Author Topic: Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels  (Read 4732 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 22998
  • Reputation: +20139/-243
  • Gender: Male
Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
« on: May 28, 2013, 03:06:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • http://www.therecusant.com/conference-press-release

    A Reply to Mr. Damian Thompson, et al.

    Monday, 27th May, 2013
    St. Bede the Venerable

    The organisers of the Crisis in the SSPX Conference have been made aware of an article by one Mr. Damian Thompson of the Daily Telegraph, entitled “Neo-Nazi Holocaust Deniers 'plan takeover' of SSPX, claim anti-Fascist campaigners."

    We note with astonishment that this article appears to have been written solely for the purpose of uncritically publicising some simply incredible claims, subsequently taken up by others, made against the priests of the SSPX Resistance, the Recusant, the Crisis in the SSPX Conference, and all those involved in it, all of which claims we wish here to deny, to wit:


       that the organisers of the Crisis in the SSPX conference are neo-Nazis and/or BNP members and/or in any other
       way "disreputable" people;

       that the conference is a “far-right” political event and/or that the event is aimed at removing Bishop Fellay from
       his position as Superior General of the SSPX;

       that the conference somehow involves any form of infiltration and/or takeover of the SSPX in this country;

       that Bishop Williamson will be present at this conference and/or is the driving force behind this conference
       and/or is somehow involved this conference;

       that the conference involves secrecy, plotting, or plots of some sort; and moreover, that the locations, address,
       dates, timings or other details of our conference have ever been a secret.



    We are disappointed to note that Mr. Thompson has decided not to allow comments to be written under the article in question, meaning that we are denied any right to reply, by the same means and in the same place, to the outrageous and ridiculous claims which he has published. However, for public record, the organisers of the ‘Crisis in the SSPX’ conference wish to point out to Mr Thompson the following:

       1. Bishop Williamson will not even be in the country when our conference is scheduled to take place. We are unaware of his precise movements but are given to understand that he will be on the other side of the world doing confirmations. He will not be the subject of any of the talks, nor was he consulted in the preparation of the conference, nor did he have any part in the planning or organising of the conference. In short, Bishop Williamson has nothing to do with this event.

        2. Every one of the people involved in setting up this conference is a respectable, practising Catholic with a good name which has now been publicly and shamefully besmirched.

       3. To the best of our knowledge, no “Neo-Nazis” “BNP members” or “disreputable” persons are in any way involved, much less a “bunch” of them. Nor are any such people welcome, unless they come as practising Catholics, and only as practicing Catholics.

         4. The sole purpose of the weekend’s proceedings will be to discuss the doctrinal position of the SSPX and the problems attendant therewith, and to strengthen the devotion, piety and holiness of the participants.

        5. The conference has been advertised in The Recusant newsletter for the past three months. It has been advertised on our website for the past four or five weeks. The press release published by Mr. Thompson says “We can reveal [that the conference] will be held in Earlsfield Library Hall...” when in reality, this address together with the times, the local busses, and all other useful information has been publicly available on our website for several weeks. There never was any secret, and hence nothing to “reveal”.

         6. In addition to talks on Doctrine, during the weekend we will have Mass, Confessions, Rosary and a Consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Can Mr. Thompson please explain to us how he qualifies these things as “extreme right wing” or “neo-Nazi”? Once again, this has been publicly visible on our website for the last several weeks, and a quick internet search would have brought it up.

         7. It has been, and still is, our intention to film and make subsequently available the weekend’s proceedings so that those unable to attend can benefit from them. Does Mr. Damian Thompson consider that this is what “plotting” neo-Nazis would do?


    Where these ridiculous claims have originated is not our concern, although some of us suspect that Mr. Thompson, who is himself no friend of the SSPX, has unwittingly allowed himself to be drawn into what appears to be an intra-mural SSPX dispute involving a dirty tricks campaign against Fr. Pfeiffer, Fr. Hewko, Fr.  Kramer and the organisers of our event. Be that as it may, and although Mr. Damian Thompson may now wish to distance himself and his newspaper from the scandal involved, yet the fact remains that to uncritically make public the claims of another is tantamount to making those claims one's own. Furthermore, to commit the sin of calumny one need not be the originator of a lie: it is also a very serious sin to spread calumny begun by someone else, the more so if one makes public a lie which was hitherto private.

