Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Thuc condemnding Thuc  (Read 7338 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TomGubbinsKimmage

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 561
  • Reputation: +154/-414
  • Gender: Male
Thuc condemnding Thuc
« on: December 21, 2025, 05:54:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Thuc line priest condemns Thuc line priest.
    What a clown show.

    How dare he insult his holiness Pope Michael II !!!


    Thucsaythuc" border="0





    REASON NUMBER 2343 TO STAY AWAY FROM THUC LINE SACRAMENTS!
    Logged

    Offline Freind

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 470
    • Reputation: +56/-101
    • Gender: Male
    • Caritas, Veritas, Sinceritas
    Re: Thuc condemnding Thuc
    « Reply #1 on: December 21, 2025, 06:02:07 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Looks like the only thing the post is against is "Palmarians, self-elected popes and mystical sects"

    This doesn't have anything to do with Thuc.
    Logged

    Offline TomGubbinsKimmage

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 561
    • Reputation: +154/-414
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc condemnding Thuc
    « Reply #2 on: December 22, 2025, 06:33:09 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Freind on December 21, 2025, 06:02:07 PM
    Looks like the only thing the post is against is "Palmarians, self-elected popes and mystical sects"

    This doesn't have anything to do with Thuc.

    Pope Michael is now Thuc line.

    Keep up.
    Logged

    Offline Freind

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 470
    • Reputation: +56/-101
    • Gender: Male
    • Caritas, Veritas, Sinceritas
    Re: Thuc condemnding Thuc
    « Reply #3 on: December 22, 2025, 08:31:41 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: TomGubbinsKimmage on December 22, 2025, 06:33:09 AM
    Pope Michael is now Thuc line.

    Keep up.

    You mean, I'm supposed to keep up on all the nuts?
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13246
    • Reputation: +8343/-2575
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc condemnding Thuc
    « Reply #4 on: December 22, 2025, 08:56:29 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: TomGubbinsKimmage on December 21, 2025, 05:54:53 PM
    Thuc line priest condemns Thuc line priest.
    What a clown show.

    How dare he insult his holiness Pope Michael II !!!


    Thucsaythuc" border="0



    REASON NUMBER 2343 TO STAY AWAY FROM THUC LINE SACRAMENTS!
    The Thuc line is varied and large.  One size does not fit all.  You can’t condemn all of them and you can’t say all his consecrations are 100% ok.  If you had some critical thinking, then you wouldn’t be making this overly-simplistic argument.  Life is full of gray area.  It’s part of being an adult. 
    Logged

    Offline TomGubbinsKimmage

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 561
    • Reputation: +154/-414
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc condemnding Thuc
    « Reply #5 on: December 22, 2025, 11:14:20 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on December 22, 2025, 08:56:29 AM
    The Thuc line is varied and large.  One size does not fit all.  You can’t condemn all of them and you can’t say all his consecrations are 100% ok.  If you had some critical thinking, then you wouldn’t be making this overly-simplistic argument.  Life is full of gray area.  It’s part of being an adult.


    The point, which you're obviously too dull to understand, is that the entire line has bad fruits. 400 Bishops and counting.
    Therefore Lefebvre/Williamson line is much more sane and certain. You should just go with that.
    Logged

    Offline Freind

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 470
    • Reputation: +56/-101
    • Gender: Male
    • Caritas, Veritas, Sinceritas
    Re: Thuc condemnding Thuc
    « Reply #6 on: December 22, 2025, 11:17:18 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: TomGubbinsKimmage on December 22, 2025, 11:14:20 AM

    The point, which you're obviously too dull to understand, is that the entire line has bad fruits. 400 Bishops and counting.
    Therefore Lefebvre/Williamson line is much more sane and certain. You should just go with that.

    R&R ain't more sane.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 48420
    • Reputation: +28583/-5349
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc condemnding Thuc
    « Reply #7 on: December 22, 2025, 02:58:17 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

    • Yes, this is the kind of stupidity to expect from someone who's malicious and has zero intelletual honesty.

    +Lefebvre "line" priests condemn +Lefebvre "line" priests all the time, starting with The Nine vs. Lefebvre, and then one SV after another, and then FSSP types that condemned +Lefebvre for the consecrations, and the myriad +Lefebvre "line" priests that went back to the Novus Ordo, and then the +Lefebvre line priests of The Resistance condemn the +Lefebvre line priests of the neo-SSPX

    ... and now

    Resistance priests Pfeiffer, Hewko, et al. condemn Bishop Williamson and the other Resitance priests
    Then Hewko leave Pfeiffer and condemns him
    Fr. Ringrose, Resistance priest went SV
    Pfeiffer of the Resistance went +Thuc-Palmar line

    So if any group fragmented in LITERALLY RECORD TIME, where you had priests condemning one another ... that was the Resistance.

    I can't believe that Scuмmage attempted to try this tactic, as if it wouldn't blow back in his face, where he was trying to throw a bucket of manure right into an industrial sized fan.  Only someone who's been stultified by malice wouldn't see what was about to happen.  So furious with rage, he hurls the contents of the bucket, and the rage makes him oblivious to the fan.

    I recall when Fr. Chazal put out his little chart of the SV groups in trying to attack the SVs, and I said at the time that he'd better be careful about trying that tactice ... and within weeks you had Pfeiffer insulting Bishop Williamson outside his door at Broadstairs.


