Author Topic: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON (Read 9197 times)

Matto · « **Reply #75 on:** May 16, 2019, 03:09:03 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on May 16, 2019, 02:53:46 PM

But the hypothesis you describe above? Only a bitter, angry, sore loser Sedevacantist could actually believe that.

Yes, I guess that would be a way to describe them. The more extreme kind. I was searching for information about Hutton Gibson to see if he believed something similar but I cannot find much about him right now. I don't know why it isn't coming up on google or duck duck go (is that a good search engine?) for me. I thought he used to have a website where he expressed doubts about Lefebvre but I can not find it right now.

But I do think it is an interesting conspiracy with legs if you are paranoid and learned about the rumors of Lefebvre's Bishop being a Freemason. One could think Lefebvre was chosen to be the false savior of traditionalists because his orders were not valid instead of Thuc who had valid untainted orders.

Matthew · « **Reply #76 on:** May 16, 2019, 03:26:29 PM »

Quote from: Matto on May 16, 2019, 03:09:03 PM

But I do think it is an interesting conspiracy with legs if you are paranoid and learned about the rumors of Lefebvre's Bishop being a Freemason. One could think Lefebvre was chosen to be the false savior of traditionalists because his orders were not valid instead of Thuc who had valid untainted orders.

You have admitted many times that you enjoy hearing different points of view, even from those you describe in a negative manner.
You really are a glutton for punishment, aren't you? I don't know if it's excessive curiosity or what.

You give WAY too much thought, credence, and credit to idiots. That's the biggest fault I've seen in you, and I've read your posts on CI for years.

If you want to end up holding the truth in your hands, you have to learn how to boldly throw GARBAGE in the incinerator (causing irrevocable destruction to said garbage). If you eat garbage (or even lick it or handle it too much) you're going to end up sick.

I'm "extreme" in the eyes of the world. To bring the world back to the truth, back to God, back to sanity, things would have to be done that would be considered radical, extreme, etc.

But you need to learn the difference between "an extreme position" and "insanity".

There are few man that did more for God, more for Tradition, and did more damage to the Conciliar cause than +ABL. Actions speak louder than words or speculation. There is ZERO CHANCE that he was secretly a God-hating Freemason trying to do his part to destroy the Church.

Matto · « **Reply #77 on:** May 16, 2019, 04:26:00 PM »

Moderator: Apologies for trashing your post -- I clicked "modify" instead of "quote". It happens sometimes, and I apologize.

Matthew · « **Reply #78 on:** May 16, 2019, 04:36:47 PM »

Those positions, although unpopular, at least have rational reasons behind them and pass the "smell test".

You can't say that "Trads are fringe. Believing in aliens is fringe. Therefore they're kind of the same." Yes, both are unpopular and counter-culture, but being Traditional Catholic is sane and rational, whereas we know that God didn't create any aliens. Our Lady of Fatima said that UFOs are devils.

Withholding judgment and looking into something is praiseworthy. But once you find insanity, you need to be able to "let it go" and completely reject it. Only by being completely detached from the consequences can you ever hope to find the truth in a sea of lies.

Our Lord gave us some pointers on how to sort out the truth from lies. "Judge a tree by its fruits." He elaborated, "Do men gather figs from thistles?" He invites us to use our brains.

Matthew · « **Reply #79 on:** May 16, 2019, 04:43:53 PM »

Matto,

Please give me the argument why supporting Fr. Pfeiffer/Hewko in the early Resistance from 2012 to mid-2014 would constitute "idiocy".

Keeping in mind that supporters/followers aren't privy to every secret of the heart, or every thing that happens behind closed doors. How could a non-idiot have "known better" and not supported Fr. Pfeiffer back then?

Be careful. This time period was before Ambrose, before Tetherow, before Pablo doxxed all Fr. Pfeiffer's coordinators, before the infamous "The Devil and Mr. Hernandez" article was known to those outside Phoenix AZ, before any of the OLMC scandals, and before Fr. Pfeiffer broke with +Williamson and committed his "seminary" to operating without a bishop.

I deny that supporting the early Resistance constitutes ANY MEASURE of "idiocy". Especially in light of the fact that the Resistance turned out to be 100% correct! Just look at the SSPX today. Go read the CCCC thread if you doubt the Resistance was right.

Matto · « **Reply #80 on:** May 16, 2019, 04:59:14 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on May 16, 2019, 04:43:53 PM

Please give me the argument why supporting Fr. Pfeiffer/Hewko in the early Resistance from 2012 to mid-2014 would constitute "idiocy".

