Please vote on Fr. Z poll
#21
(10-12-2012, 04:19 PM)Adeodatus01 Wrote:
(10-12-2012, 04:08 PM)Gerard Wrote: Remember, Fr. Z's job is to be an apologist for the Popes and Vatican II.  I suspect, he's not going to brook a repudiation of Vatican II even in a poll.  He is a gatherer of intel,  not a broker for trads to get the Holy Father to see things correctly. 

On what factual basis do you make this accusation?

From accumulated facts from several years of posting on Fr. Z's website and his refusal to acknowledge the complicity of the Popes in the disaster we are in.  He worked under Card. Ratzinger, has his attitude about smells and bells and thinks Vatican II is a wonderful thing. 

He foments division among the SSPX as much as he can.  I and others who had some hope that Fr. Z was an honest broker told Fr. Z to call Bishop Williamson and talk to him (before the lifting of the excommunications) and instead he simply trashed him and speculated about Williamson's "mind." 

When you put Fr. Z in a corner and lay the blame for whatever bad bishop or Cardinal is running off at the mouth or engaging in Liturgical abominations, where it properly belongs--on the Pope.  Fr. Z does everything to get rid of you. 

The only place in the world where the man at the top has no responsibility for what goes on below him is the papacy in Fr. Z's (and others) minds.  Try and state that the Pope is the boss of the bad bishops and those bishops continues shenanigans are his fault and Fr. Z will send you packing.

Relentless polls, the reading lists, the notable failure to acknowledge any specific points in which Romano Amerio or Michael Davies are correct. 

His whole operation is a data mining project to gather info on the English speaking traditionalists and to inculcate them into the "Brick by Brick" fundamental transformation of the Catholic Church into some reconstruction according to ideas in Vatican II. 
Reply
#22
(10-12-2012, 04:41 PM)Gerard Wrote:
(10-12-2012, 04:19 PM)Adeodatus01 Wrote:
(10-12-2012, 04:08 PM)Gerard Wrote: Remember, Fr. Z's job is to be an apologist for the Popes and Vatican II.  I suspect, he's not going to brook a repudiation of Vatican II even in a poll.  He is a gatherer of intel,  not a broker for trads to get the Holy Father to see things correctly. 

On what factual basis do you make this accusation?

From accumulated facts from several years of posting on Fr. Z's website and his refusal to acknowledge the complicity of the Popes in the disaster we are in.  He worked under Card. Ratzinger, has his attitude about smells and bells and thinks Vatican II is a wonderful thing. 

He foments division among the SSPX as much as he can.  I and others who had some hope that Fr. Z was an honest broker told Fr. Z to call Bishop Williamson and talk to him (before the lifting of the excommunications) and instead he simply trashed him and speculated about Williamson's "mind." 

When you put Fr. Z in a corner and lay the blame for whatever bad bishop or Cardinal is running off at the mouth or engaging in Liturgical abominations, where it properly belongs--on the Pope.  Fr. Z does everything to get rid of you. 

The only place in the world where the man at the top has no responsibility for what goes on below him is the papacy in Fr. Z's (and others) minds.  Try and state that the Pope is the boss of the bad bishops and those bishops continues shenanigans are his fault and Fr. Z will send you packing.

Relentless polls, the reading lists, the notable failure to acknowledge any specific points in which Romano Amerio or Michael Davies are correct. 

His whole operation is a data mining project to gather info on the English speaking traditionalists and to inculcate them into the "Brick by Brick" fundamental transformation of the Catholic Church into some reconstruction according to ideas in Vatican II. 

Are you paranoid or just randomly accusing someone of bad intent, involved in a conspiracy?  Crazy!
Reply
#23



No, Vatican II itself is not to blame for our problems. (52%, 755 Votes)
Yes, Vatican II is mostly to blame for problems in the Church today. (48%, 703 Votes)
Huh? There are no problems in the Church today! (0%, 6 Votes)
Total Voters: 1,464

Reply
#24
I voted “Yes, Vatican II is mostly to blame for problems in the Church today.” We are climbing, it's 48% now. Lets take it to 50%!
Reply
#25
(10-12-2012, 04:50 PM)kingofspades Wrote:
(10-12-2012, 04:41 PM)Gerard Wrote:
(10-12-2012, 04:19 PM)Adeodatus01 Wrote:
(10-12-2012, 04:08 PM)Gerard Wrote: Remember, Fr. Z's job is to be an apologist for the Popes and Vatican II.  I suspect, he's not going to brook a repudiation of Vatican II even in a poll.  He is a gatherer of intel,  not a broker for trads to get the Holy Father to see things correctly. 

