You seem to ignore Kavanagh’s public persona.
He’s a flaming narcissist, a showboat who thrives on attention.
It's irrelevant to the question at hand. Whatever his motives are, either what he's saying is true, or partly true ... or else he's simply lying.
I'm not really concerned with this matter about judging Mr. Kavanaugh and whether he's an "embarrassment to the Catholic remnant".
Similarly, I had serious problems with Voris and Niles. But that didn't make all of their allegations untrue. I'm not going to defend +Fellay's coverups of and complicity in the predations of Fr. Abbet, for instance ... just because I had serious problems with both Voris and Niles. Even with those two, I regularly called out their motivations, and dismissed SOME of their claims as slander, fueld by the motivations. But that does not equate to exonerating +Fellay.
Capiche?
I don't understand why some people struggle so mightily with making basic logical distinctions. Both could be true ... what you assert about Mr. Kavanaugh's defects of character AND that there's something inappropriate (or worse) going on with Bishops Morgan/Ballini and this Moran character.
That's yet another example of false dichotomy and inability to make distinctions, where all you guys can thin in is binary (maybe you should apply to be computers), where it's constantly all or nothing, this side or that side (which is how you guys get constantly manipulated by the Hegelian dialected) ... when, as St. Augustine already taught all those years ago ... that generally
veritas in media stat ... "truth stands in the middle".
Unless we attribute abject lying to Mr. Kavanaugh, which I don't have any reason to do ... I find that his allegations need to be taken seriously and that Bishops Morgan and Ballini need to respond to them. Again, perhaps that truth is in the middle, where there's some truth to what Mr. Kavanaugh says, but then his perspective has imposed some interpretations on the raw facts that may or may not be valid, etc. But we can't even begin to discern the truth unless we hear the other side of the story. That's true of every fight, such as between children, when you have to go in and referee. You get one side of the story that's invariably slanted toward their perspective. Then you have to interrogate the other part for their side of the story, and finally apply some Solomon-esque thinking to discern the truth (it usually comes out due to inconsistencies, etc. -- and then you can reconcile the discrepancies if you take into account each individual's perspective).
Problem is that without +Morgan / +Ballini's side the of the story, we have nothing to work with in attempting to discern the truth of the matter ... and I am absolutely not prepared to dismiss Mr. Kavanaugh's allegations simply because some Trads don't "like his style". Nor am I prepared to judge Mr. Kavanaugh's character based on some superficial perception created by a couple of Youtube videos. I know nothing about him, and this is a context in which "Whom am I to judge?" most certainly applies. I can't judge a man's soul or character from a few seconds of Youtube videos, especially when some were from a good time ago. I also saw a few videos where he appeared to be praying devoutly in front of the Blessed Sacrament, so there is that on the other side. We all have faults, and I'm not going to point out the splinter in his eye when I have my own beams to deal with. I am not prepared to call anyone an abject / malicious liar without hard proof ... but one does find regularly that a perspective can be overlaid onto the facts that can cause a distortion depending upon how you're viewing things.
Topic: Man arrested for email (Read 16760 times)