Friday, 29 May 2020

The "TRAD" Coverup

At the risk of losing friends, I ask this; "Where is the condemnation of the perverts in the SSPX by my "Trad" friends? 

A pervert's a pervert no matter how trad. 

Neither Michael Voris nor Christine Niles deserve the mocking and vitriol.

So called, "Trad Inc." cares more about defending the Society of St. Pius X then outing the wretched sodomites and those who covered it up. Where is the consistency as with McCarrick?

This writer has been consistent. 


Ana Milan said...

Absolutely agree. VII has deeply wounded the entire Church through Apostasy, Modernism & Marxism & the SSPX are no different. Satan is at the helm now & he intends to stay there & will until Heaven decides otherwise. These perverts must be called out no matter where they are hiding & brought before the civil courts, not Vatican ones nor their Bishop. It is beyond time to call an end to all perversion which has led to all our churches closing with no sign of ever re-opening, as most of these Bishops are homosexual & are open to contracting any disease due to their damaged immune systems resulting from their diabolical habitual sin.

Tradical said...

Do you believe that those guilty of sexual abuse were promoted to the highest levels within the SSPX?


Vox Cantoris said...

Tradical: Yes, I most certainly do. Why would think that they would not be infiltrated?

Brian said...

"Inc", be it Trad "Inc", or Novus Ordo "Inc", or Church Militant "Inc", will be reticent to come forward when a scandal happens in it's own camp. THAT does not in any way justify coverup. I think that statements on this scandal will come forward from some parts of Trad "Inc"(sic dictum). Some of the statements against Voris and Niles are disgusting. They make me cringe. Voris is using this scandal and coverup to vector his hatred of the SSPX. It is the manner in which he packaged his coverage of this scandal that has caused much of the ugly backlash against Voris and Niles.

Tradical said...

"Yes, I most certainly do. Why would [you] think that they would not be infiltrated?"

The presence of people guilty of abuse is not the intent of my question.

The question is whether or not the SSPX,knowing that a person was guilty (not just alleged) of abuse and still promoted them. This would be a key difference compared with the McCarrick like cases.

If I remember correctly, there are only about 40 (district superiors, Superior General and staff) in the actual leadership positions, which of these do you believe committed abuse and were promoted?

Last question: infested or infiltrated? There's enough speculation in the CMTV articles, let's not add to it.


Anonymous said...

Thank you Vox ! I have been fighting the pervs in the Byzantine Catholic Rites and in the SSPX and Novus Ordo.I have paid dearly in losing those whom I thought were my friends.
I also take a verbal beating on other websites. Take a look at AKA Catholic. I suggest you all click on the links provided to find out what else Mr Voris and company do NOT know or say concerning the SSPX.
Here is my response to an SSPX adherent who claims I am going to hell because I am not a member.
"What sickened me the MOST was reading about the camp counselor who taught a group of boys group sodomy in Post Falls. Yes , he finally went to jail but no thanks to the SSPX priest who was there and knew about it. On CathInfo broken hearted parents complained to posters that their children now believed themselves to be homosexuals.
So yeah Rush , the good Lord is going to send me to hell for not re joining a cult with homosexual priests. Rush, I worked for this group and it was there that I found out for myself how evil and corrupt they are."
So Society people please STOP shooting the messengers, the crimes are even worse than you can imagine especially since you join believing your children are safe and you and they are going to heaven for joining.

TLM said...

I have seen both sides of the disgusting verbiage used between those offended by CM's scandal coverage AND by CM and supporters as well! The door swings both ways on the name calling and insults. Someone asked a question as to the coverage and was called a 'Perv Sympathizer' by CM? The only thing worse would be to call someone a Pervert! I've seen name calling and insults toward CM and CN as well that are just as nasty and unacceptable, but like I said the door has been swinging both ways on the insults and nastiness. NEITHER PARTY has been acting in the least bit charitable and it has been an embarrassment to their Catholic identity!

Anonymous said...

Yes !
Trad friends , what if it was your child?

Evangeline said...

Bickering is boring and will make people tune out in short order.
It won't hold people's interest. The name-calling is embarrassing.

