Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 9

Author Topic: Fr Hoopes Mess  (Read 1349 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Fr Hoopes Mess
« Reply #25 on: Yesterday at 09:17:23 PM »
Quote from: TomGubbinsKimmage on Yesterday at 07:43:22 AM
You people are such losers.

My goodness how the sedevacantist mind is utterly perverted.

The story is completely the other way around.

The vietnam vet pressured hoopes into being hardcore sede and when Fr. Hoopes refused he went and had Mass elsewhere.

The vet wanted Hoopes to join in the imperfect council nonsense.


It is abundantly clear that this whole nonsense is a premptive move to tar Fr. Hoopes, because that old geezer (who by the way is totally unstable) is basically on his own in that Church with not even his family supporting him. They all saw how reasonable Fr. Hoopes was.


By the way our vet in question HAD ALREADY agreed to hand over the Church, and then changed his mind. The mental gymnastics of him to try to paint it this way in the article. What low life scuм.



Now as for our good gracious Bishop Z, who never would ever EVER find bad words falling from his lips about fellow clergy men. What can I say? Not much since Matthew has weighed in on his side. I will just charitably point out that Fr. Hoopes has had no contact with him whatsoever since he got back stateside. In fact he has only ever briefly met him once.Bishop Z has never reached out to him either, and never brought up any of his concerns. So either Bishop Z is being totally misrepresented here (something I don't doubt due the insanity of this article) or he has some questions to answer.


The astrology book thing is thrown in there obviously for real effect.


Step back and read the whole article now like a  normal mentally balanced person.


You should see the crazy.

So, let's try to extract some substance from this idotic rant.

You open with the typical moronic ad-hominem "You people are such losers." ... and then conclude your insane rant with "... read the whole article like a normal mentally balanced person.  You should see the crazy."

Pathetic that Matthew defends someone who's as obviously psychological disturbed as you are, and won't do you the mercy of banning your ass from all civilized public discourse.

You do speak some truth here, though you can't help but layer the typical bullcrap on top of it, whereby you have the same effect that Church Militant did on the SSPX coverup for predators, namely, that by blending some very real criminal degeneracy in with made-up nonsense, they only served to discredit even the real problems.

In any case, the article did imply that this vet had been promoting the conclave.

I've long objected to the SSPX strong-arm tactics of insisting upon owning every chapel that they served, and conflating their spiritual authority with having some right to own the properties ... so while it's arrogant objectionable behavior, Fr. Hoopes is simply following the arrogant SSPX protcol on the matter, and seems to confound spiritual authority with owning the property.

By far the most alarming aspect of this was Fr. Hoopes' "white magic" junk, yet you gloss over THE singlemost disturbing aspect of these allegations as "obviously for real effect".

So you're claiming that the situation was made up?  It wouldn't be the first time that certain individuals who self-identify as Trad have dabbled in the occult and with "white magic" nonsense.

You hurl your bullshit at everyone else about not reading the entire article, but then you dismiss perhaps he single most serious charge with the wave of your hand as just being "for effect" ... without any evidence.

But you can't just wish that part away into the cornfield.

Hoopes, that you?
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Fr Hoopes Mess
« Reply #26 on: Yesterday at 09:23:51 PM »
Quote from: TomGubbinsKimmage on Yesterday at 04:24:06 PM
Nice try.

The facts speak for themselves.

I call everyone's attention to this non-denial.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Fr Hoopes Mess
« Reply #27 on: Yesterday at 09:26:22 PM »
Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on Yesterday at 05:51:17 PM

I think that TGK just might be Hoopes himself!

I'm beginning to wonder myself, and you'll not that his non-denials with non-answers like "Nice try.  Facts speak for themselves."

Recall that many have identified that Cabbage has been linked to Great Britain.  Here we have the background that this Fr. Hoopes came over to the States from there, from +Ballini's seminary.

I think you might be right.

Cabbage / Kimmage, are you in fact this Father Hoopes?  Yes or no will suffice.  No mental reservations are allowed.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Fr Hoopes Mess
« Reply #28 on: Yesterday at 09:34:59 PM »
Quote from: trento on Yesterday at 08:12:57 PM
Why would +Ballini delegate supervision on Fr. Hoopes to +Williamson? :popcorn:

So, +Ballini's answer to this is in fact somewhat bizarre, almost implying that +Williamson had some jurisdiction over the US while +Ballini had it in his neck of the woods.

Quote
Ballini believes that his own responsibility for his supervision was transferred to Bishop Williamson – now deceased – once Hoopes left Ireland for America. Ballini stated this in an email shared with LifeSiteNews.

More Pontius Pilate action from +Ballini.  Every time +Ballini speaks or acts, he's showing that it was a tragic mistake for +Williamson to consecrate him.  He's an absolute trainwreck and an embarrassment to the Resistance.

So, +Ballini trains this guy, and once he's shipped off to the States, he pulls the Pontius Pilate and absolves himself of all responsibility for him, even though he trained the guy.  This implies that +Ballini fancies himself as having some responsibility over Ireland, whereas +Williamson did for the rest of the world?  Both are bizarre notions.  Or is +Ballini trying to lay the blame on +Wiliamson, since it's convenient to do so now that +Williamson is no longer around?

Since no one has actually answered my question, here's the best i can piece it together ...f

1) Hoopes trains with Ballini.  Not sure if he finished 6 months in seminary like +Stobnicki did before getting consecrated?
2) Some podunk backwater in the US needs a priest and since they can't get the 50 people at their chapel to lure in SSPX, the settle for Resistance.
3) Hoopes sees this as his opportunity to skip about 4 years of seminary, head over the US and persuade +Williamson to ordain him.
4) +Zendejas sniffs it out and warns +Williamson that this guy's a seminary-hopper (seeking ordination from whomever he could con into laying hands on him).
5) +Williamson ignores this advice and ordains Hoopes.
6) ??? --- waiting for it to come out that Hoopes was a very close associate of Urrutigoity / Ensey and/or is sympatico with their "spirituality".

For all Cabbage attacks Archbishop Thuc, between the craziness of +?Pfeiffer and the whole Pablo lay Santeria exorcist saga, and +Ballini's unstable behavior ... we're one step away from +Ballini declaring himself the successor to Clemente Dominguez.
Logged

Offline Giovanni Berto

Re: Fr Hoopes Mess
« Reply #29 on: Today at 01:42:44 AM »
It is just my impression or is Bp. Zendejas the only reliable Resistance bishop?

He seems to be the only one with a clean record, and he knows how to work with discretion.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 9
« previous next »