    In short, we wish to remind Mr. Damian Thompson of his grave obligation under pain of mortal sin to make public restitution for the serious public injustice which he has committed against the reputations of those involved in the ‘Crisis in the SSPX’ conference, and to restore the good name of the event itself and of the people involved. According to Catholic Moral Theology, until and unless such restitution is made, the penitent cannot validly receive absolution.

    We await his public apology and restitution.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 22998
    • Reputation: +20139/-243
    • Gender: Male
    Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
    « Reply #1 on: May 28, 2013, 03:07:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Note how the devil's tactics are used against the Resistance here.

    Throw ridiculous accusations with no chance for the victim to reply.

    The truth is simply not with these people.

    Thank God the cause of Tradition is still being carried and fought for by the Resistance.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!


    Offline John Grace

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5521
    • Reputation: +120/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
    « Reply #2 on: May 28, 2013, 03:12:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I had actually forgotten about  Damian Thompson until that article.

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18160
    • Reputation: +8250/-634
    • Gender: Male
    Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
    « Reply #3 on: May 28, 2013, 03:16:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .


    Dear Matthew,

    Thank you for alerting the world to the presence of this development on
    The Recusant's website.  

    The war is on, and the bullets and arrows fly, but we all know, this is what
    happens in battle.  So it's nothing new.  

    One thing's for sure:  you can know that the upcoming conference is
    already having an effect because it garners a reaction from the devil
    even before it happens.  This is good news.  

    And Fr. Morgan's knee-jerk reply to the authors of The Letter of Entreaty
    is most telling as well.  It seems someone put him up to his nonsensical
    words, which don't even sound like him.  He couldn't even bother to
    address them by name when they supplied their names.  This is an act
    not of fortitude but of cowardice.

    IOW the Menzingen-denizens must be CHOMPING AT THE BIT.

    This is also good news.  

    Onward, Christian soldiers!!



    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18160
    • Reputation: +8250/-634
    • Gender: Male
    Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
    « Reply #4 on: May 28, 2013, 03:23:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .


    It seems to me that this upcoming conference is assured the
    success that the organizers and we have prayed for, because
    it is going to be the event of the decade -- so far!  

    It is with much interest and applause that we see these
    developments in progress.  


    .   .   .:applause:.    .    .:applause:.    .    .:applause:.    .    .:applause:




    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.


    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4808
    • Reputation: +5595/-453
    • Gender: Male
    Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
    « Reply #5 on: May 28, 2013, 03:34:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Max Krah's vision for the neoSSPX is that it become a pro-semitic religious order.  Therefore, anyone who disagrees with the Zionist is anti-semitic by definition.

    The SSPX-Resistance realizes Max Krah as a Zionist infiltrator, so the zio-propagandists must label them as "neo-Nazis".

    This is the same propaganda the zio-rag "SearchLight" and Blaise Compton (a.k.a Ashmolean) have touted. Maybe there is a link between them?

    "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 John Grace

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5521
    • Reputation: +120/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
    « Reply #6 on: May 28, 2013, 03:44:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Incredulous
    Max Krah's vision for the neoSSPX is that it become a pro-semitic religious order.  Therefore, anyone who disagrees with the Zionist is anti-semitic by definition.

    The SSPX-Resistance realizes Max Krah as a Zionist infiltrator, so the zio-propagandists must label them as "neo-Nazis".

    This is the same propaganda the zio-rag "SearchLight" and Blaise Compton (a.k.a Ashmolean) have touted. Maybe there is a link between them?



    I would be sorry to think Ashmo is involved. Whilst the IA team should have stepped in to vouch for him, I think he exaggerated happenings at conferences in London. I don't share his concerns. I take things on board for certain. I wouldn't dismiss a concern but there was nothing in my mind, that I regard as sinister.

    The upcoming conference 'Crisis in the SSPX' is about the 'crisis in the SSPX'.


