CathInfo.com

What do you know, you haven't been censored OR banned. So much for that little dig!

I won't tolerate emotional zealots against the Resistance, no. But you yourself admit and point out that many CathInfo members aren't involved with the Resistance, or even sympathetic to it. So much for your BASELESS assertion that CathInfo doesn't tolerate free speech or a variety of opinions.

I sincerely hope you discovered what you were after. There are plenty of posts on this forum giving you all the arguments and evidence why the Resistance exists. I'm happy for you that you find your local SSPX chapel unchanged, but mark my words the changes at the top WILL percolate down to the chapels and individual pews eventually, if they haven't already. The leadership molds and directs an organization. The superiors form the inferiors. Ideas matter.

I've repeated many times my own scientific data on this heading, for example interviewing people who stayed with the SSPX. They spout total nonsense now, such as the idea that an independent chapel is somehow "disobedient" or "less legit" than the local SSPX chapel. How so? Because the SSPX gets auto-jurisdiction after their 5,000th parishioner, their 30th year in business, their 100th piece of real estate, or their $5,000,000th dollar in the bank? Give me a break! Who gave these parishioners these ideas? They certainly didn't have them 5 years ago. What else can I conclude? There is only one possibility: the recently-ordained priests who served the San Antonio chapel for over 1 year have taught this in sermons, confession, and through peer pressure. They must have brainwashed these and other individuals. There is a groupthink going on there, and it isn't good.

These people are being slowly frog-boiled to accept Vatican II, the new religion, and the leadership of the priests/bishops/hierarchy of that new religion.
The District Superior (Fr. Wegner) visited my old San Antonio chapel and endeavored to convince the parish that Vatican II and conciliar bishops "weren't that bad". That's not the Traditional movement/Catholic resistance I signed up for. I was raised Traditional Catholic, and so I will remain until the Crisis is OVER. Only a complete fool would say the Crisis is ameliorating to ANY degree, much less claim it's almost over. On the contrary! Just look at Pope Francis.

The SSPX has a messianic complex, and they have become very cult-like in the past 6 years. But the SSPX is nothing without the Catholic Faith. And they are starting to play footsie with Modernist Rome now, trying to get on the good side of the scandalous Pope Francis, so they are actively losing their only real value. Their money and buildings aren't worth crap if they aren't going to reject Vatican II WITHOUT COMPROMISE as they did for decades. If we're to judge an organization strictly by its wealth, I would pass up the SSPX and go right for the Conciliar Church. Even the cash and real estate-rich SSPX is poor as a churchmouse compared to the vast wealth owned by the mainstream Church!

But we all know buildings and wealth aren't everything. What's important is avoiding the Modernist contagion. Vatican II must be destroyed. Vatican II isn't 95% Catholic. It is 0% Catholic. It is full of ambiguous statements, and a double tongue is a trademark or telltale sign of the devil's horns. The devil is the father of lies and confusion. And shall we follow Our Lord's advice to judge a tree by its fruits? Therefore Vatican II must be stricken from the record, burned at the stake, 100% of it. Every single docuмent. Throw it all out and start over.

In another thread Matthew I asked why allow a like and dislike option for every post. You never replied. When one gets a like, that is fine, but when one gets a host of dislikes that IS CENSORSHIP of a kind. If not for you, it is for me and perhaps others. There is no other thread, except flat-earth threads maybe, that if one disagrees with the subject matter, the dislikes come piling on. So much so that I for one avoid discussing my experiences with the Resistance. On no other thread do I experience such anger.

There are many aspects of that one thread I would like to talk about but dare not. The walloping I have just received from you for answering your question thread makes me look like I am defending Vatican II and need a lecture to that effect. I am 76 years old. I was serving Mass from 1947 to 1957 and learned the Faith within six foot of the tabernacles of so many churches then. I served at many retreats and talks, the only ones I was removed from were the talks given at women's retreats. I experienced what Catholicism was like before Vatican II, churches so packed that if you did not come early for Mass you got no seat. I saw crowds outsides churches listening to Mass on a loudspeaker. I saw bishops come back from Rome and Vatican II to Ireland and fight against changes to teaching and practices until they left, resigned or died of a broken heart. I experienced the slow changes where our churches were stripped of their altars and sacramentals. I once received three beautiful brass and wooden crucifixes found in a skip. They now bless three houses, mine and two of my daughters to remind us of what happened. When the altar girls first arrived I objected with the PP. I saw the pews gradually empty, and saw Mass-goers reading Sunday newspapers at Mass. One Sunday I shouted at them and they looked at me like I was nut-case.

For years I searched for the Church of my youth and many years later found it with the SSPX. Where else could one rear children in the Catholic faith if there was not a church to bring them to on a Sunday or Holy day of obligation in the company of other like-minded Catholic families. Where else would they get to receive Holy Communion or Confirmation like I got as a child? Until I hear a teaching that contradicts my Catholic understanding, I will continue to go to my little SSPX chapel and support children growing up in an environment that I was reared in. A hotel room is not an option for me, my children or my grandchildren..




 

Unlike Cassini (one of my favourite posters here), I have no problem with Cathinfo being a Williamson/Resistance forum.  It is typical that a forum be associated with a specific position, either explicitly or through its prevalence among the members.  Fisheaters is Ecclesia Dei (FSSP, "indult", etc.) Suscipe Domine is SSPX/Fellayista.  Thetradforum is sedevacantist.  And so on. If one decides to join a forum where one one does not share its position, one must accept the consequences of that decision.  One either keeps quiet about the area of disagreement or one is prepared for some sort of push back.  To some extent, people sort themselves out based on forum position.  

That, however, is not the only factor. Another is moderation style.  Matthew tends toward the "hands off" end of the spectrum.  At the other end, I know of a forum that, for example, does not allow discussion of whether women should wear pants because that is seen as too controversial.  Yet another factor is "forum personalities".  Some members post so much that their opinions and personality traits colour the forum.  This aspect shifts over time as the membership changes.

No forum is a good match for everybody.  Since Cathinfo seems rather successful as it is, I doubt that any major changes are advisable.  The only thing that I could see tweaking would be the Anonymous subforum.  It appears that it is often used by people who wish to express unpopular opinions or nastiness while avoiding repercussions.  This is not its intended purpose, so it might be useful to prevent this abuse.