Have you gentleman noticed how many trads - clergy included - simply refuse to look at themselves, at the trad movement, at their trad heros, such as ABL, with any kind of objectivity or healthy critical examination? Have you noticed how immobile, inflexible, and somnambulistic they are? Have you noticed that cliche, party line, 'position,' and default settings have forcefully asserted themselves in that craven realty that self-nominates "traditional Catholic," apparently entirely replacing prayer, meditation, objective consideration, deep study, and consequent militant Catholic action?

What comes out of the mouth comes forth from the heart.

Whenever anything refuses to prune itself, God will come in and do the pruning.

There is a possibility that trads may be excluded from forums if they indulge in such things! Recently, a forum has banned a member for indulging in "lies and slander against Archbishop Lefebvre" and for "criticizing Resistance priests".

Oh come on.  It is always nice to hear from "His Holiness".   :wink:

I am pretty sure that no pope has ever used the phrase, "Dag gum".

He also published an encyclical, dated August 10, 2010, well sort of... the title itself speaks volumes:

https://www.facebook.com/notes/david-bawden/strange-contacts/144323052264532

Strange Contacts

There are several people who have been causing my friends and me trouble over the past years. They are separated into two unrelated groups. I wish to take this time to issue a warning to my friends of these problems, and ask you to forward me anything suspicious.
 
Let us proceed to the first group of people, who have been plaguing my friends and I for about seven years, according to their claim. They have masqueraded as everything from Catholic laymen to priests, to communities who wish to join with me in the Catholic Church, to Bishops and even to a claim to the Papacy. They have used so mamny names and fake email addresses over the years that I have been unable and unwilling to attempt and sort them out. They have not only attacked my friends and I, but also my enemies.

Although I see no difficulty through Facebook of a serious attack, you should be warned of what they have done. In early 2005, I had just built a new computer with a fresh install of Windows XP and Norton Antivirus. I received an email with an attachment from pope@vatican.va. I deleted the attachment immediately, but not quickly enough, because the computer slowly went down sick with a virus. (No, I do not believe they are connected with Antipope John Paul II the Great Deceiver or Benedict XV or the usurpers in the Vatican City State.) More recently my computer got sick again and would simply shut down for no reason. I would be going along and the power would shut immediately off. I reformatted and the computer began showing signs of sickness again. Several others I was in contact with at the same time also suffered serious problems. However, if you run Vista or Windows 7, you should be fine. I was still running XP at the time. This group may even have stolen the identity of a former friend, who has decided to become my enemy and is part of the other smaller group I will discuss in a moment. Note well, I have seen no evidence that these two groups are in any way related, except the group I am discussing has made contact with the other group I will soon discuss, as well as many others on the internet.
This group will make wild claims from being a Bishop supporting Pope Michael to being totally against Pope Michael, and anything in between. I would name names, but that would only stir them up again. They will most likely see this note and may be my 'friend' on Facebook at the moment. I have a policy of accepting most friend requests. I only turn down those, which are not proper, such as a recent one from a prostitute, promoting her wares on Facebook, which I believe is against Facebook policy. (I also reported here as well, but probably some of you have had to do this as well.) I am simply here, because there is a community that wishes to discuss serious matters. This enemy I am discussing so harassed members of an egroup I was in for the same reason, that we all had to shut it down. Security must be better here at Facebook, which protects all of us.

Now to the other smaller group. In this group there are only two, possibly three on the internet. Only one is on Facebook, and she has 'declared war' on me, stating: “Know this, ..., I will NOT be silenced!!! If I can help just one person to know what you are doing to people I will do my best. I have all the proof I'll ever need for any situation which may arise and I'm not afraid. It is my duty and my right to expose who and what you are.” She has contacted at least two of my friends and made some rather strong statements about me that are utterly false. However, I prefer not to name any names, for the same reason as I gave above. However, I don't think she can see what you or I write as none of you are friends with her. (This was not true, a few days ago, but the mutual friend unfriended both of us.)
In the same message she claims not to have contacted me in two years, when she sent me an email on February 5, 2010, and a signed notarized letter from herself and three others from July 2009. This should be enough to discredit this person, who admitted to me in an email in 2008, that she does not remember things well, when I inquired about incidents from the previous year. She was my friend, but a fair-weather friend at the time.
If you receive anything, I will happily answer any and all questions and help make all things clear. Until then, I ask you to pray for these people that they may cease what they are doing and start working for the good of the Catholic Church, which is why I believe all of us are friends here.