    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 48420
    • Reputation: +28583/-5349
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc condemnding Thuc
    « Reply #8 on: December 22, 2025, 03:08:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I just looked it up before posting, but I was sure this moron didn't even know what he was talking about.  He's such an idiot that he completely discredits himself.  He's so filled with venomous rage and hatred (of a diabolical variety) against Archbishop Thuc that he sees +Thuc behind every bush.

    Bawden (Michael I) was ordained/consecrated through the Duarte-Costa line with some overlap from Old Catholic.

    Martinez (Michael II) was consecrated by two guys from the "Catholic Charismatic Church" (Old Catholic line, sortof)

    So there was no +Thuc anywhere in the Michael line ... despite the ravings of this fool.

    Nor do I see established anywhere the identity of the one MAKING the critisism in the OP.

    This guy's literally had a psychotic break where he dreams of +Thuc flying around, and hiding everywhere coming after him.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 48420
    • Reputation: +28583/-5349
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc condemnding Thuc
    « Reply #9 on: December 22, 2025, 03:12:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: TomGubbinsKimmage on December 22, 2025, 06:33:09 AM
    Pope Michael is now Thuc line.

    Keep up.

    False, you liar.  He was consecrated by bishops from the "Catholic Charismatic Church", whose lineage, if you look it up, comes from Old Catholic with some alleged Eastern Orthodox somewhere in the mix ... after having been ordained to the priesthood by a Duarte-Costa bishop.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13246
    • Reputation: +8343/-2575
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc condemnding Thuc
    « Reply #10 on: December 22, 2025, 05:56:17 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: TomGubbinsKimmage on December 22, 2025, 11:14:20 AM

    The point, which you're obviously too dull to understand, is that the entire line has bad fruits. 400 Bishops and counting.
    Therefore Lefebvre/Williamson line is much more sane and certain. You should just go with that.
    This is the dumbest thing I've ever read. You are completely uneducated and completely wrong.  Your generalizations on this matter are shockingly stupid.  The whole point is, generalizations don't matter.  EACH INDIVIDUAL SACRAMENT STANDS ON ITS OWN.  

    You're trying to invalidate an ENTIRE LINE of clerics based on your "emotional dislike" of a bishop. 

    This is the most feminized attack on validity i've ever seen.  If you are truly a man, you should be ashamed.
    Logged

    Offline Marcellinus

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 172
    • Reputation: +142/-27
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc condemnding Thuc
    « Reply #11 on: December 22, 2025, 07:14:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on December 22, 2025, 03:08:38 PM

    This guy's literally had a psychotic break where he dreams of +Thuc flying around, and hiding everywhere coming after him.
    You can read the saga that resulted in this madness here:  https://traditionalcatholiclies.com/kenneth#d203e575-ee00-4328-9087-c0a87d4b1e3d

    Essentially, he blames Bp. Pivarunas for his marriage falling apart, so now his mission in life is to destroy the "Thucs".

    It's sad... Poor man.
    Logged

    Offline TomGubbinsKimmage

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 561
    • Reputation: +154/-414
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc condemnding Thuc
    « Reply #12 on: December 23, 2025, 05:51:51 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on December 22, 2025, 03:08:38 PM
    I just looked it up before posting, but I was sure this moron didn't even know what he was talking about.  He's such an idiot that he completely discredits himself.  He's so filled with venomous rage and hatred (of a diabolical variety) against Archbishop Thuc that he sees +Thuc behind every bush.

    Bawden (Michael I) was ordained/consecrated through the Duarte-Costa line with some overlap from Old Catholic.

    Martinez (Michael II) was consecrated by two guys from the "Catholic Charismatic Church" (Old Catholic line, sortof)

    So there was no +Thuc anywhere in the Michael line ... despite the ravings of this fool.

    Nor do I see established anywhere the identity of the one MAKING the critisism in the OP.

    This guy's literally had a psychotic break where he dreams of +Thuc flying around, and hiding everywhere coming after him.


    Hey if you want to do us all the favor of posting that up with links etc, I would return the favor, more than happily of retracting that statement.

    It's no skin of my back, Thuc has already so much madness in his line, that I have plenty of other ammunition.
    Logged

    Offline TomGubbinsKimmage

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 561
    • Reputation: +154/-414
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc condemnding Thuc
    « Reply #13 on: December 23, 2025, 05:54:09 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on December 22, 2025, 05:56:17 PM
    This is the dumbest thing I've ever read. You are completely uneducated and completely wrong.  Your generalizations on this matter are shockingly stupid.  The whole point is, generalizations don't matter.  EACH INDIVIDUAL SACRAMENT STANDS ON ITS OWN. 

    You're trying to invalidate an ENTIRE LINE of clerics based on your "emotional dislike" of a bishop. 

    This is the most feminized attack on validity i've ever seen.  If you are truly a man, you should be ashamed.

    No its about discerning where the safest place to go for true Catholic Sacraments is.

    If you want to call that effeminate while having your little temper tantrum, then go right ahead.
    Logged

    Offline TomGubbinsKimmage

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 561
    • Reputation: +154/-414
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc condemnding Thuc
    « Reply #14 on: December 23, 2025, 05:56:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on December 22, 2025, 02:58:17 PM

    I recall when Fr. Chazal put out his little chart of the SV groups in trying to attack the SVs, and I said at the time that he'd better be careful about trying that tactice ... and within weeks you had Pfeiffer insulting Bishop Williamson outside his door at Broadstairs.


    I literally have no idea what posting the picture of sede madness has to do with Father Pfeiffer at the door of Broadstairs.
    Logged
    Pages: [1] 2
    « previous next »