Priest, bishop clash in sex, theft scandals

THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^ | 11/12/2002 | George Archibald

[Zviadist]

You have really hit the bottom. Traditionalists are all Nazis! This is your argument??!?? You are a shameless bottom-dweller for resorting to this disgusting argument. You are on par with sleazebags like Cornwell and Goldhagen.

With this post your true, visceral hatred for the Roman Catholic Church is completely unmasked! You can no longer hide behind the lie that you are a Catholic. You seethe with hatred for the Church. At least my protestant friends here are honest: they don't follow my Church and I have no problem with that when they don't attack it. But you pretend to be a Catholic so as to eat at the Body from within. That is despicable. You are shamed for this post!!! I will no longer address any comments to you.

[Zviadist]

If that is too much trouble, stay with SSPX and face the eternal consequences.

What consequences? There is no sanction on Catholics for assisting at an SSPX Mass. Ever heard of Honolulu? Do you want to continue spread lies, or will you bother with the truth?

[Land of the Irish]

I'll read your silly post as soon as I get off my prayer rug, kiss the Koran and give praise to almighty Allah; i.e., a cold day in Hell.

[ultima ratio]

You are getting funny, posting Vichy government accusations. Or else desperate. What's next? Another charge of racism or anti-semitism? First of all, where's your proof? Second of all, how is this relevant to matters of faith? I acknowledge the Pope had been a good Polish patriot during the war--but he has still been colossally wrong to punish traditionalists. In other words, this is another smear and red herring at best.

That said, it should be noted the good Archbishop spent his life in the African missions, laboring in the vineyards, living in poverty. Do you really think he was deeply involved in supporting Hitler? There were many reasons Frenchmen supported the Vichy government besides sympathy for the Nazi cause--not least of which was a desire to spare the nation horrific destruction. Do you understand how silly these smears are getting on your part? You sound like Democrats straining to prove Bush was secretly hand-in-glove with Enron because the corporation once contributed to a political campaign fund. Give me a break.

The Archbishop was in good standing up until around 1970. He had been superior general of the Holy Ghost Fathers and had worked on the schema for Vatican II. In other words, none of this stuff about the Vichy government or anything else bothered any of you Novus Ordo types--UNTIL he began defending traditional Catholicism. Then all of a sudden his past is raked over for something--anything--that might possibly discredit him and lend credence to the charge that his motives were anything but honorable.

By participating in this transparent charade, you dishonor yourself.

[Zviadist]

Then all of a sudden his past is raked over for something--anything--that might possibly discredit him

And this tactic exposes a Leninist soul.

[Catholicguy]

<> Zviadist, you are your buddies like to slam those in union with the Pope. I thought you and your ilk would like to read a little bit about your side:)<>

You have really hit the bottom. Traditionalists are all Nazis! This is your argument??!??

<> No. This isn't an "arguement." Please read my forward to that post. It appeared in the original post and I copied it here in this post also. You are not a poster child for reading comprehension:) <>

You are a shameless bottom-dweller for resorting to this disgusting argument. You are on par with sleazebags like Cornwell and Goldhagen.

<> That it? I also have fillings, I am no longer svelte, I can't drink as much wine as I used to...<>

With this post your true, visceral hatred for the Roman Catholic Church is completely unmasked! You can no longer hide behind the lie that you are a Catholic. You seethe with hatred for the Church. <>

That it? No charges of halitosis or psoriasis?<>

At least my protestant friends here are honest: they don't follow my Church and I have no problem with that when they don't attack it. But you pretend to be a Catholic so as to eat at the Body from within. That is despicable. You are shamed for this post!!! I will no longer address any comments to you

<> I am deeply wounded<>

[Catholicguy]

<>Zv, your buddy ultima concedes the facts.....does that expose a Trotskyite soul?<>

[Catholicguy]

<> I think you better prepare yourself to receive a Bulla from Zvdiast. You conceeded the facts re Vichy. I suspect you will be excommunicated from the excommunicated. Now, I am not sure how this works. I'd prolly have to go back and research "Mad" magazine's "Spy vs Spy" to reconnect with the thought process:)<>

[Audit_Jesse]

Please inform me if you find any way to help Fr. Haley. I'd love to be a part of that. Thanks!

[ultima ratio]

I conceded the facts about Lefebvre and the Vichy government? When did I do that? You are dreaming. I asked for proof--but added that even IF it was true--so what? The key word is IF. I'm still waiting for the evidence--not that it matters. Lefebvre was a religious and archbishop in good standing till he resisted being turned into a Novus Ordo Protestant. Rome punished him by looking for something to pin on him. Ultimately they claimed he was schismatic--though he started no new Church, appropriated no other bishop's jurisdiction (as is routinely done in China with not a peep out of Rome), and preached no new doctrines. But the Novus Ordo crowd doesn't let facts stop them. They simply re-define words and make them mean what they want them to mean. The Pope, as usual, goes along with any cockamamie attack on the traditional Church, regardless of the obvious damage done to practicing Catholics. He has this typically naive liberal vision of a "Civilization of Love", you see, where the lions lay down with the lambs and mullahs are as agreeable as the Daughters of Charity. In any case, read my post again. It in no way agrees with your attempt to SMEAR a good man.

[Catholicguy]

<> Mao, Stalin, Hitler is the order<>

[Catholicguy]

<> I wasn't smearing anyone. I suggest you read what I posted, again. You and your ilk have a difficult time with reading comprehension<>

[Catholicguy]

. I conceded the facts about Lefebvre and the Vichy government? When did I do that?

<> Right here<>

The Archbishop was in good standing up until around 1970. He had been superior general of the Holy Ghost Fathers and had worked on the schema for Vatican II. In other words, none of this stuff about the Vichy government or anything else bothered any of you Novus Ordo types--UNTIL he began defending traditional Catholicism. Then all of a sudden his past is raked over for something--anything--that might possibly discredit him and lend credence to the charge that his motives were anything but honorable.

[ultima ratio]

You call that a concession? LOL. What it demonstrates is more desperation on your part. I said "none of this Vichy stuff" meaning "none of this crap," and challenged you to prove it, which you haven't done. The use of smear tactics is very Clintonian and has nothing to do with reality but everything to do with a need to discredit the SSPX. The end result, though, is that opponents of tradition discredit themselves--as if they had not already done that a thousand times over since the close of the Council.

[Catholicguy]

You call that a concession?

<> Yes :)<>

[ultima ratio]

I stand by the word "smear." The very word "Vichy" connotates Nazi-collaboration--the bad guys. You counter this with the list of those who supported the "Resistance"--obviously the good guys.