Author Topic: Worst enemies of the American brand of resistance. (Read 25606 times)

Centroamerica · « **on:** February 21, 2014, 08:39:06 AM »

Since we all know that the American brand of the resistance, which is not confined to the US, has became extremely comfortable with the Novus Ordo sect just as my last thread showed (even allowing their immorality to enter within the flock where women attend Mass wearing immodest clothing (you've passed by a Novus Ordo parish and seen the immodest near prostitute like garb they enter in the church with we know you have), I have to ask: Who is the worst enemy for the American brand of the resistance?

Is it the sedevacantists?

Or

Is it the SSPX?

Which group does the resistance hate the most and why?

We know they are not concerned with the Novus Ordo sect, since most admit they are coming from it bringing all their confusions along with them. All of the energy and efforts are spent on slamming and spreading rumors about the SSPX in order to justify their existence in the first place and then attacking sedevacantists as if to prove that that is not who they are or to rebut any accusation of sedevacantism. Have they forgot that the original modernists (those of the Novus Ordo sect) are the actual problem?

ggreg · « **Reply #1 on:** February 21, 2014, 10:20:22 AM »

The worst enemy is the resistance themselves.

Compared to the damage they do to themselves by their nuttiness, the outside forces are insignificant.

One does not need to attack the resistance. Simply wait for Fr. Pfeiffer to say something crackers and the whole thing begins to lose credibility. That statement about Ratzinger can never be withdrawn. It is out there now and will be found by a Google search for the next 10 years.

Anything he says in the future, people will simply say, "Oh, yeah? Like that time you said Pope Benedict killed a child in a Satanic Ritual?". His credibility is done, toasted to a crisp. The only way for him to keep the loons who stay happy is to repeat the mistake and get even more crackers. Which is exactly what will happen.

Collecting a lot of hot headed people in one place is never a good idea. To be stable organisations need balance and calm heads. This is one reason that after a revolution the new dictator has to kill a lot of the original hot headed people because they keep destabilizing things.

Mama ChaCha · « **Reply #2 on:** February 21, 2014, 10:36:18 AM »

We need Archbishop Lefebvre...

1st Mansion Tenant · « **Reply #3 on:** February 21, 2014, 02:19:27 PM »

ggreg, I think you must have momentarily forgotten that Fr Pfieffer is not 'The Resistance'. He has played an integral part in it, but he is not it's sum total. I wish he hadn't mentioned the Bohemian Grove story. Not because it impossible and crazy, but because he should have had solid proof first. But, I think it is a bit soon to write off the whole resistance as doomed to failure because of it. There are many good priests in the resistance, including Fr Pfieffer, and more trickling in all the time. If we spent half the time praying for them that we do nit-picking for reasons to give them black eyes, I think we would all be in much better shape.

hollingsworth · « **Reply #4 on:** February 21, 2014, 02:42:53 PM »

I think ggreg was against the "resistance" long before Fr. Pheiffer's insinuations were ever made. I think he has been basically anti-Williamson and pro-neosspx from the beginning. In other words, if memory serves me correctly, ggreg never stood in opposition to Fellay & Co. on any level. If I'm wrong, ggreg, please correct my earlier perceptions. I encountered you on IA from time to time, and these are the impressions I came away with from your extensive commentary there. Or am I getting my "gregs" mixed up?