    Offline Elsa Zardini

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 317
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
    « Reply #7 on: May 28, 2013, 03:44:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Matthew,  :dancing-banana: :applause: :smile:

    Congratulations.


    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18160
    • Reputation: +8250/-634
    • Gender: Male
    Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
    « Reply #8 on: May 28, 2013, 03:54:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .


    From the linked Recusant website page:

    Quote

    We note with astonishment that this article appears to have been written solely for the purpose of uncritically publicising some simply incredible claims, subsequently taken up by others, made against the priests of the SSPX Resistance, the Recusant, the Crisis in the SSPX Conference, and all those involved in it, all of which claims we wish here to deny, to wit:


       that the organizers of the Crisis in the SSPX conference are neo-Nazis and/or BNP members and/or in any other way "disreputable" people;

       that the conference is a “far-right” political event and/or that the event is aimed at removing Bishop Fellay from his position as Superior General of the SSPX;

       that the conference somehow involves any form of infiltration and/or takeover of the SSPX in this country;

       that Bishop Williamson will be present at this conference and/or is the driving force behind this conference and/or is somehow involved this conference;

       that the conference involves secrecy, plotting, or plots of some sort; and moreover, that the locations, address, dates, timings or other details of our conference have ever been a secret.






    This reads like a litany of self-incrimination, such that:


       the perpetrators of the Crisis in the SSPX are Zionist sympathizers and/or anti-BNP members and/or in some way disreputable people;

       this Ralliement with modernist Rome is a “far-left” political movement and/or that it's aimed at retaining Bishop Fellay in his position as Superior General of the SSPX and removing any Resistance cleric from his position;

       the Crisis involves a form of infiltration and/or takeover of the SSPX in the country of Switzerland and/or anywhere else;

       Bishop Fellay will continue to be present in this Crisis and/or is the driving force behind this Crisis and/or is somehow involved this Crisis;

       the agenda of the Menzingen-denizens involves secrecy, plotting, or plots of some sort; and moreover, that the locations, address, dates, timings, documents or other details of the Menzingen agenda have ever been a secret.


    In regards to this last item, since the Menzingen-denizens are ALL ABOUT
    PLOTTING AND SCHEMING, they naturally cannot imagine that their enemies
    would be doing anything else BUT plotting and scheming against them.



    *I'm American, so deal with it.



    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Elsa Zardini

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 317
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
    « Reply #9 on: May 28, 2013, 04:05:19 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well said Incredulous. May I add that that might pose a problem for them:

    Semita: Hijos de Sem (hebreos, arabes y sirios); familia etnográfica y lingüística que comprende los diversos pueblos que hablan o hablaron arameo, siríaco, caldeo, asirio, hebreo, arabe y himiarita (Larousse Dictionary).

    Now, “if anti-semitism is bad it’s against Truth. If something is True is not bad”.
     
    So either,

    1. Antisemitism is good and hence it can not be punishable and the 7,000,000,000 human beings (semitics included) ought to be anti-semitic (because it is good), or,

    2. Antisemitism is bad and hence it is not Truth because if it is True it can’t be bad, and hence, if not True, what is it? Now, in Spanish, two words: Verdad/Verdadero (should only apply to God, hence capitals) vs. mentira/mentiroso; and certeza/cierto vs. falso/falsedad. In English?

    If correct, and I really don’t know, isn’t that a dilemma (Mt.XXI,23-27) for the “anti-semitic” ones? Also see EC 34.

    Offline Frances

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2660
    • Reputation: +2239/-17
    • Gender: Female
    Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
    « Reply #10 on: May 28, 2013, 04:08:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • One ought to expect this sort of behavior from those with guilty consciences.  Which saint didn't endure calumny?  Since the conference will be posted for the public, let the rumor-mongers be revealed for what they are.  
     St. Francis Xavier threw a Crucifix into the sea, at once calming the waves.  Upon reaching the shore, the Crucifix was returned to him by a crab with a curious cross pattern on its shell.  


    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18160
    • Reputation: +8250/-634
    • Gender: Male
    Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
    « Reply #11 on: May 28, 2013, 04:13:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .


    Quote from: John Grace
    I had actually forgotten about  Damian Thompson until that article.



