For any of our English speakers who know French and/or German, I highly
recommend that you follow the links in the Dumb Ox quoted post, above, for the
original source websites are very descriptive and elucidating in their own right.
I find it incredible that there are so many ostensibly intelligent people around who
are wont to discredit information gleaned on the Internet, merely by dint of the
fact that it was found on the Internet.
This might be a topic for its own thread, if so, it ought to link back here for
reference.
How many of us know someone who is respected in the community because of
their profession: doctor, lawyer, judge, psychologist, civic leader, corporation
CEO, philanthropist, whatever -- who scoffs at news that you bring to the
attention of a group, on the basis that it is what you found on the Internet?
I think that the Internet ought to be treated with an appropriate measure of
suspicion, for it is virtual reality, and not self-definitive, inasmuch as it is possible
to fake certain things, to make it seem like something is taking place when it
is not.
But when sources can be verified and multiple reports of the same thing are
coming from credible witnesses, it becomes worth paying attention to it, for the
sake of seeking the truth.
And especially when there is a concerted effort by some entity, of whatever
description, to oppose the testimony of witnesses, that too must be taken into
account.
For we have here +Fellay saying one thing, and credible reports of contrary
testimony being apparently suppressed by Menzingen in multiple ways. Such as
kept off the SSPX website, kept off of the DICI website, and credible reports of
the "other 3 bishops" being threatened with subjection to +Fellay's authority
by not making public the fact of such contrary testimony.
The intrigue is rather unbecoming of a Catholic Society, and perhaps the
respected professionals to whom I refer are wont to ignore such themes for the
sake of keeping public hysteria under control? Or what?
I am asking about this because it seems to me that such respected community
leaders might be under pressure from their peers to discount Internet information
by some kind of pressure from others they know and owe respect, and the whole
thing is being promoted by some minority who see the Internet as a threat to
their hold on the minds of people at large.
I would really appreciate the informed comment of other members who are
familiar with this topic, such as Matthew.
Certainly there are websites to go to that treat of this topic, but ironically, it
would be of no use to recommend such sites to the civic leaders to whom I refer,
because they discount the reliability of the Internet, per se.
But in regards to this thread, here there is a post on another website, IA (the
first, opening post of this thread, which I reformatted, above), which links to
French, English and German sites that describe a very suspicious mess
that is ostensibly going on at the highest office of the SSPX.
And you and I know intelligent, respected people who refuse to believe this could
be taking place.
Today is the Feast of the Precious Blood of Our Lord.
How many of us know of Protestants who get all choked up and emotional over
the doctrine that Jesus shed His Blood for us, which Blood, in its essence, is the
the means of our redemption, that by which we would be saved, those of us who
believe? (Actually, those who are baptized and believe, Mk xvi. 16)
And yet these same Protestants reject the dogma of Transubstantiation and ignore
Our Lord's own words the the 6th chapter of St. John, while they take literally just
about everything else in the Bible (many things to the point of ridiculousness).
They have no Feast of the Most Precious Blood of Our Lord, even while they
claim to adhere to the doctrine of the salvific effect of His Blood. They have no
feast days at all, actually, for they abhor the principle of feasting because they
deny the value of works, which applies to fasting, and without fasting, feast days
are meaningless.
This penchant for denouncing the Internet seems to be related to Protestant
blindness in a way, inasmuch as it denies the common testimony of witnesses.
Protestants deny what the the Fathers and Doctors of the Church asserted
throughout the ages, due to their separation in time from the witnesses. And
now, modern skeptics deny information obtained by multiple sources on the
Internet out of some sense of separation from the witnesses, not in time (for the
Internet is very new) but from reality itself, since the Internet is at least to some
degree a virtual reality.