Since you are very attuned to the terrible state of the SSPX priests and the extreme ignorance and malice of the laity, I'm curious as to your practical recommendations to get them out of this trajectory towards destruction.  Also, please indicate how the faithful can become less "cult-like" and simply Catholics trying to practice their faith, including all those terrible imperfections.  Numbered items would be helpful.  And if you feel that nothing less than utopia is tolerable please be explicit about it.  

Are you the only man in the Catholic Church that understands this to be a cult?  Or are you using the term "cult" in a wide sense?

I think I've made it clear how I'm using the term.

And please clarify this and respond to the first part of the question.

 

Or are you simply using the term as a dagger to drive into the backs of those with whom you disagree?

No, I'm using it to describe the sort of thing those guys from Post Falls were complaining about:

Can you please be more specific in your use of the term 'cult' in contradistinction with ordinary sins, faults or imperfections of Catholics?  Please relate this attitude towards the Catholic Church in general and explain upon what basis you make the differentiation.  

When I moved here my son’s class at ICA had over 20 students in it, the grade below had over 20 also, now in those two grades,( they are Juniors and Seniors today) there are a total of 6 students !!! Three in each grade!! That means out of like 40 families only 6 make the grade?? The other 34 families are a bunch of liberals that need to be thrown out?? Ask yourself a question, what happens to all those children and families??

How can anyone make any reasonable inference from this sensational story?

I know of a first grader who was thrown out with no explanation. When the Father approached the SUPERIOR he was never told why his son was expelled, not even the teacher knew why. He has written several letters that went unanswered.

Cults tend to want to keep people within their grasp.  This attitude seems to indicate the contrary, supposing the rectitude of the storyteller.  Again, what is the use of relaying this information if not to injure someone's reputation?  How does the storyteller know the matter wasn't eventually resolved.  And I find it incredibly difficult to believe that the school did not inform the parents as to the reason why his son was expelled.  That strikes me as exceedingly strange.  

At the girls school, St Dominic’s, is much, much worse. The ratios of graduation are ridiculous, and the pressure on the girls is unspeakable. There have been ѕυιcιdєs, nervous breakdowns, not to mention the loss of faith.

Again, what are we to infer from this?  That the school is evil?  People are killing themselves?  How many variable causes go into to these generalized observations?  The story is calculated for one purpose alone.

Emma was a very mild case also, she actually made it through. I’ve spoken to many young girls and boys who left the Faith because of their experiences. Let me tell you it is gut wrenching.

As we were able to discover, the writer of this piece had a strange infatuation with this girl and demonstrated that he was not analyzing matters from a disspassionate catholic perspective, but rather from worldly motives.  What this man does not realize is that it is precisely his attachment to the world that is the cause of the loss of faith.  

I’m sorry buddy, but I can’t just stand by and watch good Catholic families, who wanted to give their children a Traditional upbringing, get crushed by a small group of control freaks. One day one of these families are going to contact a lawyer and all of our chapels are going to be under the micro scope.  If the authorities investigate there will be Nuns and Priests going to jail for child abuse. They will not have the power of The Vatican to protect them, like in the Homo scandals of the NO. Plus the modernists in the Church will have a field day with this, I’m sure they are aware of the situation already, they may be giving us enough rope so we can hang ourselves.

If he is the altruistic alarm sounder, if the matter was so repugnant to even reasonable standards of judgment, why did he not take this action?  How irresponsible of him for not bringing this to the attention of "lawyers."  As was demonstrated on the other thread, this man's stories didn't add up.  He had a dull axe to sharpen for some reason.  The old axiom holds here: he who proves too much proves nothing at all.  

What is sad is how easily this can be rectified, and what a great place Post Falls can be!! Most Catholics would gladly suffer poverty if they knew that their children were being spiritually fed. Where is this meanness, and disorder coming from? Is it the lack of authority? Pride? I can’t put my finger on it.

Strange comment coming from one who just said that people are killing themselves out there.  

So if you want to call me names go ahead, I’ve seen your type before, and I have very little tolerance for your girly b.s. If you live here in the Northwest just email me and we can settle this face to face, I have no problem with that at all. Or I’ll be back East soon enough if you live there also. Your choice.

"Girly b.s."?  It sounds like this gentleman has a few problems of his own.  I'd be glad to meet him face to face to sort this out.  But I get the impression he's got a personal agenda and that's a tough nut to crack.  I wouldn't be surprised if there isn't sufficient material here for a libel lawsuit.  

 

Do you suppose that labeling a fellow Catholic a "cult" member

I said someone acts like a cult member when they put obsessive group loyalty ahead of the Faith.

