My favorite part is where I thank myself for my time. 
My favorite part is:
What kind of Catholics do you want on CathInfo?
All Traditional Catholics are welcome. All who can rationally discuss with other Traditional Catholics are welcome. However, they need to be able to get along with those who disagree with them on disputed points. Lay-popes, or those who act as judges or arbiters of truth and attempt to put down "the final, definitive word" on centuries-long theological debates, are not welcome and won't last long here. If you are not the Pope, please do not pass off your opinion as a "Papal Bull". Since you are not the Pope, it is not Papal. So we are left with "Bull".
I am "Cradle Catholic" but not a "Cradle Trad" like you are. I rejected the conciliar sect A.D. 1980 when I was 17. They had told me, that rules had changed and that it is not necessary to be a Catholic anymore to please the Lord. I left, because I realized that they didn't even believe that the Gospels are true reports. I had heard about Lefebvre at school, but he was presented as some kind of rebel/amish/jehovas witness. 25 years went by before I was kicked back to the faith. Now, other than a "Cradle Trad", I needed justifiable reasons to reject the conciliar sect and move ahead to the SSPX, later to the Resistance, then to my "authority-vacant" position.
I spent much time on many a topic in the past 13 years. Looking for good substantiation of my decisions. When judgement comes around, I hope to be pardoned.
With respect to the "more important things" you mention, I have less a load. My wife is more zealous than I am, and then there is a dog only.
What I have learned in studying, researching, and debating trad issues, is: In many cases, one can do the most obvious thing. For example, on the one hand, one can argue many topics connected to the question whether a certain cleric has lost his office; on the other hand, it is simply absurd to accept someone as an apostolic authority, who walks and houls like a wolf. A study of the Magisterium and/or theologians is never useless, but on the other hand it is not really needed. Noone waits for the judge to condemn the pedophile teacher before making sure that his child is out of danger. So, for all practical purposes, it is the right thing to assume, that the wolf does not represent the authority of our Lord.
Another example is religious liberty. It is infallibly condemned. But one doesn't even have to know that, to reject it. It is idiotic. They say that God on the one hand reveals commandments and threatens severe punishment, and on the other hand provides a natural right to ignore him and his commandments and punishments. As if God was a lunatic (like they themselves are).
If anyone has any other good questions, please let me know. The "interviewer" isn't far away, and I know him pretty well.
Why did you require that one has to have "Trad heroes"? Catholics have as heroes the Lord and his virgin mother Mary, apostles, popes, fathers, saints etc. My special heros are all the fathers of the Vatican Council and of the Council of Trent, St. Pius V. with respect to the mass, and St. Pius X. with respect to modernism. Also I am not a Trad (and they are Catholics). I am a Catholic (and they are the conciliar sect, as Lefebvre appropriately called them).
Topic: Interview with Matthew, the Moderator (Read 52574 times)