Pope Michael

If pre Vatican II orthodoxy is the benchmark of what you dogmatize, I am saying that you should live according to and by that dogmatic framework, be guided by it, and be faithful to it.

Which, if any, chapels conform to pre Vatican II orthodoxy and which are best avoided?

The problem with Traditionalists today is that they content themselves with living in a constant state of "lesser of two evils", so often compromising and salving their conscience by appealing to the maxim.  A concept so well overtaxed today just as R&R is, Such actions which should be used occasionally or a short term solutions, are now institutionalized in Catholic thought as a permanent way of life.

You hold R&R to be acceptable for the short term, but what is to be done when a crisis unexpectedly extends to a longer term?

And yet you, like so many others are quite dogmatic when one criticizes an aspect of the Archbishop or the inconsistency of R&R or the faithlessness of the Conciliar popes, whereby such a one must be determined to be a Sedevacantist as a given fact.

Touche. Liberals demand tolerance from others and yet metaphorically burn anyone at the stake who will not yield before them. Don't let me get away with playing such a trick!

I am trying to break the trad habit of dogmatizing my personal opinion. If you are a dogmatic Sedevacantist, I do not condemn you to Hell for that position. Rather, I go no further than observing that definition of that position as dogmatic is non-authoritative. At the same time, I reaffirm the principle of damnation for the transgression of authoritatively defined dogma.

You can be assured that orthodoxy is dogmatic, but to say that "one's personal post-Vatican II position cannot be" is the clear surrender to Conciliar induced pragmatism and is itself an alarming statement.

The concept of a "surrender to Conciliar induced pragmatism" makes no sense. It is like decrying a "surrender to attacker induced defense." A pragmatic defense against the Conciliar attack is the opposite of surrender. However, locating an authoritatively dogmatic alternative to the merely "pragmatic" defense could certainly improve the effectiveness of said defense.

Only when uncompromised and unalterable orthodoxy is championed once again by Traditionalists, will it be possible to rout the Conciliar criminals and mitered rats from the safe harbor which this pragmatism and prudence has provided for them since the council.

Amen. The task is to flesh out this "uncompromised and unalterable orthodoxy" as a set of clear steps for men of good will to follow in support of restoration.

Quote from: Columba

Does the traditionalist movement claim to legitimately carry the Apostolic inheritance?

Yes.  Bishop Tissier said so in his 2013 Pentecost Sermon (see Catholic Family News May 2013).  ABL said "we have the four marks".  Bishop Tissier says we have apostolocity.

Quote from: Columba

If so, then Rome and the Vatican would appear irreplaceable as the seat of the authority included in that inheritance. Therefore, maintaining the claim to Apostolic inheritance requires a serious preparation for the eventual reconquest of Rome.

That is true regardless of one's position with respect to the validity of Francis' claim to the papacy.  The pope is the bishop of Rome.

Excellent. We have Apostolocity. Prepare to march upon Rome.

Quote from: Sigismund

Oh come on.  It is always nice to hear from "His Holiness".   :wink:

I am pretty sure that no pope has ever used the phrase, "Dag gum".

He also published an encyclical, dated August 10, 2010, well sort of... the title itself speaks volumes:

https://www.facebook.com/notes/david-bawden/strange-contacts/144323052264532

Strange Contacts

There are several people who have been causing my friends and me trouble over the past years. They are separated into two unrelated groups. I wish to take this time to issue a warning to my friends of these problems, and ask you to forward me anything suspicious.
 
Let us proceed to the first group of people, who have been plaguing my friends and I for about seven years, according to their claim. They have masqueraded as everything from Catholic laymen to priests, to communities who wish to join with me in the Catholic Church, to Bishops and even to a claim to the Papacy. They have used so mamny names and fake email addresses over the years that I have been unable and unwilling to attempt and sort them out. They have not only attacked my friends and I, but also my enemies.

