Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: TJD on May 24, 2018, 02:21:51 PM
-
The SSPX has changed in 101+ ways!
A new book by SEAN JOHNSON
The SSPX is heading for a full merger with the Modernist Rome of Vatican II, and it's already most of the way there -- formal deal or no! The facts don't lie. Countless changes, compromises, and contradictions have already occurred within the SSPX -- past tense. This isn't about what the SSPX might do; it's about what THE SSPX HAS DONE over the past 7 years. Here is a book (almost 400 pages) detailing the docuŠ¼ented, hard evidence to prove this assertion. This book will convince you that the SSPX has taken a hard U-turn back to Conciliar Modernist Rome!
https://www.chantcd.com/index.php/As-We-Are-101-Compromises-Changes-Contradictions-of-an-SSPX (https://www.chantcd.com/index.php/As-We-Are-101-Compromises-Changes-Contradictions-of-an-SSPX)
-
Excellent!
You have shown real charity in this post. Bravo!
You may disagree with him but at least he is trying to do something. What have you done? Do you feel good about yourself for attacking a man who may be frustrated with the state of things?
-
Excellent!
You have shown real charity in this post. Bravo!
You may disagree with him but at least he is trying to do something. What have you done? Do you feel good about yourself for attacking a man who may be frustrated with the state of things?
What are you talking about mate?
It's not charity to love foolishness.
Sean spoiled every good thing he wrote by his over the top behaviour. He was a drama queen. Long may he stay quiet.
-
A guy signs up as "Rachel" just to take a swipe at Mr. Johnson?
That's a good one.
It reminds me of Bruce Jenner having a sex change, so he could better "express himself".
-
Ok, guys, that's enough. Sean Johnson is still very much the dogmatic sedeplenist we all know and love.
Please don't tell falsehoods, or start rumors.
I'd say don't talk about him in his absence, but I never banned him or anything; I think he's just "gone" because there are currently greater than 0 individuals on CI who are not dogmatic sedeplenist.
Sean advocates banning all sedevacantists, sedeprivationists, sedeimpoundists (etc.), anyone with any doubts whatsoever about the Pope, and anyone pushing for any level of tolerance for these groups.
He also told me a couple days ago (by e-mail) that he considers sedevacantism more dangerous than Modernism, for Traditional Catholics.
Needless to say, I am not with him on either of those beliefs.
-
Thanks Matthew. That sounds a lot more like the Sean I know and love. I think the Tradosphere would lose an essential part of itself if Sean Johnson relaxed his ideas about sede-anythingism. :)
-
Ok, guys, that's enough. Sean Johnson is still very much the dogmatic sedeplenist we all know and love.
Please don't tell falsehoods, or start rumors.
Well, the part about him being sedevacantist/sedeprivationist was a joke (sarcasm) because we know how much he is against it.
Maybe I should have appended the appropriate emoticon :).
-
Thanks Matthew. That sounds a lot more like the Sean I know and love. I think the Tradosphere would lose an essential part of itself if Sean Johnson relaxed his ideas about sede-anythingism. :)
Is that a joke?
It is a hallmark of liberalism to be attacking sedevacantists more than modernism.
As Matthew mentioned earlier, he considers sedvacantism more dangerous than modernism. That is very revealing.
It is revealing because the reason liberals hate sedevacantists is because even though they are wrong on the pope question, they see things in black and white when it comes to the crisis in the church. They know heresy from Truth. Liberals always equivocate when it comes to heresy and make excuses.
That is why I get on 10 times better with a sedevacantist than a liberal. Though they are annoying after a while, and I would rather neither at the end of the day.
So if Sean got his priorities straight then he would be useful. That, and becoming flat earth....
-
SodalitiumPianum will be missed.
-
Is that a joke?
It is a hallmark of liberalism to be attacking sedevacantists more than modernism.
As Matthew mentioned earlier, he considers sedvacantism more dangerous than modernism. That is very revealing.
