Author Topic: Another layman-run Resistance Website (Read 4673 times)

klasG4e · « **on:** February 21, 2015, 01:11:01 AM »

Looks great! I hope it does quite well!

NEW RESISTANCE SITE

BrJoseph · « **Reply #1 on:** February 21, 2015, 02:30:55 AM »

cathman7 · « **Reply #2 on:** February 21, 2015, 04:42:31 AM »

Anyone who peruses the site will see that it will further damage the already crumbling credibility of the "resistance" (at least in the US).

Simply read this link:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B49oPuI54eEGR2RVQmRwV3ljbGM/view?pli=1

Shoddy analysis with shoddy scholarship.

Wow....it is actually quite embarrassing.

cathman7 · « **Reply #3 on:** February 21, 2015, 04:48:15 AM »

Another example:

http://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/sspx-immodesty-sell-books.html

Quote

The SSPX uses Immodesty to Sell Books

The Angelus Press is advertising and selling a book whose cover contains a picture we refuse to print, but it depicts a bare-shouldered woman dressed according to standards of immodesty the “old” SSPX used to preach against. http://angeluspress.org/Books/SSPX-Modern-Crisis/The-Liberal-Illusion

This is a book which features a schema from Bishop Williamson. I suppose Bp. Williamson also should be accused of promoting "immodesty." Seriously who are the creators of this site? There seems to be an imbalance or an irrational zeal.

Quote

This book cover is part of a more general trend in the new SSPX, to use the modesty “standards” of the world or of the conciliar church. To take another example: the SSPX “decorates” its current edition of DICI (#310, p.5) with a generic “clip art” picture of a conciliar wedding, with a sleeveless bride exposing part of her flank, standing in a conciliar church without a communion rail.

Matthew · « **Reply #4 on:** February 21, 2015, 12:13:15 PM »

I received a PDF of that website two days ago.

I actually skimmed/read most of it -- I would best describe it as "nit-picky". Actually, muck-raking would be a better term.

I agree with Obscurus -- if these were the only problems in the SSPX, there wouldn't (and shouldn't) be a Resistance. I, for one, would be the last to join if THIS was what we were resisting.

They seem to be looking for "the latest tidbits, however small" for Resistance supporters to add to their "pile" of evidence.

But this website doesn't seem to focus on the REAL issues -- the "pile" of evidence -- that the Resistance points to as its reason for being. (See the pinned thread in this sub-forum http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Collection-of-Resistance-Writings
-- all the docuмents we've collected) As such, it would be quite scandalous for someone not already convinced by the Resistance arguments.

Matthew · « **Reply #5 on:** February 21, 2015, 12:18:32 PM »

And I'll say it again --

Any website -- or forum -- that wants to be taken seriously needs to come up with the modest sum required to get

A) a domain name, and
B) web hosting

All these "ning", "proboards" and other "start your own message board in 10 minutes" sites will always be limited by the fact that anyone on those boards can break off and start their own forum in 10 minutes. There is such a small barrier to entry.

I've run CathInfo for 8 1/2 years -- I can tell you that as soon as you get a certain number of members, you're GOING to have strife and issues, and there WILL be splits and people leaving. You can only get so many Trads living under the same virtual roof -- in peace -- at one time. That saying about "You can't please everyone"? It's even more true in the Trad world.

Anyhow, if you want to run with the big dogs, or you want to be taken seriously, get a domain name.

Pilar · « **Reply #6 on:** February 21, 2015, 12:23:10 PM »

I am with obscurus. The whole site is an embarrassment. Take a look at the link

regarding the Silver City Monks and their wonderful coffee. They are accused of

self promotion and puffery". And why? Because they have the audacity to sell their

"luxury" coffee instead of promoting "self denial" and "poverty of spirit".

I see no virtue in drinking patently bad pesticide laden coffees like Folger's.

Obviously the writer of this sad blog is ignorant of the history of the Church in general,

and in particular the history of Her religious orders. I would refer anyone interested to

link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chartreuse_%28liqueur%29 that describes

Chartreuse, the rather expensive "gourmet" liqueur that the Cathusians have made and

sold since 1737. And this is only one of the many, many examples of orders of monks

that made some of the most expensive liqueurs, ales and champaigns in order to

support themselves.

I am really so angry at this attack upon the Silver City Monks. They are and always

have been, beautiful examples of holy religious life. They stand outside in the freezing

cold before and after Mass to sell their coffees for the glory of God whenever they visit

our chapel. Their poverty and self-renunciation shines for all to see whether they are

travelling or at home in the monastery. It might be of interest here to note that the

Brazilian monastery that is considered "resistance" has been involved in the coffee

making since the beginning. They are the ones who arranged for the beans!

Really, this is the "living end". Whoever is running this site, and I do mean whoever,

is a raving lunatic. :really-mad2:

Elizabeth · « **Reply #7 on:** February 21, 2015, 05:42:27 PM »

Dear Pilar,
The same wonderful Silver City brothers have prayed on their knees, in sleet in freezing temperatures with no coats, in front of the Supreme Court at the March For Life. They also make the best St. Benedict medals around. They arise at 3:00 A.M. and I have seen their prayers work miracles. They excel in charity and humility.

Attacking them is crazy.

JPaul · « **Reply #8 on:** February 21, 2015, 07:18:20 PM »

The Resistance....so called......

Another site which conflates the SSPX/Fellay universe with resisting the enemy.

Nickolas · « **Reply #9 on:** February 21, 2015, 07:46:41 PM »

It appears to me this blog is a product outside the Resistance or SSPX, meant to embarrass Traditional Catholics as a whole. Perhaps Roman authorities had a hand in it?

Certainly some effort went into it. Is there a way to determine who the authors are?

TKGS · « **Reply #10 on:** February 21, 2015, 08:05:22 PM »

I just looked at the site and I have to say that I am confused.

In it's "Faith and Practice" section there are two completely contradictory articles: One insists that "The Catholic Church will always have a pope" while the second gives "A reason to conditionally ordain all priests who have been ordained using the modern ordination rite."

Of course, I agree with the concept that the Catholic Church will always have a pope, except during the period after a pope dies (or falls into heresy) until a new Catholic is elected pope, whether that be a few days or a few decades.

But how can they square the second article (along with its companion articles) condemning the new rite of ordination and the fact that their "pope" was ordained in that new rite and consecrated in the new rite?

It doesn't seem to make sense to me.

Centroamerica · « **Reply #11 on:** February 21, 2015, 08:11:25 PM »

I agree with the other opinions on the thread.

I noticed one of the posts claimed that the new Society is "inconsistent" because they accept some of the new canonizations and not the others. The Society has never argued against the canonization of Maxmilian Kolbe and always allowed the confirmands to take this name. José Maria Escrivás has always been considered an invalid canonization by the SSPX priests. This is what I had known at least. If I am correct that it would seem that the poster doesn't know what he or she is talking about.