On what factual basis do you make this accusation?

From accumulated facts from several years of posting on Fr. Z's website and his refusal to acknowledge the complicity of the Popes in the disaster we are in.  He worked under Card. Ratzinger, has his attitude about smells and bells and thinks Vatican II is a wonderful thing. 

He foments division among the SSPX as much as he can.  I and others who had some hope that Fr. Z was an honest broker told Fr. Z to call Bishop Williamson and talk to him (before the lifting of the excommunications) and instead he simply trashed him and speculated about Williamson's "mind." 

When you put Fr. Z in a corner and lay the blame for whatever bad bishop or Cardinal is running off at the mouth or engaging in Liturgical abominations, where it properly belongs--on the Pope.  Fr. Z does everything to get rid of you. 

The only place in the world where the man at the top has no responsibility for what goes on below him is the papacy in Fr. Z's (and others) minds.  Try and state that the Pope is the boss of the bad bishops and those bishops continues shenanigans are his fault and Fr. Z will send you packing.

Relentless polls, the reading lists, the notable failure to acknowledge any specific points in which Romano Amerio or Michael Davies are correct. 

His whole operation is a data mining project to gather info on the English speaking traditionalists and to inculcate them into the "Brick by Brick" fundamental transformation of the Catholic Church into some reconstruction according to ideas in Vatican II. 

Are you paranoid or just randomly accusing someone of bad intent, involved in a conspiracy?  Crazy!


I'll be interested in what Fr. Z does with the poll and I am waiting to see if he suppresses or alter the results.
Reply
#26
I think 48% opposition is already a repudiation of Vatican II. 
Reply
#27
(10-12-2012, 04:41 PM)Gerard Wrote:
(10-12-2012, 04:19 PM)Adeodatus01 Wrote:
(10-12-2012, 04:08 PM)Gerard Wrote: Remember, Fr. Z's job is to be an apologist for the Popes and Vatican II.  I suspect, he's not going to brook a repudiation of Vatican II even in a poll.  He is a gatherer of intel,  not a broker for trads to get the Holy Father to see things correctly. 

On what factual basis do you make this accusation?

From accumulated facts from several years of posting on Fr. Z's website and his refusal to acknowledge the complicity of the Popes in the disaster we are in.  He worked under Card. Ratzinger, has his attitude about smells and bells and thinks Vatican II is a wonderful thing. 

He foments division among the SSPX as much as he can.  I and others who had some hope that Fr. Z was an honest broker told Fr. Z to call Bishop Williamson and talk to him (before the lifting of the excommunications) and instead he simply trashed him and speculated about Williamson's "mind." 

When you put Fr. Z in a corner and lay the blame for whatever bad bishop or Cardinal is running off at the mouth or engaging in Liturgical abominations, where it properly belongs--on the Pope.  Fr. Z does everything to get rid of you. 

The only place in the world where the man at the top has no responsibility for what goes on below him is the papacy in Fr. Z's (and others) minds.  Try and state that the Pope is the boss of the bad bishops and those bishops continues shenanigans are his fault and Fr. Z will send you packing.

Relentless polls, the reading lists, the notable failure to acknowledge any specific points in which Romano Amerio or Michael Davies are correct. 

His whole operation is a data mining project to gather info on the English speaking traditionalists and to inculcate them into the "Brick by Brick" fundamental transformation of the Catholic Church into some reconstruction according to ideas in Vatican II. 

OK, so the actual facts will be in a follow up post or what?
Reply
#28
(10-12-2012, 05:56 PM)Adeodatus01 Wrote:
(10-12-2012, 04:41 PM)Gerard Wrote:
(10-12-2012, 04:19 PM)Adeodatus01 Wrote:
(10-12-2012, 04:08 PM)Gerard Wrote: Remember, Fr. Z's job is to be an apologist for the Popes and Vatican II.  I suspect, he's not going to brook a repudiation of Vatican II even in a poll.  He is a gatherer of intel,  not a broker for trads to get the Holy Father to see things correctly. 

