From: firstname.lastname@example.org (To: Dombedos@aol.com)
Be careful, you'll give my friend Griff a swelled head. :-)
In JMJ, Steven
From: Brian Snider (email@example.com).
I wish more Catholics could understand that you and the traditionalists are right.
If the Catholic Church has ever been right, then you are truly carrying forward what they have always believed and taught. Of course, that means that you have every right to burn me at the stake for being a baptist (anabaptist) but at least we would be standing where we've always stood .....baptists as willing sheep to the slaughter, and Romanists as the murderers they have always been. Not as supposed friends because of phony declarations and ecumenism.
Hoping you will see that the gospel has never and will never be found under the lies of the Romanists, Yours, Brian Snider
From: [Author of "the Gross Website"].
Sean O'L just informed me that I made your enemies list. I'm honored. Thanks for the plug.
All the best,
Answer: Thank you for pointing out the breach in my site security; that page was never meant to be available to the public, and has been deleted. It is horrifying to see anyone be proud to be counted with the "fearful, and unbelieving, and abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all [other] liars" (Revelation 21:8).
Follow up to this has been rather interesting. Some may be wondering what I meant by a page not "available to the public," as if I had something secret. First of all, it is very common that internet sites contain pages begun and abandoned, or used for a while and then abandoned, but not actually deleted, just not pointed to by any links from the main page or any other page that is linked, directly or indirectly, from the main page.
In the earlier days of the internet, search engines would only follow general topics to the main pages of sites dealing with the topic in general, and so any such "orphan" pages not linked from anywhere were considered safe and private. That is no longer the case. With the advance in search engine capability, for example that of google.com, those old search engines have given way to new search engines which read every text file on the net without any regard for the site's link structure. Ergo, such "orphan" pages have become almost every bit as accessible as the linked public pages.
The so-called "enemies list" was one of those pages, this one never intended to be available to the public, and only "out there" to enable me to do that kind of research from any computer on the net. As a qualified Catholic apologist, I most certainly have the right and duty to scan any known anti-Catholic sites to see if any of these villains can come up with any new arguments against the Faith, and which I may not have yet had a chance to address either directly or indirectly. Since the page was only meant for my own eyes, I made no distinction on it between those who are culpably opposed to the traditional Catholic Faith or its clergy, and those who were only accidently and incidently passing along malicious gossip. Nor were any explanatory notes included, as I knew the nature and purpose of each. Even the order in which they were listed is merely (and only roughly) alphabetical. But I flatly and catagorically refuse to give out the URL (or name, address, phone, email address, or any other contact information) of any anti-Catholics I am aware of, on account of the spiritual danger they may pose to the unwary. It would be a mortal sin to point any but the most clearly qualified experts to such sites, owing to the possible spiritual consequences to the naive, the inexperienced, and the unwary, and the crime it would be for me to aid and abet those villains by the pointing of any naive and unwary persons to their sites or to them.
That particular page had long been so non-descript that any search which could bring it up at all would have listed tens of thousands of other pages first, so the chances of it being discovered were what I considered sufficiently slim. When I added yet another site to it, the name of that site was so unusual that a google search on that name would list that page within the first half dozen of not all that many more references to that name. For that reason, I surmised that the "Sean O'L" who had found it had simply done a google search on that name, and there it was! Having found it "Sean O'L," in a typical gossipy fashion informed the sites listed on it of this page, and one of them, as seen above informed me.
Upon this frightful news, I promptly deleted the page, but still needing it as a reference tool I soon reinstated it, but in a different location which the search engines automatically ignore. This, it seemed to me, was reasonably obscure and safe. An expert hacker could readily get at it (I didn't encrypt it or anything like that), but really, if some hacker actually went through all the time and effort needed to see it, the information I have in it wouldn't be really worth it to such a hacker as it is not difficult to find the sites listed through independent means over which I have no control. That, one would think, should be enough.
Oh, wait a minute! Now I get it. They weren't looking for how to contact those bastards, they just wanted to know "who's on my list." So of course it wasn't enough. One of the listed villains (not the one who informed me) decided to add a whole big page dedicated to attacking me personally, on account of the fact that I have successfully refuted each and every contention and allegation that villain had made while on an email list I also participated in, back in the first part of 2000. Learning of this "enemies list" was precisely the tool he thought he found that he could use to make me seem to be just like him. In his attempt to "prove" that I would ever preach an "enemies list" to the world (like some person full of hate would do, and such as that villain has done), he even featured a pointer to this page.
To my amazement, he had actually found the far better hidden place I had moved it to, and the page would actually come up when his link to it was clicked. This to me was as intolerable as having it once so readily available through legitimate means (a search engine). That villain had to have found it (so it seemed to me) by some fairly intensive hacking into my site, a clear violation of my privacy, and a punishable offense, legally speaking (in other words, really a crime).
I tried changing the name a couple times, but in mighty short order he found it again and again. I began to feel that I was up against a major league hacker, and that concealing it might require that I encrypt it and put a password on it, and bury it further by various other technical means, much of which I have since done. But the old adage holds true that "any work of skilled stage magic can look frightfully impressive, until one finds out how it is done."