You followed, defended, and supported a priest as a good shepherd for two years who turned out to be an insane cult-leader mind-controlled by a warlock (according to current Cathinfo thought). I am sure there were numerous red flags which you ignored because you were blinded by your disillusion with the SSPX and were willing to trust those priests who opposed them. So you followed and trusted a man who is apparently more of an "idiot" than Hutton Gibson or Gerry Matatics. I do not blame you at all. I am just saying it is dangerous out there and very hard to know who to trust (I do not believe all the crazy things I read but I read and consider things from various viewpoints). For all we know the CMRI is the true path and not the resistance. I don't have the answers. I just try.

Matthew · « **Reply #81 on:** May 16, 2019, 05:07:59 PM »

Quote from: Matto on May 16, 2019, 04:59:14 PM

You followed, defended, and supported a priest as a good shepherd for two years who turned out to be an insane cult-leader mind-controlled by a warlock (according to current Cathinfo thought). I am sure there were numerous red flags which you ignored because you were blinded by your disillusion with the SSPX and were willing to trust those priests who opposed them. So you followed and trusted a man who is surely more of an "idiot" than Hutton Gibson or Gerry Matatics. I do not blame you at all. I am just saying it is dangerous out there and very hard to know who to trust (I do not believe all the crazy things I read but I read and consider things). For all we know the CMRI is the true path and not the resistance.

You're not giving any example.

You can't just speculate and assume there were red flags. Red flags aren't just "always there" by default. That's why they are called RED FLAGS. I'm here to say there weren't any. Fr. Pfeiffer showed no signs of evil or being controlled by an evil one.

"who turned out to be an insane cult-leader mind-controlled by a warlock"
remember, it is equally or more likely that "he eventually TURNED INTO an insane cult-leader mind-controlled by a warlock"

Isolation and lack of any higher authority has driven a lot more priests than just Fr. Pfeiffer insane over the last 50 years. The problem is, they don't go insane on Day One.

You can't say that just because someone went bad or fell, that he was ALWAYS bad. That's the mistake some people make about Bishop Fellay! They can't believe a current bad guy wasn't always a bad guy from his very conception.

It's that comic book mentality. Good guys and bad guys -- and never the twain shall meet! Your opponent is the devil, but the devil was always evil since Man was created, so...

ByzCat3000 · « **Reply #82 on:** May 16, 2019, 06:28:00 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on May 16, 2019, 04:36:47 PM

Those positions, although unpopular, at least have rational reasons behind them and pass the "smell test".

You can't say that "Trads are fringe. Believing in aliens is fringe. Therefore they're kind of the same." Yes, both are unpopular and counter-culture, but being Traditional Catholic is sane and rational, whereas we know that God didn't create any aliens. Our Lady of Fatima said that UFOs are devils.

Withholding judgment and looking into something is praiseworthy. But once you find insanity, you need to be able to "let it go" and completely reject it. Only by being completely detached from the consequences can you ever hope to find the truth in a sea of lies.

Our Lord gave us some pointers on how to sort out the truth from lies. "Judge a tree by its fruits." He elaborated, "Do men gather figs from thistles?" He invites us to use our brains.

Just wondering, how do we know aliens don't exist? Maybe there's some theological principle I'm unaware of?

Even if UFOs are devils that doesn't necessarily mean aliens don't exist.

And to be clear, I don't really believe in them, I'm just kind of indifferent unless there's some theological principle I'm unaware of.

Matto · « **Reply #83 on:** May 16, 2019, 06:30:23 PM »

You must know Father Pfeiffer better than me. Are you suggesting he was normal and holy until 2014 and then fell? I think the presence of Pablo from before then is evidence that there were problems with Pfeiffer from the beginning. But I can't say you are wrong. This is a silly argument anyway so I am sorry for wasting your time though I do like talking to you. You are right about me that examining crazy ideas from different perspectives (including idiotic ideas) is one of my weaknesses. I guess you have paid attention to my posts over the years as I own up to that fault. I have heard about many crazy things (and some of them I believe) and try to understand those who believe those things and not dismiss them as idiots. So the idea that Lefebvre was a part of some conspiracy and not a saint is something I can understand a paranoid isolated traditional Catholic believing (especially if one was a sedevacantist whose orders do not derive from Lefebvre) so while I disagree I do not dismiss it as mere idiocy. It comes from growing up in a liberal household and then rejecting everything I was ever taught to believe by my parents and in schools to become a conservative right wing traditional Catholic who has trouble trusting people. And the apparent fall of the SSPX makes trusting even more difficult.

Aliens are a problem because of original sin and redemption. I think aliens with free will who are not children of Adam causes difficulty because it means there are creatures who were not subject to original sin because they were not children of Adam and who were not redeemed by Christ. So if there were aliens with free will either they did not fall and needed no redeemer and were not redeemed by Christ, or there were other Adams who fell and there were other Christs who redeemed them. So the idea of creatures with free will who were not children of Adam and were not redeemed by Christ causes difficulties.