Although I see no difficulty through Facebook of a serious attack, you should be warned of what they have done. In early 2005, I had just built a new computer with a fresh install of Windows XP and Norton Antivirus. I received an email with an attachment from pope@vatican.va. I deleted the attachment immediately, but not quickly enough, because the computer slowly went down sick with a virus. (No, I do not believe they are connected with Antipope John Paul II the Great Deceiver or Benedict XV or the usurpers in the Vatican City State.) More recently my computer got sick again and would simply shut down for no reason. I would be going along and the power would shut immediately off. I reformatted and the computer began showing signs of sickness again. Several others I was in contact with at the same time also suffered serious problems. However, if you run Vista or Windows 7, you should be fine. I was still running XP at the time. This group may even have stolen the identity of a former friend, who has decided to become my enemy and is part of the other smaller group I will discuss in a moment. Note well, I have seen no evidence that these two groups are in any way related, except the group I am discussing has made contact with the other group I will soon discuss, as well as many others on the internet.
This group will make wild claims from being a Bishop supporting Pope Michael to being totally against Pope Michael, and anything in between. I would name names, but that would only stir them up again. They will most likely see this note and may be my 'friend' on Facebook at the moment. I have a policy of accepting most friend requests. I only turn down those, which are not proper, such as a recent one from a prostitute, promoting her wares on Facebook, which I believe is against Facebook policy. (I also reported here as well, but probably some of you have had to do this as well.) I am simply here, because there is a community that wishes to discuss serious matters. This enemy I am discussing so harassed members of an egroup I was in for the same reason, that we all had to shut it down. Security must be better here at Facebook, which protects all of us.

Now to the other smaller group. In this group there are only two, possibly three on the internet. Only one is on Facebook, and she has 'declared war' on me, stating: “Know this, ..., I will NOT be silenced!!! If I can help just one person to know what you are doing to people I will do my best. I have all the proof I'll ever need for any situation which may arise and I'm not afraid. It is my duty and my right to expose who and what you are.” She has contacted at least two of my friends and made some rather strong statements about me that are utterly false. However, I prefer not to name any names, for the same reason as I gave above. However, I don't think she can see what you or I write as none of you are friends with her. (This was not true, a few days ago, but the mutual friend unfriended both of us.)
In the same message she claims not to have contacted me in two years, when she sent me an email on February 5, 2010, and a signed notarized letter from herself and three others from July 2009. This should be enough to discredit this person, who admitted to me in an email in 2008, that she does not remember things well, when I inquired about incidents from the previous year. She was my friend, but a fair-weather friend at the time.
If you receive anything, I will happily answer any and all questions and help make all things clear. Until then, I ask you to pray for these people that they may cease what they are doing and start working for the good of the Catholic Church, which is why I believe all of us are friends here.

Pope Michael

Should this be regarded as infallible, or is it just strongly advised under risk of grave error?   :roll-laugh1:

Quote from: Columba

Quote from: Clemens Maria

Quote from: Columba

Does the traditionalist movement claim to legitimately carry the Apostolic inheritance?

Yes.  Bishop Tissier said so in his 2013 Pentecost Sermon (see Catholic Family News May 2013).  ABL said "we have the four marks".  Bishop Tissier says we have apostolocity.

Quote from: Columba

If so, then Rome and the Vatican would appear irreplaceable as the seat of the authority included in that inheritance. Therefore, maintaining the claim to Apostolic inheritance requires a serious preparation for the eventual reconquest of Rome.

That is true regardless of one's position with respect to the validity of Francis' claim to the papacy.  The pope is the bishop of Rome.

Excellent. We have Apostolocity. Prepare to march upon Rome.

I think instead of marching upon Rome as if worldly glory was important, Catholics need to stand fast in the Catholic Faith.  Any outward public action would probably be goaded on by the Evil One.  In fact, that's "Pope" Michael's biggest sin.  A well-read guy with above average intelligence could see some issues with the R&R view, but if he takes a drastic action (like proclaiming himself "pope") then he would at that point engage in likely sinful activities.

Best I can tell, there are only three available non-temporary postures toward modernist Rome: separation, submission, and conquest. The first would equate to schism and the second to modernism. That leaves only the third option, if constrained by a requirement to maintain Apostolocity.

This fellow's name is David Bawden. He should be referred to as such, and not by his alleged "papal" name, use of quotation marks notwithstanding. This should be doubly true for those around here who refer to Pope Francis as "Bergoglio," despite the plain fact of his being pope by all outwardly apparent criteria.

I also recommend watching the docuмentary film made about him ( http://popemichaelfilm.com ) for no other reason than to excite in you all the profound sorrow and pity I feel for this poor man and his family, and not the scorn and derision that I see in some of the comments. This man and his family are perhaps the most extreme public example of the catastrophic spiritual damage wrought by the diabolical modernist disorder in this infelicitous post conciliar age.

Please pray a Rosary tonight for the Bawdens (and Phil Friedl).

I think it is high time that we had a pope who sounds like he came from an Arkansas trailer park - it would drive the Vaticanistas insane.  Hopefully, though, it would be a Pope that is at least an ordained priest.

Hi Vinny!

This your maiden voyage here?