I will say again that I am very happy to have been expelled from ABL2.  I'm not certain who these "provocateurs" were on that forum to whom 1st Mansion refers, (outside of myself).  But not to worry, ABL2 admits a number of other kinds of "provocateurs."  Most of them feel they can declare open season on the bishop, and not be called to account for it.

I was banned from ABLF 1.0 for a number of reasons. The official reason was for criticizing the administrator SSS. But months earlier I was bewildered by a huge attack mounted against me by half the forum, joined in by Telesphorus of all people, for suggesting gender-segregated forums. Not demanding, mind you. I was merely suggesting, more for conversation fodder than anything. I also created bad blood with those on the forum who were devotees of Dawn Marie for expressing skepticism about her; these devotees also happened to be the same people who were most aggressive towards me months earlier for suggesting gender-segregated forums. The big surprise was that Telesphorus sided with the bull-dykes and she-males against me. I received support only from Graham, PereJoseph, and Ethelred and 1 woman (who's handle escapes me). GottmitunsAlex agreed with me that this craziness was an indication of feminism within traddom.

I can see from lurking on ABLF 2.0 that the same dysfunctional atmosphere continues to reign. I find needleduck about the most unsavory person on that forum. Her forced good-humor conceals a snake in the grass. Telesphorus astonished me by joining in the attack. Mr. Anti-Feminism, of all people. I guess Telesphorus is one of those types who's very strong when it comes to rhetoric, but in action is full of contradiction.

As far as Bishop Williamson, I've become cautious about him as a result of learning the following things about him:

-- Inviting Rabbi Mayer Schiller to Winona to speak to seminarians.

-- Promotion of The Poem of the ManGod, in which "Jesus" is depicted: "I love and venerate Hillel, I respect and honour Gamaliel. They are two men through whose justice and wisdom the origin of man is revealed"

I've read that Cardinal Bea, the false Jєωιѕн convert responsible for Nostra Aetate, was the man behind early promotion of The Poem

-- Has promoted Malachi Martin.

-- Has promoted Charles Coulombe

2vermont is at least Judaized. She's a Jєωιѕн convert who has attacked me on Te Deum for my posts about Jєωs. She was also one of the women on ABLF 1.0 who attacked me for suggesting gender-segregated forums.

2vermont is at least Judaized. She's a Jєωιѕн convert who has attacked me on Te Deum for my posts about Jєωs.

Yeah, that's one of the litmus tests for Jєωιѕн "converts". See if they still defend and / or propagate Jєωry.

BUMP:

It is historical fact that the Jєωs have been behind the worse revolutions against the Church of Christ. (Reformation, French Revolution, Bolshevik Revolution, Vatican II, etc.) If a convert Jєω takes an issue with these historical facts against Judaism and still may take offense when someone points out these facts, then it is a proof that as Ascend says, he is not really born to New Life as a Catholic, but still carries the mark of the Jєω with their innate nature to revolt against Christ. Wherever the Jєωs as a whole are allowed to gain power, only spiritual and social decay follows. That is why they have always been expelled and secluded from everywhere, until XX century when they have literally taken over the world and over the Catholic Church with Vatican II, and we are seeing the disastrous results of the global Jєωιѕн influence. Everything that is twisted in society today, we can thank the global spread of Judaism for.


Over the centuries, the Church has never changed her firm, wise stance on the Jєωιѕн question (until Vatican II, apparently). On the one hand, she prevented the Jєωs from being mistreated and she allowed their religion to be practiced in private. On the other hand, however, faced with the impossibility of converting them, she rebuked them for the crime of Deicide, exhorted them to repent, and isolated them in order to prevent them from perverting Catholics.

.........................

Quote

In the Brief of May 27, 1581, Gregory XIII (1572-1585) warned the faithful and religious authorities against the false conversions of Jєωs as a means to infiltrate the Catholic Church. (37) In the Bull Antiqua ʝʊdɛօrum improbitas of June 1, 1581, the Pontiff established these conditions for when Jєωs must be submitted to the vigilance of the Inquisition:

a. when they attack Catholic dogmas;
b. when they invoke devils or offer sacrifices to them;
c. when they teach Catholics to do the same;
d. when they speak blasphemies against Our Lord and Our Lady;
e. when they try to induce Catholics to abandon their Faith;
f. when they forbid a Jєω or an infidel to convert;
g. when they consciously favor heretics;
h. when they disseminate heretical books;
i. when, in disdain for Our Lord, they crucify a lamb – principally on Good-Friday – and then spit on it and spew it with insults.
j. when they oblige Catholic wet-nurses to pour their milk into the toilettes and sewers after they have received the Eucharist. (38)

http://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/a028htJPII_VisitToѕуηαgσgυє1986.htm

As we see, the Jєωιѕн infiltration have always been a thread for the Church but never seemed so victorious and evident as with Vatican II Council.

