CathInfo.com

Quote from: Seraphim

Here are some thoughts on organizing categories for the website:

1) Bishop Fellay Contradicts Bishop Fellay

2) Bishop Fellay Contradicts Archbishop Lefebvre

3) The Three Bishops Versus Bishop Fellay

4) Changes in the SSPX Since 2009

5) Assessment of Recent Damage Control Statements Coming From Menzingen (and the Varoius District HQ's)

6) Statements of the Various Allied Religious Congregations and Independents

7) Declarations of SSPX Clergy Opposing the Deal

8) Lists of SSPX Clergy Expelled (Or In Danger of Expulsion) For Opposing The Deal

9) Anonymous List of SSPXers Supporting Clergy Holding The Line (Showing Current Chapel Attended)

10) Krah

   Just my thoughts of some organizational options.

Very good!

Maglan (Hebrew: מגלן. Also known as Unit 212 or Sayeret Maglan) is an Israeli Special Forces unit which specializes in operating behind enemy lines and deep in enemy territory using advanced technologies and weaponry.

The IDF keeps the unit's designated missions a secret and gives no information about it or the operations in which the unit takes part. Maglan only became publicly known in 2006

Dumb Ox, Yes you did tell me all these things on the telephone.

And YES, I totally supported the exposure of the William-of-Norwich Affair and the strange financial dealings with a lawyer who was involved with Israel, and who visited for a few days, with other students, some Israeli Special Forces' camp (you never did post the photos!).

These were FACTS, REAL FACTS which could be found in docuмents posted in the public domain.

I never involved myself in personal attacks in this affair. I even defended the lawyer (who is no friend of mine) who was insulted as a German with the disgusting term of Hun -- which still continues to be applied liberally on this forum. By the way, for the historically unaware people, the Huns belonged to an Asiatic race made famous by Attila, nothing whatsoever to do with the Germanic race.

And YES, I shall carry on defending SSPX Father Celier's reputation, irrespective of which side of the fence I am on. I have read his books but you have not.


What you claim as "evidence" is only a criticism from the Dominicans of Avrillé that concerns itself with a philosophical/theological point, which is not unusual when a new book is written, don't you know? As I have already stated before, Fr. Celier is in the process of answering this critical analysis - it will appear shortly on his blog.