    Who's Damien Thompson? . . . . . . . . . . HAHAHAHAHAHAHA




    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18160
    • Reputation: +8250/-634
    • Gender: Male
    Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
    « Reply #12 on: May 28, 2013, 04:27:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Elsa Zardini
    Well said Incredulous. May I add that that might pose a problem for them:

    Semita: Hijos de Sem (hebreos, arabes y sirios); familia etnográfica y lingüística que comprende los diversos pueblos que hablan o hablaron arameo, siríaco, caldeo, asirio, hebreo, arabe y himiarita (Larousse Dictionary).

    Now, “if anti-semitism is bad it’s against Truth. If something is True is not bad”.
     
    So either,

    1. Antisemitism is good and hence it can not be punishable and the 7,000,000,000 human beings (semitics included) ought to be anti-semitic (because it is good), or,

    2. Antisemitism is bad and hence it is not Truth because if it is True it can’t be bad, and hence, if not True, what is it? Now, in Spanish, two words: Verdad/Verdadero (should only apply to God, hence capitals) vs. mentira/mentiroso; and certeza/cierto vs. falso/falsedad. In English?

    If correct, and I really don’t know, isn’t that a dilemma (Mt.XXI,23-27) for the “anti-semitic” ones? Also see EC 34.



    If only it were that simple, Elsa Zardini.

    The problem with so-called anti-Semitism is in what it is.  I don't think you'll
    find any dictionary that accurately defines it.  

    So I will define it for you, so then it will make sense.

    It is this: anti-Semitism is whatever the Zionist Jews don't like.  Their own
    subjective judgment defines what is and what is not anti-Semitism.  
    Therefore, something is anti-Semitic if the Zionist Jews don't like it.  
    Something is anti-Semitism if it describes something the Zionist Jews don't like.
    Someone is an anti-Semite if they are someone the Zionist Jews don't like, or
    if they do enough things that the Zionist Jews decide is too much of the kind
    of things they don't like.

    It's all about THEM.  They are the "masters" and everyone else is the goyim
    (that means 'the cattle'.)

    Go to Wal*Mart and see the rows and rows of "GOYA" food products on the
    shelf.  Coincidence?  Why choose that name?  IN YOUR FACE, GOYA.  Stand
    there for a while and try to find a Jewish person buying Goya food products.
    Watch them go down the aisle and deliberately avoid even LOOKING at them.
    A stock clerk who is Jewish probably won't want to TOUCH the Goya products.
    Check it out.

    They are the Masters and thou art cannon fodder.  Thine is not to question
    why ~ thine is but to do or die!


    Get it?  They tell you.  You listen and obey.  End of story.

    E.g., Fellayism.


    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Wessex

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1311
    • Reputation: +1951/-361
    • Gender: Male
    Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
    « Reply #13 on: May 28, 2013, 06:22:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The Recusant should not go out of its way to justify itself to these media whores. They have a scoop and want to relay it to those who gobble up stories guaranteed to be juicy. Religious themes are favourite because, morally speaking, they presuppose clergymen falling from a great height or doing something that is not politically correct. For them, once mainstream churches become politically correct, it is no longer news. And these mainstream churches are no better than newspapers in exercising malice.

    Back in 2011, the traditional group, Pro Eccleisia, organised a conference with Cardinal Burke as speaker in Methodist Central Hall, Westminster (of all places!). When someone hinted it would be critical of the hierarchy, he withdrew. His replacement was Fr. Paul Kramer and Robert Sungenis. But staff at Westminster Cathedral contacted the Methodists warning them of the speakers' 'alarmist Fatima theories' and 'anti-semitism'. The hall suddenly became unavailable.  


    Offline Matto

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5634
    • Reputation: +3069/-141
    • Gender: Male
    • Love God and Play, Do Good Work and Pray
      • Julian Moore
    Resistance enemies are cowardly scoundrels
    « Reply #14 on: May 28, 2013, 06:33:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Just what you would expect from a mainstream journalist. What else would you expect them to do except maybe just ignore it. :fryingpan:

    But don't they say there is no such thing as bad publicity.
    I Love Watching Butterflies . . ..

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16