It is revealing because the reason liberals hate sedevacantists is because even though they are wrong on the pope question, they see things in black and white when it comes to the crisis in the church. They know heresy from Truth. Liberals always equivocate when it comes to heresy and make excuses.
That is why I get on 10 times better with a sedevacantist than a liberal. Though they are annoying after a while, and I would rather neither at the end of the day.
So if Sean got his priorities straight then he would be useful. That, and becoming flat earth....
I think what sean probably means is that the vacantist movement is worse than the ecclesia dei movement. I don't think he means the vacantist movement is worse than the novus ordo.
-
Well, the part about him being sedevacantist/sedeprivationist was a joke (sarcasm) because we know how much he is against it.
Maybe I should have appended the appropriate emoticon :).
Well, my post (which was deleted, so you might have missed it) used the joker emoticon, so apparently the appropriate emoticon doesn't matter.
-
Is that a joke?
I sure hope so.
-
He also told me a couple days ago (by e-mail) that he considers sedevacantism more dangerous than Modernism, for Traditional Catholics.
Hopelessly indoctrinated into R&R SSPXism. Holding up the sedevacantist boogey man while running away from that which has actually crippled the Catholic Church. The only people that he hurts with is on again off again activities is those who actually agree with him for the most part. He also shows the weakness of that doctrinal position by not demonstrating it and explaining how it is not contradictory to itself and the Magisterium of the Church.
He fails to understand that it has ceased to make logical sense to true Traditional Catholics as there has been a sea change since the Archbishop was alive. There is now no doubt as to who and what occupies Rome.
It is certainly not sedevacantism that has destroyed the Church in the past fifty years.
-
I think what sean probably means is that the vacantist movement is worse than the ecclesia dei movement. I don't think he means the vacantist movement is worse than the novus ordo.
No matter what he means, he doesn't consider sedevacantists Catholic, is an anti-sede and a dogmatic sedeplenist. One less of one of these "trads" in the Tradosphere? Sounds good to me.
-
Sean has a wife and young children, so maybe he's just taking a break til he can catch his breath. I will miss visiting his site. I wish him luck in whatever new endeavors he undertakes; and will continue to say a rosary for he and his grandma when he crosses my mind.
-
Hopelessly indoctrinated into R&R SSPXism. Holding up the sedevacantist boogey man while running away from that which has actually crippled the Catholic Church. The only people that he hurts with is on again off again activities is those who actually agree with him for the most part. He also shows the weakness of that doctrinal position by not demonstrating it and explaining how it is not contradictory to itself and the Magisterium of the Church.
He fails to understand that it has ceased to make logical sense to true Traditional Catholics as there has been a sea change since the Archbishop was alive. There is now no doubt as to who and what occupies Rome.
It is certainly not sedevacantism that has destroyed the Church in the past fifty years.
Indeed, there is always a problem when one determines the conclusion of any argument before actually considering the evidence. When one does this he becomes blind to any evidence that does not fit into his pre-conceived conclusions.
-
Well, my post (which was deleted, so you might have missed it) used the joker emoticon, so apparently the appropriate emoticon doesn't matter.
Yeah, I noticed your emoticon and you were obviously joking in the same vein as I was. Nobody in their right mind would any more believe that SeanJohnson had embraced sedevacantism than that Truth is Eternal had converted to "ball/Baal" worship.
-
Indeed, there is always a problem when one determines the conclusion of any argument before actually considering the evidence. When one does this he becomes blind to any evidence that does not fit into his pre-conceived conclusions.
Agreed. People can be hindered from the truth by their own confirmation bias. I have become keenly aware of this myself over the years and will listen with an open mind to pretty much anything (except heresy and doctrinal error). So I get attacked by both sides of many issues because I will accept arguments from both sides as valid, and reject others as invalid. Even though I initially did not believe in flat earth and thought it was preposterous, I made a point of looking at the evidence they presented ... while rejecting the emotional rhetoric and ad hominems on both sides.