[JPaul]

I never said anything about sedevacantism as their clergy is just lethargic in this regard. That was imputed incorrectly to me. They stand equally with the others.

The thing which is paramount is the truth. The truth of today's ecclesiastical reality is not at all what it was 30 years ago, when there was still some doubt about the intentions and nature of the conciliar church and the errors and heresies of the conciliar popes who were given the benefit of doubt due to it still being an early stage of this revolution.

We no longer have to speculate or wait and see. We waited for almost fifty years and through multiple deniers of the Religion, and now we see what has been wrought upon Christ's flock.

Ignoring it and denying it does not change it, it just enables it to progress more quickly and more thoroughly.

Proposing the false left or right dichotomy to support either side alleviates them of the responsibility to search for other remedies to this subversion of Christ's Church.  None has been found but as it is,no one has bothered to look.

Anyway everyone has their guy, and they will of course rally to that personality,s position, and anyone who challenges that position will be called something or other.  That is a fatal flaw of the neo-Traditionialist status quo.

[Matthew]

Proposing the false left or right dichotomy to support either side alleviates them of the responsibility to search for other remedies to this subversion of Christ's Church.  None has been found but as it is,no one has bothered to look.

Anyway everyone has their guy, and they will of course rally to that personality,s position, and anyone who challenges that position will be called something or other.  That is a fatal flaw of the neo-Traditionialist status quo.

You really presume a lot there! What makes you so sure that no one has bothered to look? What makes you so sure that there is some magical solution just waiting for a human being to find? Your thinking is way too earthly.

I posit that everything is being done that CAN be done, under the circuмstances.

I really fail to grasp what it is you are suggesting, when you consider the circuмstances and the situation.

Do you advocate taking away the free will of Novus Ordo Catholics? Traditional Catholics? Every person in the world? This isn't feasible.

What solution do you propose for the problem of the World being so errant, liberal, and anti-Christ? Do you propose we start blowing things up right now to "take back the world"? Maybe just Hollywood? I'm serious; I want to know what you propose, since you place yourself "above it all" (i.e., above the whole Traditional Movement) which includes a dozen bishops, hundreds of priests, and tens of thousands of laity. They have all somehow overlooked something that ONLY YOU are wise enough to see...?

How are we laymen supposed to "force" the restoration of the Catholic Church? Do you propose we elect a president who will launch 59 tomahawk cruise missiles at Modernist Rome this time instead of Syria? Give me a break.

Given the problem as YOU describe it, the ONLY position you could put forward as a solution is CONCLAVIST sedevacantism. In other words, you criticize most sedevacantists because most of them are not conclavist. Most of them fail to move forward, elect a pope, and begin rebuilding the Church.

[josefamenendez]

"I must work the works of him that sent me, whilst it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work." 
John 9:4

Maybe things are folding organically for some, in spiritual aknowledgement of what's coming. 

[maxkolbe]

This is from:
http://ablf3.com/

Home  Forums >
I have paused all activity on this forum.

 The reasons for this are :

 1. I believe it is time for our bishops to speak, preferably loud but at least clear, and if we are all very quiet then maybe we can hear their voice. Unless and until they do so, this forum will remain silent.

 2. If or when our bishops find their voice, I believe it will be time for the laity to start participating in the building up of the Catholic Resistance. There are plenty of ways in which everyone can help, if only they make the effort.

 3. In the current state, this forum seems to have outlived it's usefulness. Unless the previous two points will trigger the unexpected, I will pull the plug and move on.

 Samuel

still crickets in 2025AD

[TomGubbinsKimmage]

Crickets from the forum? or from the bishops?

[Matthew]

I will chime in a few points:

1. I have nothing against ABLF3 or Samuel its owner/moderator.  I regularly participate in email exchanges with him, Sean Johnson, and others.

2. It's true that with 108 members, ABLF3 would be considered a "micro forum", but that's just a generic description, not intended as an insult.

3. Note that the ENTIRE site has been paused (resources, articles, forum, etc.) and not just the discussion forum.

4. Having said point #1, I completely disagree with Samuel on his recent action.

5. Also with all due respect to Samuel, I must point out that CathInfo's philosophy is closer to that of the United States Postal Service: "Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds."

To apply this motto more specifically to CathInfo, "Neither SSPX propaganda, nor persecution, nor lawsuits, nor threats, nor intimidation, nor politics, nor outbursts of anger followed by penitence, nor boredom, frustration or any other emotion, nor Denial-Of-Service attacks, nor technical or financial difficulties, nor obsolete software, nor personal life changes, shall shut down or cause posts to be lost on this important Traditional Catholic discussion forum." and CathInfo has lived up to this promise for close to 11 years.

6. Which of these things "got" Samuel and his ABLF3 forum? I guess "politics" and/or "boredom/tedium/frustration".

Since someone bumped this thread, I'm going to bump this post.