On what factual basis do you make this accusation?

From accumulated facts from several years of posting on Fr. Z's website and his refusal to acknowledge the complicity of the Popes in the disaster we are in.  He worked under Card. Ratzinger, has his attitude about smells and bells and thinks Vatican II is a wonderful thing. 

He foments division among the SSPX as much as he can.  I and others who had some hope that Fr. Z was an honest broker told Fr. Z to call Bishop Williamson and talk to him (before the lifting of the excommunications) and instead he simply trashed him and speculated about Williamson's "mind." 

When you put Fr. Z in a corner and lay the blame for whatever bad bishop or Cardinal is running off at the mouth or engaging in Liturgical abominations, where it properly belongs--on the Pope.  Fr. Z does everything to get rid of you. 

The only place in the world where the man at the top has no responsibility for what goes on below him is the papacy in Fr. Z's (and others) minds.  Try and state that the Pope is the boss of the bad bishops and those bishops continues shenanigans are his fault and Fr. Z will send you packing.

Relentless polls, the reading lists, the notable failure to acknowledge any specific points in which Romano Amerio or Michael Davies are correct. 

His whole operation is a data mining project to gather info on the English speaking traditionalists and to inculcate them into the "Brick by Brick" fundamental transformation of the Catholic Church into some reconstruction according to ideas in Vatican II. 

OK, so the actual facts will be in a follow up post or what?

What kind of evidence would suffice?  Screenshots from wayback?  It looks clear enough to me that Gerard is speaking from direct experience.  Are people here suggesting he's making this up?
Reply
#29
(10-12-2012, 04:41 PM)Gerard Wrote:
(10-12-2012, 04:19 PM)Adeodatus01 Wrote:
(10-12-2012, 04:08 PM)Gerard Wrote: Remember, Fr. Z's job is to be an apologist for the Popes and Vatican II.  I suspect, he's not going to brook a repudiation of Vatican II even in a poll.  He is a gatherer of intel,  not a broker for trads to get the Holy Father to see things correctly. 

On what factual basis do you make this accusation?

From accumulated facts from several years of posting on Fr. Z's website and his refusal to acknowledge the complicity of the Popes in the disaster we are in.  He worked under Card. Ratzinger, has his attitude about smells and bells and thinks Vatican II is a wonderful thing. 

He foments division among the SSPX as much as he can.  I and others who had some hope that Fr. Z was an honest broker told Fr. Z to call Bishop Williamson and talk to him (before the lifting of the excommunications) and instead he simply trashed him and speculated about Williamson's "mind." 

When you put Fr. Z in a corner and lay the blame for whatever bad bishop or Cardinal is running off at the mouth or engaging in Liturgical abominations, where it properly belongs--on the Pope.  Fr. Z does everything to get rid of you. 

The only place in the world where the man at the top has no responsibility for what goes on below him is the papacy in Fr. Z's (and others) minds.  Try and state that the Pope is the boss of the bad bishops and those bishops continues shenanigans are his fault and Fr. Z will send you packing.

Relentless polls, the reading lists, the notable failure to acknowledge any specific points in which Romano Amerio or Michael Davies are correct. 

His whole operation is a data mining project to gather info on the English speaking traditionalists and to inculcate them into the "Brick by Brick" fundamental transformation of the Catholic Church into some reconstruction according to ideas in Vatican II. 

I agree with a few things you said, such as the first paragraph and the bit about Amerio and the tradtastic Welshman (Davies).  But I honestly don't think anybody, good guy or bad guy, trad or neo, would ever use Fr Z's polls for anything.  They are not scientific.  They are from a website that everyone knows mostly only trads or those with slightly tradish tendencies go to so the numbers are essentially of no use.

It would be like the government using foxnews.com or msnbc polls to help decide on policy. 
Reply
#30
(10-12-2012, 06:12 PM)per_passionem_eius Wrote: What kind of evidence would suffice?  Screenshots from wayback?  It looks clear enough to me that Gerard is speaking from direct experience.  Are people here suggesting he's making this up?
I second this. There is plenty of evidence for what Gerard is saying for those willing to admit it.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)