Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: SSPX memory holes pic of District Office women in pants  (Read 15240 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: SSPX memory holes pic of District Office women in pants
« Reply #70 on: April 09, 2019, 02:52:07 PM »
Everyone should heed the wisdom of Pope Gregory XVII (aka Giuseppe Siri).

I fantasize about what things might have been like in the Church had Roncalli not stolen the papacy.
Is this ironic or do you actually think Siri was a true Pope?  :furtive:

Re: SSPX memory holes pic of District Office women in pants
« Reply #71 on: April 09, 2019, 03:14:10 PM »
Is this ironic or do you actually think Siri was a true Pope?  :furtive:
What makes it ironic ? that sounds bit out of context


Re: SSPX memory holes pic of District Office women in pants
« Reply #72 on: April 12, 2019, 04:08:36 AM »
SSPX District HQ reacts to CathInfo CCCC thread! They memory holed a picture of their entire female staff in pants. SOMEONE FEELING GUILTY?

https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/catalog-of-compromise-change-and-contradiction-in-the-sspx/msg645783/#msg645783

They actually created a new photo, which conveniently cuts off before the pants are shown. No matter, the former photo has been saved off and hundreds of people have already seen it. Why would they do this, unless they knew it was wrong? They've been CAUGHT, and now they have to backpedal to appear "still Trad" to their Trad following.

I see we have the attention of the SSPX!

CathInfo 1
SSPX 0

PS. Isn't that "new addition" at the bottom already featured, first on the left, in the original pic above? I think it's the same woman. Isn't it ridiculous to add another person months or years after the fact? But especially when the addition is just a solo shot of a staff member you already had pictured in your existing "group shot of office staff" picture.

Watch, they'll do something else with the photo now.

Hi, SSPX officials! Nice morning today, isn't it?

None of these people are Society faithful nor do they work in any of the buildings that belong to the Society. They are hired to take care of accounting only. The SSPX would be opening itself up for legal difficulties should they try to dictate to outsiders what they should or should not wear when they are not on any SSPX properties. You will keep trying to stir the pot.

Offline X

Re: SSPX memory holes pic of District Office women in pants
« Reply #73 on: April 12, 2019, 08:40:18 AM »
None of these people are Society faithful nor do they work in any of the buildings that belong to the Society. They are hired to take care of accounting only. The SSPX would be opening itself up for legal difficulties should they try to dictate to outsiders what they should or should not wear when they are not on any SSPX properties. You will keep trying to stir the pot.

Hello Pilar-

Thank you for this clarification.

At least for my own part, my motivation in including this episode within the CCCC thread is not to stir the pot, but (as with the entire thread) an attempt to make the SSPX clergy and faithful conscious of the compromises, contradictions, and changes in the SSPX which have taken place in pursuit of an accord with modernist Rome, primarily for the good of the SSPX, in the hopes of sparking a correction of these deviations.

Failing that, the secondary motivation is at least to place the facts of these changes before the faithful, in order to give them the necessary information to orient themselves.

For these reasons, I have no compunction regarding correcting or modifying anything included in the CCCC thread, and when the final product is complete, I will make note of your comment.

I will say that the ordinary reader would certainly have been justified in presuming that the women pictured within an article titled “Another Look Inside Operations of the Regina Coeli House - Assistant Priest’s and Staff” were indeed working on site at Regina Coeli house,” and I would not fault them for having made such a natural conclusion.

It would be helpful if you could pm me something from the District saying otherwise.

Also, it could be argued that the District’s willingness to publish such a picture, oblivious of the scandal which was bound to ensue in light of the absence of the necessary clarification, reflects something of a new spirit in itself, consistent with the general reorientation of the Society.

In any case, I appreciate and thank you for your intervention, since facts are what is desired.

Pax tecuм,

-X

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
Re: SSPX memory holes pic of District Office women in pants
« Reply #74 on: April 12, 2019, 09:12:39 AM »
X,

You are giving Pilar too much credit. You're being WAY too nice.

If you look at his past posts, you will see that he is an SSPX shill, who has blinded himself to the situation in the SSPX today. He's one of those typical Baby Boomers (in one post, he states that he's in his 60's) who helped build up the SSPX back in the day, and now he's too old/tired to start over. He's invested so much in the SSPX, he's not about to give it up, even if they were literally on the road to hell!

He gets emotional and upset on a regular basis; I had to moderate several of his recent posts, in which he unloaded on the forum at large. He is obviously emotionally attached to the SSPX, which he has invested much time and money in over the years (decades)? Humanly speaking, it's understandable. But he's still a shill for the SSPX.

Pilar cites NO sources or evidence for his assertion. His source is "groundless faith in the SSPX, because it just CAN'T be true! They just CAN'T be compromising!"

I posted that particular item in several Facebook groups, and I don't mean Resistance-friendly ones. Several pro-SSPX and SSPX-attending members actually recognized several of the individuals pictured and called them by name!

He's claiming this isn't even Regina Caeli House, even though that's precisely what the page on the SSPX site was about? The picture was taken from an article entitled, "Another Look Inside Operations of the Regina Coeli House - Assistant Priests & Staff". Is he insane? Is he actually claiming MOST of the people pictured were actually from some kind of outsourced, third-party accounting firm? Get real!

https://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/another-look-inside-operations-regina-coeli-house-assistant-priests-staff-45732

Who even does that? Who carries an article about their organization, and includes group pictures of third party agencies they outsource various work to?  That would be crazy. Such articles are about OUR COMPANY, about US, WHO WE ARE -- you'd never include non-employees in such an article.

Matthew