CathInfo just celebrated 19 years this past August. We got our 1,000,000th post a few weeks ago.

I will also add -- I don't consider Facebook, Discord, or similar options to be competition.

If you can't send links to specific posts/threads, easily search for past posts, find past posts in search engines, etc. then it's not a replacement for message boards/forums. Period.
With "social media", you can't even migrate your years of discussions to a new forum or website. You could always do that with classic "forums". You always owned the database of users/posts. Some migrations would be easier, some harder -- but it was *always* 100% possible, even if it took a custom-written script (the personal work of a software developer) to do the migration.

If the whole Internet collapsed forever, (say they required the Mark of the Beast to get online) I could *still* run CathInfo. I could serve it up over ham radio, dial-up modems, meshtastic LoRa, or something. Because it's a forum running on my own hardware. It's a database that I fully control and own. Yes it would be difficult, but at least there would be a *chance*. WIth social media, etc. you would be 100% cooked. You couldn't even walk off with the archive of posts for *yourself*, much less continue to discuss with others.

[Angelus]

Since someone bumped this thread, I'm going to bump this post.

CathInfo just celebrated 19 years this past August. We got our 1,000,000th post a few weeks ago.

I will also add -- I don't consider Facebook, Discord, or similar options to be competition.

If you can't send links to specific posts/threads, easily search for past posts, find past posts in search engines, etc. then it's not a replacement for message boards/forums. Period.
With "social media", you can't even migrate your years of discussions to a new forum or website. You could always do that with classic "forums". You always owned the database of users/posts. Some migrations would be easier, some harder -- but it was *always* 100% possible, even if it took a custom-written script (the personal work of a software developer) to do the migration.

If the whole Internet collapsed forever, (say they required the Mark of the Beast to get online) I could *still* run CathInfo. I could serve it up over ham radio, dial-up modems, meshtastic LoRa, or something. Because it's a forum running on my own hardware. It's a database that I fully control and own. Yes it would be difficult, but at least there would be a *chance*. WIth social media, etc. you would be 100% cooked. You couldn't even walk off with the archive of posts for *yourself*, much less continue to discuss with others.

[maxkolbe]

Since someone bumped this thread, I'm going to bump this post.

CathInfo just celebrated 19 years this past August. We got our 1,000,000th post a few weeks ago.

I will also add -- I don't consider Facebook, Discord, or similar options to be competition.

If you can't send links to specific posts/threads, easily search for past posts, find past posts in search engines, etc. then it's not a replacement for message boards/forums. Period.
With "social media", you can't even migrate your years of discussions to a new forum or website. You could always do that with classic "forums". You always owned the database of users/posts. Some migrations would be easier, some harder -- but it was *always* 100% possible, even if it took a custom-written script (the personal work of a software developer) to do the migration.

If the whole Internet collapsed forever, (say they required the Mark of the Beast to get online) I could *still* run CathInfo. I could serve it up over ham radio, dial-up modems, meshtastic LoRa, or something. Because it's a forum running on my own hardware. It's a database that I fully control and own. Yes it would be difficult, but at least there would be a *chance*. WIth social media, etc. you would be 100% cooked. You couldn't even walk off with the archive of posts for *yourself*, much less continue to discuss with others.

The only attitude is fidelity to the faith, once that is gone, pen & paper will do just fine between those that are still faithful. This forum has lost much of its members who had the faith intact, thank you for keeping the older stuff up.

[Matthew]

This forum has lost much of its members who had the faith intact, thank you for keeping the older stuff up.

I don't know what nonsense you're trying to imply here, but I can't control why people leave or stop posting. Some of them might not be alive anymore, they might have had catastrophic events in their personal life, or even a crisis of Faith. The number of members I've banned for being "good faithful Catholics" is exactly 0.

I've banned the same individual multiple times. Occasionally a person will refuse to follow the forum rules, coexist with other members, or refrain from attacking various cleric(s). Most banned members are banned after they blow up at me and "ѕυιcιdє" their account in that way, or they leave in a huff after having a blowout with another member. Nevermind the fact that usually the other member doesn't stay long either -- no one ever checks back in a month or a year to see if the reason they left CathInfo still even applies.

But 9 times out of 10 there is no drama; they just silently quit for whatever reason. Maybe it's burnout -- they never learned how to "take a break and come back". They feel like if they take a break, they have to be faithful/consistent and stay away forever or something. Which is insane to me. If I didn't allow myself "breaks" I could never do anything for longer than a year.

But your account isn't even 2 weeks old. What could you remember about CathInfo over the last 19 years?

How do you say "I've been banned but I'm back again" without saying "I've been banned but I'm back again"?

[Pax Vobis]

But your account isn't even 2 weeks old. What could you remember about CathInfo over the last 19 years?

How do you say "I've been banned but I'm back again" without saying "I've been banned but I'm back again"?