ByzCat3000 · « **Reply #84 on:** May 16, 2019, 06:39:28 PM »

Quote from: Matto on May 16, 2019, 06:30:23 PM

Aliens are a problem because of original sin and redemption. I think aliens with free will who are not children of Adam causes difficulty because it means there are creatures who were not subject to original sin because they were not children of Adam and who were not redeemed by Christ. So if there were aliens with free will either they did not fall and needed no redeemer and were not redeemed by Christ, or there fell and there was another Christ who redeemed them. So the idea of creatures with free will who were not children of Adam and were not redeemed by Christ causes difficulties.

I'll agree with ruling out the "Another Christ" explanation. But what if aliens were in a comparable position to the angels? (either unfallen, or else, in a "no second chances" type of paradigm?)

Again, to be clear, I don't see why this isn't a possibility, but that doesn't mean I actually affirm it.

Matto · « **Reply #85 on:** May 16, 2019, 06:42:14 PM »

Quote from: ByzCat3000 on May 16, 2019, 06:39:28 PM

I'll agree with ruling out the "Another Christ" explanation. But what if aliens were in a comparable position to the angels? (either unfallen, or else, in a "no second chances" type of paradigm?)

Again, to be clear, I don't see why this isn't a possibility, but that doesn't mean I actually affirm it.

I believe C.S. Lewis thought about this before we did and wrote about aliens who never fell visiting us in one of his stories which I never read.

But the fact that they were never mentioned in the Bible may cause problems, but one can theorize. I don't think the Church ever declared that there were no aliens infallibly.

ByzCat3000 · « **Reply #86 on:** May 16, 2019, 08:24:02 PM »

Quote from: Matto on May 16, 2019, 06:42:14 PM

I believe C.S. Lewis thought about this before we did and wrote about aliens who never fell visiting us in one of his stories which I never read.

But the fact that they were never mentioned in the Bible may cause problems, but one can theorize. I don't think the Church ever declared that there were no aliens infallibly.

I don't see why it would be theologically problematic if Lewis' speculation was right. Of course he was writing a fiction novel, but I'm not aware of anything in that novel that would contradict a Christian worldview. I'd see the existence of aliens as speculative rather than demonstrably theologically right or wrong unless some point the Church teaches was denied.

Matthew · « **Reply #87 on:** May 17, 2019, 09:45:02 AM »

1. The Bible doesn't mention aliens, even though it mentions everything else in the visible world.

2. We haven't found any aliens yet. Not even microbes.

3. (true) Science has discovered that the earth is actually the center of the universe. Everything rotates around the earth. Google "axis of evil". Geocentrism is true. Carl Sagan was wrong that we are in a backwoods "nothing special" far-out corner of a galaxy.

4. #3 actually makes sense, because Earth is the planet on which God took HUMAN FLESH and died on the cross. The second Person of the Holy Trinity has a human nature now in Heaven. He can't take on any other additional alien nature(s). He can't have a glorified human body AND a glorified green alien body with 15 tentacles at the same time. That would be metaphysically impossible; an actual contradiction like a square circle.

5. And no, the other two Persons in the Holy Trinity aren't standing around in some kind of waiting room "still available" to do what the Second Person of the Holy Trinity did on Earth to save mankind in 33 AD. Jesus created the world, He is the LOGOS, the Word. It's difficult to comprehend the Trinity to any degree, but let's just say that it wasn't a coincidence that the LOGOS, the Second Person became man and died for our sins. Jesus didn't lose a divine "coin toss", nor did He draw the "short straw".

The Trinity is kind of like a fire: you have light, heat, and consuming action. Those 3 things go together. Where you have "fire", you have all 3. The light isn't the heat, and the heat isn't the consuming action. But there is only 1 fire. You can't say, "Well, last time the HEAT of the fire warmed my food; this time let's have the LIGHT of the fire warm my food." It doesn't work that way.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #88 on:** May 17, 2019, 11:15:12 AM »

Quote

We haven't found any aliens yet. Not even microbes.

What?

Ladislaus · « **Reply #89 on:** May 17, 2019, 11:48:10 AM »

Quote from: ByzCat3000 on May 16, 2019, 06:28:00 PM

Just wondering, how do we know aliens don't exist?

Indeed, what if +Fellay/+Lefebvre are/were aliens?

NOW we have come full circle on this thread.

Author Topic: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON (Read 9197 times)

Matto

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Matthew

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Matto

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Matthew

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Matthew

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Matto

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Matthew

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

ByzCat3000

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Matto

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

ByzCat3000

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Matto

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

ByzCat3000

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Matthew

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Pax Vobis

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Ladislaus

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON