It is currently Sun Jul 23, 2017 12:40 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
 The Resistance 
Author Message
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post The Resistance
Some thoughts on this strange phenomenon.

If you're a dupe of these people, thank me for trying to aid you to see through it. If not, and instead you are a principle and source of it, then get as angry as you like as the light is shone on you.

The Resistance is very appropriately named as a pure negative. It's about negation. Negation of good, of truth, of access to Holy Mass and the sacraments. Its primary unifying principle is hatred of the SSPX, a negative factor. Its sole positive unifying factor will be discussed further below.

The Resistance is the fruit of an organised campaign by men who employ anonymity and other tactics perfected by the Communists in order to undermine trust amongst Catholics, and most especially, trust in our leaders (i.e the priests). The organised nature of this campaign can be seen in obvious aspects such as the weekly Eleison Comments of Bishop Williamson, and in the activities of various interesting characters such as the anonymous "Dumb Ox" on Ignis Ardens, who was the immediate source (sometimes badly disguised) of various key texts such as leaked letters from (most likely) Bishop Williamson. Other examples of "agents" similar, yet subordinate, to "Dumb Ox" revealed themselves by their posting of rumours and definite lies, which when refuted were never withdrawn or apologised for, but instead were serenely replaced with the latest faux-outrage. This behaviour demonstrated that the rumours were not merely sincere, if sinful, gossip, but had some other definite, malicious, purpose.

"The Resistance exists to oppose a deal."

If this were true, then the leading characters would have celebrated when the proposed agreement with "rome" fell over in May 2012. They didn't. Instead, they insisted even more stridently that the deal had in fact been signed already, or alternatively was still in the works and would appear in October 2012, or some other equally false assertion.

Like the global warming mythmakers, these fellow-travellers of all revolutionaries have now shifted their claim to the equally false assertion that the SSPX is preparing its members for a future deal. This is the equivalent of the change of slogan from "global warming" to "climate change." And in the same way, the true believers swallow the shift of language without so much as a glance at the fact that the new accusation is an intrinsic admission that the debate has been lost and that a new position, incompatible with the old one, must be taken.

"The Resistance is defending the faith."

If this were true, then several clear heresies being proposed by Resistance clerics (Fr. Pfeiffer and Bishop Williamson) would bother them. To the contrary, there's no sign that the purity of sacred doctrine has the slightest interest for these people. They swallow the preaching of outright revolution with nary a blink.

The other striking factor in the Resistance is its habit accusing the SSPX and Bishop Fellay of sins for which they themselves display the most clear propensity.

They employ anonymity and secret communications to conspire and avoid accountability. They accuse the SSPX leadership of injustice, a virtue that they repeatedly prove that they do not respect themselves. They do the same with charity, a mere word in their mouths. They lament an increase in worldliness, yet they tend to be the worldliest of traditional Catholics (e.g. the BNP types associated closely with the Resistance in England - there's nothing worldlier than that bunch of losers). They accuse the SSPX of going silent on "the Jews," but Bishop Williamson is forgiven for doing the same, no doubt because he needs to protect his remaining possibilities for international travel. They complain that private activites or communications are exposed, yet they blissfully leak every manner of document and even private conversations (no doubt inaccurately) often to the acute embarrassment of the other party to the conversation (e.g. Bishop Tissier, several times, and recently Fr. Angles). In this they have no common courtesy or even adult sensibilities, but behave like badly trained teenage girls out of range of immediate supervision. Their own clergy constantly advise the abandonment of the mass and sacraments from SSPX priests, while they look for every opportunity to accuse the SSPX of depriving them of these same goods. They purport to believe Bishop Fellay when he says something they think they can use against him, then when he says thank God we were preserved from a deal they accuse him of lying. Liars always think everybody else is lying; honest men find it hard to believe that another is not being honest.

"The SSPX is becoming a cult of personality."

The Resistance, insofar as it has any unifying positive factor, is a personality cult centred on the most charming - even charismatic - and least theological of all of the men consecrated to the episcopal state by Archbishop Lefebvre. Only one man could possibly meet this description, and all readers know immediately whom I mean. I don't even need to name him, you all recognise him in this description. Various facts illustrate this. There is the presence amongst Resistance followers of priests who disagree on vital points, of laymen who are sedeplenists and sedevacantists, of some who abandoned the mass and sacraments years ago (I can name two laymen in this situation), of those who stick fast to the SSPX chapel they have always attended, and even complain when they are no longer permitted to sing in the choir or do the bookkeeping, of dogmatic sedeplenists and dogmatic sedevacantists (each generally keeping their respective dogmatisms somewhat muted as a rule), etc. This is a house divided. So what unites it besides its devotion to this one man? And what is the driving factor in this devotion if not personality? This is manifest in the anger they have over the fact that he was expelled, despite the notorious reality that he chose to be expelled by refusing to cease publishing his Eleison Comments. They are personally offended by his expulsion, because they are personally devoted to him. He's the heart of the Resistance, and that explains why when they look at the SSPX cheefully proceeding without him, they imagine that it too must be a cult of personality. After all, it's what they know.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:54 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:57 am
Posts: 391
Location: Indiana, USA
New post Re: The Resistance
John Lane wrote:
If you're a dupe of these people, thank me for trying to aid you to see through it. If not, and instead you are a principle and source of it, then get as angry as you like as the light is shone on you.