Parents should never, and I mean never, take their eyes off their boys, adolescents, teens, and young men, in particular. This is true at all times, and when they are around men not their father. I don't care who it is. Responsible parenthood demands parents do not leave their boy alone with any male not their father. Do not do it! Once your boy is corrupted, there is no going back. Once a man has put his hands on him, it is too late. Once he has been groomed and shown pornography, he can never forget it. You cannot make a mistake with this. Do NOT leave your boy or young man alone with any man not his father. Predators rely on the gullibility of parents, and they rely on relationship, with the parents, with the boy. They exploit it, they know how to gain trust. Don't let any man "take an interest" in your boy, especially if you are a single mother. NO to gifts, no to outings, time alone, etc. Sorry, it would be wonderful if we still lived in a world where men could try to help and take that boy or young man to try to guide him.
Those days are gone. Better a boy stay home and not learn how to flyfish rather than have a man fondling your boy and introducing him to homosexuality.
When your boy comes to you and says something happened, you must believe them, there and then. You must not pretend you do not see, that would be the pinnacle of cowardice. You must accept what they are telling you and let them know that. You must call the police. You must get counseling by a counselor who won't support the predator and make your boy question his sexuality.
Know this, your boy NEEDS TO HEAR, that just because his body responded, that does NOT make him a homosexual! This is something you must tell them, because a boy or young man can be lied to, and convinced of what is not true in this way. This can lead to a lifetime of pain.
Parents, do right by your child. Watch them at all times for changes in behavior, moodiness, crying, anger, depression, sudden interest in sexuality, sudden sexual behaviors, an unwillingness to be around a certain person. You brought that child into the world, you owe it to them to protect them, even if that brings uncomfortable situations. It is your JOB.
Never assume, ever, EVER, that your boy is "safe" with a priest, or bishop, or any man not his father.

Tom A. said...

This whole episode is the product of those who are too lenient. Bp Fellay and Fr Wegner are soft accommodationists. They were always looking for some sort of deal with modernist Rome. So it is no surprise to me that they went soft with dealing with perverts in their ranks. This does not mean that the SSPX culture is sodomite friendly or is infested with fornicators. What Mr. Voris has demonstrated is what we all knew to begin with, Bp Fellay is a weak leader who has trouble disciplining his troops. He has not as yet demonstrated a culture of perversion in the SSPX as has been demonstrated in the Novus Ordo false religion. As many know I am a sedevacantist who is very critical of the SSPX on theological grounds. It is the spirit of compromise that has made the SSPX vulnerable to the charge of abuse cover up. They sought to accommodate instead of defending the truth and what is right at all costs. Hopefully the new SSPX leadership learns these lessons from the failures of Bp Fellay and takes steps to avoid Fellay’s mistakes and weaknesses. That said Mr Voris is a self admitted sodomite and we should never forget that. I simply do not trust him one iota. If he has facts to submit fine, but as far as the assertions he makes from those facts, he has no credibility in my eyes.

Anonymous said...

Wonderful advice in your post Evangeline.We can prat and hope it reaches the eyes and brains of the parents who need to see it.

Anonymous said...

Tom , CMtv produced plenty of facts in their investigations of the SSPX in all of their articles on the subject.I suggest you take the time to read them all.
The group's theological stance has nothing to do with the perverts. Their response to the crimes do. That response has been abysmal.In Post Falls they hired a man whom they knew to be psychologically ill to be a Camp counselor for the boys.Same man tried to self circumcise while in their seminary.The boys were abused for quite some time and according to reports some still have not had much needed therapy.Allegedly the priest knew but did nothing.
The SSPX conversations are on CathInfo.

Jack said...

When company image comes before charity age justice, you're the servant of an ideology not the gospel. That Traditionalism often operates as a self-serving ideology is apparent to everyone except its most ideologically committed adherents, and it's public scandals like this that are meant to trigger people into pulling back and reassessing what is tradition and what is mere traditionalism m, what is the gospel and what is mere ideology. Some people are more eager to wage ideological and cultural warfare against the "modern world" or the "modern church" than they are to peach the gospel. St. James' epistle calls people with such bitter zeal perverse.

Peter Lamb said...

These are simply questions and I would be grateful if someone could enlighten me:

1. A satanic black mass is valid if said by a validly ordained priest. But does it confer sacramental grace?

2. A mass said "una cum," i.e. in union with an heretic is sacrilegious, but valid if said by a validly ordained priest. But does it confer sacramental grace?

Tom A. said...

