilter smear campaign?  And yes I see the humor.  I'll bet the priests that the youtube videos were directed at even laughed.  Difference is they can't excuмunicate, close churches, deport or even give a friday meat dispensation if you attend there special function.  Sounds like the Palestinians vs the neocons, who really has the power?

I think you need to lighten up a little bit.

No: when it comes matters pertaining to Holy Mother Church, I find it neither expedient nor decorous for Catholics to behave in such a manner or to sanction such behavior.

When you shall hear the Priest tomorrow read the Epistle Lesson at Mass, remember in what manner we ought to behave ourselves in regard to our fellow neighbor.

Oh, and that brings me to my next point.

After I read the horrible material on the sites that you complained about in your initial retraction thread, I found the Hitler videos very funny and a pretty effective way of showing that the mudslingers were not to be taken seriously. Toth's writing on Pristina is prissy and pompous, so showing him as an officious junior Goebbels seemed just right to me.

Two wrongs don't make a right, last time I checked.

The best refutation of such attacks is for one to be a refutation all unto oneself: to be instant and persevering in prayer and good works, and allow one's own actions to betray the deceit and maliciousness of calumniators.

This what the Priests of the CMRI and devout members of its lay Confraternity strive to do. At least I don't see them doing this sort of stuff on the internet.

But I will admit what people find funny is a matter of individual taste, too, so I don't expect everyone to agree with me on this.

We're Catholics, not Protestants: it's not a matter of taste or emotion, but about truth and the glory of God and salvation of souls, independent of any emotion or proclivity.

I dunno, but that's the way I see things.

Also, I'm not very funny: see this http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Pious-Pick-Up-Lines

For social outings, I go more to hospitals and wakes than anywhere else...

I would not have done it, personally, and I wouldn't recommend it. But as there is good, better and best in the world, I think there is probable opinion to say it is good. Certainly, "two wrongs don't make a right", but that really begs the question unless you determine first that it is bad.

Fr. Hall laughed when he heard of, or watched, it, even though the first video made a comment about his being "too fat" to get behind the keyboard. That comment is probably my biggest objection, but if the man himself laughs, what can I say?

Next, with all the things that were said against Fr. Cekada and Bp. Dolan publicly, the very principle of doing such a video is indeed in accord with the very principles of those portrayed in the videos, so why would they complain?

Also, the people who railed against SGG so venomously and unjustly deserve reprimand. Believe me, such light-hearted videos is pulling punches in giving a reprimand, while it also serves to docuмent, albeit allegorically, the history of the situation.

For those not already fully aware of the situation, they will not really understand the allegory, and probably won't even finish the first video, so putting it in satire was a very smart thing to do also; it effectively lowers it to a private inside joke.

My only other major objection was making fun of someone who is a "seminary drop-out", which can tend to make people look down on anyone leaving a seminary even if it was God's will. I do think such things as these videos should be very infrequent, and carefully weighed, and it does look like the authors were very conscientious in designing them. I would label the videos "tolerable", all things considered.

I dunno.

I believe there are two distinctions to be made: the cinematic and aesthetic aspect (and all other pertinent artistic and technical matters), and the ethical value contextualized by the sensus Catholicus.

When it comes to the former aspect of the question, even I have to admit that the videos are not to be slighted, and that they are superior to what "the other side" has put forward, but that may be because of the difference of media. In the present age, cinematic productions are more appealing to a culture that is saturated by hyper-textuality.

However, when it comes to the latter aspect of the question, I think it best to follow the teachings of that St. Paul expounds in the Epistle Lesson for today's Mass (Rom. cap. xii., 16-21). And that's all I say about it.

That's 'cause they're really funny!  

Pristina has a new blog entry, extolling the intellectual ability of the Novus Ordo compared to "One Hand", the name he learned from Fr. Jenkins.

  The comments are interesting,.   :read-paper:  Only four of them.

Or you could read this instead:

Gherardini