You didn't answer this question either.  And how do you distinguish between "obsessive group loyalty" from legitimate differences of opinion?  That's a little subjective.  Shouldn't you give people the benefit of the doubt instead of claiming they are acting like cultists (not in reality of course, but acting like one nevertheless).  

 

is equally as bad as calling a fellow Catholic a "kook" for asserting a ʝʊdɛօ-Masonic conspiracy?  

Anyone in the SSPX who calls someone a "kook" for asserting a ʝʊdɛօ-masonic conspiracy is either woefully ignorant, a hypocrite, or a traitor.

You evaded the question here too.  Is calling a fellow catholic a "cult member" for erroneously defending priests as bad as calling a fellow catholic a "kook" for erroneously detecting a masonic conspiracy?  For to assert that someone is a "cult member" is to go well beyond the individual and impugn the entire organization whereas a naive individual that finds the theory of a masonic conspiracy strange is simply ignorant of history.    

Or is it better?  Worse?  You keep up with these vague assertions that no one can pin down.  When challenged you shout "cult"!  That is more than a little strange to me.    

No, when you start using the term "sick" to label critics - when you answer every criticism with talk about patiently accepting things - that's cultish.

What is "sick" is all this vitriolic name-calling.  I'm a critic of the critic.  Your entire case is built upon ad hominem with little substance.  As such, the matter is necessarily directed primarily to the one leveling the charges.  And I'm curious, where do the virtues come into play in your life?  Or is that just for Sunday?

Quote

In a situation of the world so serious that there are even rumours of Japan's recent peacetime disaster, with its estimated 27,000 people dead, being not an act of God but an act of man ( look up HAARP tsunami on the Internet ), what can a Catholic do to save his soul ?

 

BW has such a brilliant intellect and insight as regards matters of Faith, it is disturbing to see him attach himself to SO MANY conspiracy theories. His enemies have already reduced his mainstream credibility to zero. Yet, his sincere, but misguided belief in these theories keep proving to be his achilles heel.

Stevus and others, I don't think that Bishop Williamson is agreeing with the HAARP theory at all, but rather criticizing those who would see it as having human causes (HAARP) rather than an act of divine chastisement. Three weeks ago he wrote a column on how people had a sentimentalized view of God.

Can you please be more specific in your use of the term 'cult' in contradistinction with ordinary sins, faults or imperfections of Catholics?

The tremendous desire for manipulation and control to the detriment of the outsiders.  The desire to please the inner groups at these chapels.  The abusive way in which people are treated.

Cults tend to want to keep people within their grasp

Cults often have insiders who can be very exclusionary and treat outsiders badly.

For the sake of those who disagree with you on this one topic, perhaps you can site one other instance of the SSPX denying Catholic doctrine.

The Angelus article about Hillel was an example.

As well as Bishop Fellay's statement that the Jews share the Old Covenant with us.

In any case, the people Bishop Williamson are quoting are saying there are problems with a struggle in the society.  Caminus is the one who tried to divert this topic back to me personally.

No, I actually said that you are extrapolating your case and exaggerating.  And your practical suggestions are as vague as your accusations.  Your supposed doctrinal criticisms amount to a hill of beans.  Where is the official Church doctrine on "Hillel"?  You take one passing statement of Bishop Fellay as a doctrinal pronouncement?  Your case is getting more pathetic by the minute.  Finally, you keep up on this "cult" idea without a leg to stand on.  You sound like a non-catholic alleging the Church is a cult because Catholics defend other Catholics against unjust charges.  Really, that's all you can say.  Those who criticize your criticisms are cult members.  Can you say "begging the question"?  Can you say "conclusory allegation"?  There is no difference between your tactic and those of anti-catholics.    

But calling someone a kook for invoking ʝʊdɛօ-masonic conspiracy - that's downright anti-Catholic.

And who exactly did that?  Was it the entire SSPX?  Was it one priest?  One layman?  Get some perspective man.  There are plenty of people who are ignorant in my chapel.  Do I go around calling them names because they are ignorant?  No.  I sure don't.  Because that would be a vicious thing to do.  Knowing and understanding the masonic movement is not under the purview of our salvation.  As such, many people are bound to be ignorant of such things.  If they imbibe the spirit of the age and use the same terms as worldlings, that is also to expected since our minds are saturated in it.  Take your violent reaction to the real or perceived faults of priests.  It reminds of of not only anti-catholic bigots, but also that of the approach of a modern atheistic psychologist.  See, even the pure minded Tele has imbibed the spirit of the world to some degree.