  Right.

[Matthew]

still crickets in 2025AD

And ANOTHER thing...


Crickets about WHAT? What are these bishops supposed to "find their voice" and speak out about? This argument was stupid in 2017, and it's even stupider today.

But let's take you seriously, just for fun. Ok, maybe "stupid" isn't the most precise term. Let's be more precise: these sort of people (usually Pfeiffer/Hewko supporters) are over-critical, with poorly thought-out positions.
The bishops and priests I know of in the Resistance are doing their best with what they have. The number of people offering support is limited. Money is limited. But most of all, the number of priests willing to work under a bishop, doing his will rather than "freelancing" on his own, is very small. Without priests under him, you can't get another SSPX-style organization built up -- even if you thought that was a prudent move.

Unless you do the "Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer" tactic of planting your flag all over the place, and convincing each group to "wait for me" and avoid ALL OTHER TRAD PRIESTS in the meantime. Because even Fr. Pfeiffer can't serve the whole world -- he tries though, pushing Home-Aloneism on his flock. And that is an evil for which I will not cease to criticize him.

Why? Because I've seen the good that the Traditional Movement has done for souls over the decades. I can't believe some people would reject that, for dogmatic OR personality reasons.
The Catholic Faith is a habit of life. It's not something you roll out once a year. It's hard to be Catholic while virtually never going to Mass.

[maxkolbe]

And ANOTHER thing...


Crickets about WHAT? What are these bishops supposed to "find their voice" and speak out about? This argument was stupid in 2017, and it's even stupider today.

But let's take you seriously, just for fun. Ok, maybe "stupid" isn't the most precise term. Let's be more precise: these sort of people (usually Pfeiffer/Hewko supporters) are over-critical, with poorly thought-out positions.
The bishops and priests I know of in the Resistance are doing their best with what they have. The number of people offering support is limited. Money is limited. But most of all, the number of priests willing to work under a bishop, doing his will rather than "freelancing" on his own, is very small. Without priests under him, you can't get another SSPX-style organization built up -- even if you thought that was a prudent move.

Unless you do the "Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer" tactic of planting your flag all over the place, and convincing each group to "wait for me" and avoid ALL OTHER TRAD PRIESTS in the meantime. Because even Fr. Pfeiffer can't serve the whole world -- he tries though, pushing Home-Aloneism on his flock. And that is an evil for which I will not cease to criticize him.

Why? Because I've seen the good that the Traditional Movement has done for souls over the decades. I can't believe some people would reject that, for dogmatic OR personality reasons.
The Catholic Faith is a habit of life. It's not something you roll out once a year. It's hard to be Catholic while virtually never going to Mass.

<BS propaganda deleted>

[Matthew]

Oh, it's YOU again. I know there are only 1 or 2 of you "Trumpeteers" -- you sign up for lots of CI accounts, disregarding things like rules, honesty and morality, but that doesn't change the fact you're a fringe minority and for good reason.
Like Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer, you believe "the ends justify the means". Those pesky things like truth, morality, honest can be set aside for "the great holy cause" of Your Team. Disgusting.

YOU WISH there were that many supporters of your fringe "true resistance" nonsense. Too bad the truth isn't with you. If it were, I'd be with you.

[Bl Alojzije Stepinac]

I don't know what nonsense you're trying to imply here, but I can't control why people leave or stop posting. Some of them might not be alive anymore, they might have had catastrophic events in their personal life, or even a crisis of Faith. The number of members I've banned for being "good faithful Catholics" is exactly 0.

I've banned the same individual multiple times. Occasionally a person will refuse to follow the forum rules, coexist with other members, or refrain from attacking various cleric(s). Most banned members are banned after they blow up at me and "ѕυιcιdє" their account in that way, or they leave in a huff after having a blowout with another member. Nevermind the fact that usually the other member doesn't stay long either -- no one ever checks back in a month or a year to see if the reason they left CathInfo still even applies.

But 9 times out of 10 there is no drama; they just silently quit for whatever reason. Maybe it's burnout -- they never learned how to "take a break and come back". They feel like if they take a break, they have to be faithful/consistent and stay away forever or something. Which is insane to me. If I didn't allow myself "breaks" I could never do anything for longer than a year.

But your account isn't even 2 weeks old. What could you remember about CathInfo over the last 19 years?

How do you say "I've been banned but I'm back again" without saying "I've been banned but I'm back again"?

I visit Cathinfo quite often, but don't login as member. I usually read new topics and posts if I have time or headlines seems interesting. Only when I need to write messages or search some older topic, then I login. I'm sure I'm not the only one who does this.

I'm grateful to you Matthew, and also other forum members who helped me personally (private messages) or by their posts. One forum member gave me a contact with one resistance priest and he recently visited my home, in a small town in Croatia. I couldn't believe but it happened.