CathInfo.com

As Veritas1961 states

Respectful questioning of authority, based upon public docuмentation of unquestionable authenticity and transparency, does not in Catholic moral teaching amount to “calumny.” So: please substantiate by proofs, by examples, not assertions, that these docuмents posted by faithful members of Catholic Tradition contained calumnies.

Regarding these rumours outlined by Fr Rostand for example, it is quite easy to provide him with docuмentation from the public domain. I remain disturbed a priest of all people would dismiss facts as "rumours". It doesn't say much for the type of clerics involved in the Society.

Even initially Fr Lindstrom tried the "internet rumour" approach with me. It insulted my intelligence and whilst he is a good priest, he took the wrong approach. Yes, we must discern what we read on the internet but let these clerics not insult people by suggesting fact is rumour and we are children who can't discern what is true and false.

Even Clare on Ignis Ardens suggested I was some type of troublemaker. That was not my intent at all.

Quote

There is no doubt Fr Morgan is one of the better SSPX priests but I can't recall any allegations raised against Krah or Bishop Fellay. I recall William of Norwich asked questions based on substantiated facts.The Ignis Ardens team removed the file before any alleged request to remove it.

I think that someone either privately threatened or forewarned them of the request. I know of other posters who left at that time were targeted privately.
And no they never addressed the charges, they simply attacked those who were making them known.

Whilst also another excellent cleric, I'm afraid we can't ignore even Fr Clifton only got angry over events of the past three months. A very  short span of time.

What William of Norwich presented in his dossier was/are substantiated facts. I suppose when we see Fr Rostand go to extraordinary length to dismiss facts as rumours, it demonstrates all that is wrong and rotten in the leadership of this "pious union"

Fr Laisney had not even the courage or the conviction to answer the questions put to him by Veritas1961. Valid questions based on facts.

No charges were made.That is the trouble facing Menzingen. 'William of Norwich' raised valid questions based on facts that can be proven.

With politicians, we might allow for this as they are elected to be corrupt and tell lies.They are professional liars. We expect better from priests and Bishops.

This Krahgate and what is happening in the SSPX is a disgrace.Atleast with a politician he/she would be removed from office.

I don't think, John Grace, that we can accuse some priests like, for example, Fr Clifton, of only having reacted recently. For many priests there was not always an avenue for them to react publicly, and some held their fire in an effort not to create waves until they were absolutely sure that the situation was becoming untenable. Some are more cautious and sometimes that is better. Fr Lindstrom, is certainly one of those who is more cautious, but he is no fool, and is very much attached to the SSPX and Mgr Lefebvre, and Tradition!