:lol:

Maybe not appropriate, but this is what I did when I read this paragraph!


Tue Jun 03, 2014 4:05 pm
Profile

Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:13 am
Posts: 138
New post Re: The Resistance
I read the quoted passage below by QuaeriteDominum on another forum. It is very witty, and, in my view, appropriate.

Quote:
Poor panicked Bishop Williamson. Placing all of his predictions and hopes that Bishop Fellay would sell out the SSPX to a crippling modernist deal, it has now become clear to him that no avenue to a regularized SSPX exists with the current Pope, who not only mocks tradition but appears to take an active hand in suppressing it from time to time. Bishop Williamson is a single Bishop, alone in the world with no place to call canonical home. He has been jettisoned by his beloved SSPX for chronic disobedience and has become the bishop of the neo-resistance crowd which includes a worldwide group of about 2 dozen disaffected priests and a 4 monk monastery in Brazil. He could be reasonably happy in his newly established resistance motherhouse, competing in concept with Boston Kentucky. He has a nice multi-room “retreat” where folks can go and pay him homage and listen to his sermons on vague enemies and tired and irrelevant poison cake analogies. He has been hoping for a changing of the guard at the SSPX headquarters that would lead to an invitation back into some sort of relevance. But with the ascension of Francis to the Papal See, it has become clear that the SSPX will remain in the same place it has been since 1974 – without a canonical attachment to the Pope (or “the enemy” as the good Bishop describes him). With the prospect of imminent redundancy in a Catholic world where there is not much use for single independent Bishop who’s fixation is the secret dealings of the SSPX SG with Rome, it must nearly panic time when no deal is imminent or even remotely possible. What could he possibly warn of in his bi-weekly internet screed?

Well, he’s finally hit on it. The deal is that there is a secret deal to have … no deal! Perfect! Now he doesn’t have to wait for a deal that will never happen (in his lifetime) but to keep the funding at a reasonable rate, he can now talk about the non-deal as a clandestine deal to have no deal. And there is no need to discuss the non-details of the non-deal because there are no non-members of a non-committee to argue against.

This new non-deal deal will give him plenty of blog ammo because it will be a long lasting non-deal with many secret undisclosed meetings between “Rome” and Bishop Fellay and the other SSPX bishops, who are now also boogey-men-bishops for not joining forces with +Williamson (with the possible exception of +Tissier who is supposedly under house arrest in Chicago. He is the neo-resistance’s new Cardinal Siri). Good luck to the two former U.S. SSPX priests who have not been able to convince another single SSPX priest in the US to see things their way as they raise people from the dead and await the supposedly imminent news that Benedict XVI celebrated a Black Mass in 1989 and sacrificed a baby (according to Fr. Pfeiffer).

+Williamson was such a great Bishop to have fallen so far into a fantasy of conspiracies of his own making.


Wed Jun 04, 2014 12:38 pm
Profile

Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 8:13 am
Posts: 194
New post Re: The Resistance
Quote:
Well, he’s finally hit on it. The deal is that there is a secret deal to have … no deal! Perfect! Now he doesn’t have to wait for a deal that will never happen (in his lifetime) but to keep the funding at a reasonable rate, he can now talk about the non-deal as a clandestine deal to have no deal. And there is no need to discuss the non-details of the non-deal because there are no non-members of a non-committee to argue against.


Downunder this is what would be called “A Clayton’s Deal”. As the jingle would go ...”the deal you have when you are not having a deal.”

For those who are not Aussies or New Zealanders and don’t understand this, see below.

From Wiki: “Claytons is the brand name of a non-alcoholic, non-carbonated beverage coloured and packaged to resemble bottled whisky. It was the subject of a major marketing campaign in Australia and New Zealand in the 1970s and 1980s, promoting it as "the drink you have when you're not having a drink" at a time when alcohol was being targeted as a major factor in the road toll.

Though the product is largely forgotten, the phrase "Claytons" has entered the Australian and New Zealand vernacular...

_________________
On the last day, when the general examination takes place, there will be no question at all on the text of Aristotle, the aphorisms of Hippocrates, or the paragraphs of Justinian. Charity will be the whole syllabus.

- St. Robert Bellarmine


Wed Jun 04, 2014 2:05 pm
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: The Resistance
AMWills wrote:
Well, he’s finally hit on it. The deal is that there is a secret deal to have … no deal!


Oh, that's priceless!

I recall a neo-con telling me a year or so after the Iraq war, when it had become depressingly (for the neo-cons) certain that the Weapons of Mass Destruction didn't exist, this theory:

In fact the WMDs had existed, still existed, had been found by US Defence personnel, and were being destroyed without any publicity for a strategic reason. The reason was that if other rogue states realised that Iraq had the capacity to make these things without detection, then it would encourage them to proceed with their own efforts on the same lines. So the Bush Administration was taking the fall for the noblest of causes.

You couldn't make this stuff up... Hang on, yes, they can, and do!

_________________
In Christ our King.


Thu Jun 05, 2014 1:50 pm
Profile E-mail
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.