 

One of the ABL2 anti-Williamson denizens, a frequent contributor there, who takes upon himself often the responsibility of  reprinting H.E.'s ECs,  does not apparently know if he's a Jєω or not.  It must be some kind of ethnic amnesia.   LOL.

Quote from: 2Vermont

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Quote from: 2Vermont

Except both Bishop Fellay and Bishop Williamson don't seem to take issue with Catholics attending the NO.

That's a lie, and you know it.  Attempting to stir up controversy, now?

Or, when you said, "I'm beginning to think you just like to argue for the sake of argument," were you thinking of yourself?

.

Actually it's not a lie and you know it.  Or are you one of the folks who deny or explain away that Bishop Williamson advised a woman to attend the NO in June?

No, it's a lie and you know it.

Bishop Williamson did not advise a woman to attend the N.O., but only explained to everyone publicly that he did not advise AGAINST her doing so, for personal reasons applicable only to her case and to others like her.  He was very clear in saying that he does not recommend the N.O. for everyone, and that it constitutes an objective danger to the faith of Catholics in general.  Maybe you should pay better attention.
.

Of course he told her that she could go to the Novus Ordo. Bp. Williamson, in one and the same answer told her:

the Novus Ordo is a "key part of the new religion, a major part of the worldwide apostasy.”

“Do whatever you need to nourish your faith.”

 “Some Novus Ordo priests are nourishing and building the faith in the Novus Ordo parish.”

“There have been eucharistic miracles with the Novus Ordo Mass. They are still occurring.”

“While the new religion is false, is dangerous, and it strangles grace, and it’s helping many people to lose the faith, at the same time there are cases where it can be used and is used to build the faith.”

“Do whatever you need to do to keep the faith.”

“You make your own judgments.” “I’ve got to make my own decisions in my own circuмstances.”

 “Therefore there are cases when even the Novus Ordo Mass can be attended with an effect of building one’s faith instead of losing it.” “Stay away from the Novus Ordo. But exceptionally, if you’re watching and praying, even there you may find the grace of God. If you do, make use of it in order to sanctify your soul.”

“If they [the lay people] can trust their own judgement, that attending the New Mass will do them more good than harm spiritually…But it does harm in itself. There is no doubt about that. It is a rite designed to undermine Catholics’ faith, and to turn their belief away from God towards man.”

“The whole of the new religion, and the Novus Ordo Mass is an essential part of the new religion, is designed to get you away from the Catholic Faith…”

All of this was in the same answer to this one question asked by this one woman. It took Bp. Williamson about 10 minutes to answer her.

I think this illustrates the position of the SSPX and even the so called "Resistence." This is the consequence of not answering the essential question definitively. This is the consequence of having your "pope" and eating him too.

Watch his response for yourself.

I agree.  I think so long as these men are "recognized" as popes confusion reigns.

Who are "these men?"  I lost the thread here.

Who 'recognizes' these men as popes?

Confusion does reign, it's true. And 2vermont and mysterium help to sow it.

Quote from: rum

Wise words.

2Vermont objected to my thread suggesting that Catholics should be cautious about Jєωιѕн converts who haven't been disowned by their families. I learned from GottmittunsAlex that this was also the view of St. Vincent Ferrer.

This does strike me as a possible marker to look out for. I have an ex-Mormon in-law who converted to traditional Catholicism, and his whole family disowned him, won't even see his children on holidays. And at the mostly Mormon place of employment he has, he is ostracized. Not that he seems to care, though.

(However, that may not always be the case. Many families now-a-days consider themselves religious conservatives of whatever variety, yet condone anything under banner of 'love and acceptance.')

It's not necessary to be suspicious of converts from most, or all, non-Jєωιѕн religions, because no non-Jєωιѕн religion that I'm aware of gives permission to adherents to pretend to not be adherents. Judaism permits Jєωs to not admit that they're Jєωιѕн, so a Jєω can convert to the Church and claim to be a good Catholic while remaining in his mind a Jєω.