No one specifically asked me to shut CathInfo -- unless you count a bit of "peer pressure" coming from Samuel (ABLF3) and Sean Johnson.

Don't worry -- I wasn't tempted for a second.

That's why I'm pointing out that a LOT has changed since 2006, and a lot has happened during that time. But CathInfo has been here, stable, through it all. And it will continue to be, until I'm dead! And hopefully my wife and/or son will be able to take over after that point.

Yes, keep at it! This is a good service that you have provided; a central place to share news, information and ask questions.

No one specifically asked me to shut CathInfo -- unless you count a bit of "peer pressure" coming from Samuel (ABLF3) and Sean Johnson.

Don't worry -- I wasn't tempted for a second.

That's why I'm pointing out that a LOT has changed since 2006, and a lot has happened during that time. But CathInfo has been here, stable, through it all. And it will continue to be, until I'm dead! And hopefully my wife and/or son will be able to take over after that point.

May you live long, Matthew!

Quote

Quote from: St.Patrick on May 04, 2017, 07:55:35 AM

What is it that they want the bishops to speak about? That they are not talking about already?

They want the bishops to "pontificate" more, set conditions for being part of the Resistance, settle disputes authoritatively, and in general take a more active and authoritative posture.

Some of these things sound good (or even great, exciting) but I'm inclined to pray and wait for this WHILE keeping open the communications hub that is CathInfo.

.
ABL was torn over this issue as well. He wanted to preserve Tradition but was afraid that by giving one or more successor bishops things that might be construed as active authority or quasi-jurisdiction, he would appear to be setting up a parallel Church (in competition with Rome).
.
It seems to me that it is not surprising that this challenge presents itself to the Resistance now, as well. To me, it looks a bit like a blessing in disguise, because it could be seen as a phase that a movement has to go through when it is destined to have endurance in the future.
.
Incidentally, I find it amusing when among a single group of priests in close association with each other, such a diversity of outlook toward the Resistance can exist, such that one priest mutters with derision at the concept, another has no hard and fast opinion at all, and a third is entirely at peace with the need and value of the Resistance.
.
When I get the chance, I like to point out that ABL himself referred to his little fledgling group in the 1970's as "the Resistance," and his friends (including one Tissier de Mallerais and a certain Franz Schmidberger, both ordained by ABL in 1975, and Fr. Hector Boldoc, US Dist. Superior in late '70s) were all fine with the term, "the Resistance," of which they were a part.
.
So how does one word garner such a multiplicity of reactions? Mysterious.