I believe thats exactly what I said. CM presented many facts but then went on to assert that there is a pervert culture in the SSPX. I pointed out that from what I read on CM, it was Fellay and Wegner being too lenient and incompetent that led to the reassignments and appointment. My opinion and assertion is that Fellay was to weak in seeking accommodations with modernist Rome. This desire for accommodation is also the same weakness that led him and Wegner to be soft on the perverts. I do think there is a theological component to this scandal. Those who will compromise one iota on matters of Faith will have no problem turning a blind eye to matters of morals. As if yet, I do not think CM has made a good case that the SSPX has a pervert culture equal to the pervert culture we see in the Novus Ordo Vatican 2 sect.

Anonymous said...

Peter Lamb , I will repeat what I have said on many forums and to many priests .
No matter how you defend a Sacrament canonically or otherwise, there can be no Sacramental Grace when the cleric is an active sodomite.
WHY? Because it is impossible for them to have the Proper Intention to do what the Church does. Never ! The True Church is the Body of Christ which can never willfully commit an abomination against Our God.

Tom A. said...

Satan cannot be at the helm of the Catholic Church. He can, however, be at the helm of a false church masquerading as the Catholic Church.

Peter Lamb said...

Dear Anonymous @ 8:27 pm, Thank you for responding. You raise a very interesting point of the intention of the celebrant. We cannot read minds, so if it depended on the secret intent of the priest we would never be able to know for sure whether any sacrament was validly confected, nor not. Therefore it is taught that if you do as the Church does, then your intent is the same as that of the Church. In other words, the celebrant must either clearly state that he does not intend what the Church intends, or he must indicate his non-intent by doing some part of the liturgy differently to the way the Church performs it, in which case his non-intent will be VISIBLE to others.

No, intent does not solve my problem. The satanist says nothing and performs the Liturgy as the Church does. The sacrament is valid. Does it therefore automatically confer sacramental grace? If I am dying and there is no Catholic Priest available, should I accept viaticum by attending a black mass, or receive the Blessed Sacrament from the hands of a satanist? The question is more difficult than it seems. NO! would St. Hermenegild say. He chose death rather than accept the Blessed Sacrament from the hands of an arian heretic. Would he have accepted It from the hand of a SSPX priest who confected, or rather offered it una cum with an heretic. Is the SSPX priest not himself an heretic for doing so and for preaching false ecumenism and false ecclesiology? On the other hand, if Our Lord voluntarily allows satanic hands to touch Him so that I can receive His Blessed Self, how dare I presume to lay down conditions as St. Hermenegild did? In more practical terms, if I was dying and there is no sede Priest, should I receive SSPX viaticum?

Peter Lamb said...

P.S. ” … There are some men, in fact, whose names cannot even be mentioned by the celebrant in the “Commemoration of the Living”: “Hence were anyone to mention by name an infidel, a heretic, a schismatic, or an excommunicated person (whether a king, or a bishop, or any other), … he would certainly violate the law of the Church.” (De la Taille, The Mystery of Faith, v. II, p. 317). ”

Here is a good article on Sacramental Intention and judeo-masonic bishops.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

The Church and it's people are divided and dividing still, with coverups and scandals in every group/order/diocese... And, in the USA, the cities are burning as the same Maoists/Neo-Marxists who have destroyed the Church and Judeo-Christian society (which has also divided us, the Church), are now exercising their Bolshevik Revolution, with the help and blessings of the MSM, and most mayors and politicians in these cities. The Blessed Mother's warnings at Fatima are this real, as I type.

Anonymous said...

Vox CMtv did not report on this horror. Three priests were told about this pervert and all were transferred having nothing to do with reporting the ten years of sexual abuse the poor children underwent in Post Falls.I too read the commentary from sspx adherents on CathInfo who said one boy abused his little brother as a direct result of his own habitualized molestation. They said the boys gathered to mutually abuse each other and still another mother was shocked her victimized son now identified as homosexual.
TEN YEARS !!!! and nothing was done despite boys telling the priests.The posters added that few if any received therapy.

Anonymous said...

Okay , so Voris has no credibility reporting on the SSPX?????
The SSPX has NO credibility reporting on the post V2 Popes,especially their long time friend Borgoglio.

"Pope helped SSPX after scandal with Holocaust-denying bishop"

With the exception of THIS Blog Host, I see far too many hypocrits claiming to be holy Catholics.

Pilgrim said...

Totally agree with you Vox.