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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]

Author Topic: More on Voris  (Read 4162 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline josefamenendez

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5601
  • Reputation: +4212/-291
  • Gender: Female
Re: More on Voris
« Reply #45 on: May 22, 2020, 12:11:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I agree. In my opinion I think that it is more a prideful allegiance thing that Jones has for the Church that "the gates of hell will not prevail against it" than something more malicious. I think he knows the Church is in shambles but sticks to it  despite the heresies because he has to believe it will resurrect in it's present form as all other "forms" ( Trads and offshoots) are not the Church to him.
    Logged

    Online Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 9535
    • Reputation: +9311/-1009
    • Gender: Male
    Re: More on Voris
    « Reply #46 on: May 22, 2020, 12:49:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: josefamenendez on May 22, 2020, 12:11:14 PM
    I agree. In my opinion I think that it is more a prideful allegiance thing that Jones has for the Church that "the gates of hell will not prevail against it" than something more malicious. I think he knows the Church is in shambles but sticks to it  despite the heresies because he has to believe it will resurrect in it's present form as all other "forms" ( Trads and offshoots) are not the Church to him.

    Your charity is admirable.

    But right now, tradition is surrounded by wolves and standing at the edge of the cliff.

    Being gentle as a doves and being as wise as serpents is go together.
    Logged
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline KevinBrumley

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 50
    • Reputation: +44/-11
    • Gender: Male
    Re: More on Voris
    « Reply #47 on: May 22, 2020, 01:22:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on May 22, 2020, 09:40:07 AM
    Yeah, the SSPX would never win such a lawsuit, since they have actually done enough wrong in this matter (particularly the cases of Fathers Abbet and Peignot) that the jury would find the conclusions of CM to be plausible and therefore not libelous.

    I think that certain individuals could win lawsuits against CM ... such as the Fathers Novak.
    All I can say is I hope Voris and Niles have a good attorney.  This is a defamation per se case.  Easily winnable.  I suggest people look up that term.   
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: More on Voris
    « Reply #48 on: May 22, 2020, 03:22:59 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: KevinBrumley on May 22, 2020, 01:22:58 PM
    All I can say is I hope Voris and Niles have a good attorney.  This is a defamation per se case.  Easily winnable.  I suggest people look up that term.  

    Well....

    To prevail in a libel suit, the plaintiff (SSPX) must be able to show that:

    1) Specific defamatory remarks are false (i.e., truth is a defense to libel); 
    2) They were made with malice.

    To determine whether malice was present, the SSPX will have to show that Voris knew, or should have known, injurious comments were false.

    For a discussion of what constitutes malice within a libel context, see here: https://rmwarnerlaw.com/what-is-actual-malice-in-a-defamation-lawsuit/
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline KevinBrumley

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 50
    • Reputation: +44/-11
    • Gender: Male
    Re: More on Voris
    « Reply #49 on: May 22, 2020, 04:50:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on May 22, 2020, 03:22:59 PM
    Well....

    To prevail in a libel suit, the plaintiff (SSPX) must be able to show that:

    1) Specific defamatory remarks are false (i.e., truth is a defense to libel);
    2) They were made with malice.

    To determine whether malice was present, the SSPX will have to show that Voris knew, or should have known, injurious comments were false.

    For a discussion of what constitutes malice within a libel context, see here: https://rmwarnerlaw.com/what-is-actual-malice-in-a-defamation-lawsuit/
    Sean,
    I said this is a case of defamation per se, that's a legal term of art which refers to a distinct kind of defamation.  In these instances, the law generally presumes both harm and malice, therefore malice need not be proved.  Also, I was referring to individual priests, not the SSPX as a whole.   
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: More on Voris
    « Reply #50 on: May 22, 2020, 04:58:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: KevinBrumley on May 22, 2020, 04:50:26 PM
    Sean,
    I said this is a case of defamation per se, that's a legal term of art which refers to a distinct kind of defamation.  In these instances, the law generally presumes both harm and malice, therefore malice need not be proved.  Also, I was referring to individual priests, not the SSPX as a whole.  

    Yes; my apologies:

    I thought you were using the term “defamation” in a lay/colloquial sense, where you really meant libel (ie., I missed the “per se” in your previous post).

    Thanks for the clarification.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."
    Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
    « previous next »