When I moved it again, I added a new page to come up when the previous address was used, which merely stated, "Ah Hah! Caught you poking your nose into my private stuff, have I? How Dare You!" While the villain in question does not care whose privacy he violates, anyone using his site to try and find this page on mine would get a suitable warning regarding the impropriety of his link. The response he made surprized me, I must admit. In addition to updating his pointer to the real file so quickly, he added a footnote to his page against me explaining the details of his hacking, that is to say, how he did it. It turns out that when one goes from one page to another, the second has a record of where it came from, and some internet providers (including his) make lists of such things readily available to their customers. He had but to scan that list for any access from my site and the full and correct and current address of the referring page would be there, enabling him to see it with very little effort. Duh!
So that's how he did it! Perhaps he wrote that in a vain attempt to cover his own posterior regions and pretend to some right to invade my private space. Well, it won't be so easy for him anymore. I have moved it again, and this time to a place where such a back reference cannot point, but instead points to my "How dare You" page. If he manages to hack his way into it where it is now, I truly can press charges.
In any case he has written (not to me, as he knows he cannot face me, but on his own page) a huge diatribe against me, most of which clearly shows his hate and prejudice against me, but perhaps some few comments might merit some limited response, and it is the policy for this file to present the sorts of hate mail (and other hate) thrown at me for defending the Church:
ENEMIES OF THE FAITH
According to the "Gospel" of Griff "the grid" Ruby
Former Jehovah's Witness, Griff Ruby, who likes to be called "the grid", (and who recently admitted in his "About the Author" webfile to "Having committed intellectual, moral, and spiritual suicide, and having taken leave of my senses...") recently posted a page to his website (link)Enemies of the Faith(close link) - Grif has changed the URL twice now! wherein he named as enemies the following web sites, web files, and the only "named" person, [name deleted]...
The grid was merely my internet carrier. The Grid folded up and I have since transferred to another internet carrier. But seriously, seeing how he has taken a quote out of context (it really applies to him now, it only applied to me for a brief period over 20 years ago, and that was before I really knew anything of the real Christ) is a clear demonstration of his bad faith. The diatribe continues with long extracts of some arguments he lost on the list, of course selectively quoting only those places where he could engage the support of a few others, some of whom are simply immature in the Faith and others who lean dangerously towards a regrettable cultic degree of devotion to the SSPX (as if it were the whole Church, and not merely a portion of it as it actually claims to be and actually is), and one of whom was a Feeneyite. One member of the list had actually faulted me for being a "trad-ecumenist" and then went on in long winded terms to explain himself as being one too, at least in everything but name. Really silly stuff to be "accusing" me of.
Griff Ruby classifies the pope, bishops and clergy, and laity in communion with them as being "Enemies" of the "Faith"
This is simply an out and out lie, as copious references throughout my site make abundantly clear. I have no quarrel whatsoever with the Indult and obviously pray for its "generous and wide" application just as John Paul II himself requested. I congratulate him for making that "request" and pray that more of what remains of his career as leader of the Vatican institution may savor of that generosity.
for [name deleted - "Pride"] (and the other named persons) would agree that they do possess a faith which is different from that professed by [Griff] Ruby.
So there it is! Since, (as all would readily acknowlege) my Faith is simply that of every Canonized Saint of the Church, nothing more, nothing less, nothing other, such a shocking admission on their part constitutes a clear and public admission that they are not Catholics. And so indeed we find, for my First Appendix is chock-full of official Papal and Magisterial Teachings of the Church which these types once learned, understood, and abided by, but then subsequently repudiated. Unlike those they have deceived, they cannot plead ignorance. Again, look at that last part. They said: "[the villians] do possess a faith which is different from that professed by [me]," instead of saying "[I] possess a faith different from [them]." Even their turn of phrase carries with it an unconcious but implicit admission that mine is the standard and theirs, something which deviates from it. Any sincere Catholic-at-heart who has had the misfortune to stumble across the writings of such like these would do well to reflect upon the seriousness and dangers of relying on the advice and information of such self-professed ex-Catholics.
He really began to hate me when I proved that Abp. Lefebvre had not voted for the last two Vatican II documents, and when I proved that there was absolutely no substance to the rumor that Padre Pio had ever faulted Lefebvre or made any predictions regarding him. He goes on to fault me for some indecorous turn of phrase I once used towards some particularly nasty accuser of holy Catholic priests, but really, even some canonized saints have been known to say indecorous things about evil and about those who willingly and knowingly advance its cause. When he lost the debate he had with me about those two things regarding the Archbishop and many others, his own language became just as indecorous, and that on an ongoing basis as opposed to my one time use of indecorous language, and the moderator of that email list eventually "moderated" him out.
This whole sordid topic of these spawn of Hell and their vituperative frothings at the mouth has been for me a remarkably unpleasant one, as I far prefer to focus on the positive, the warm, and the friendly, and the good news there is of the Resurrection of Christ and of His Church. Really, these "enemies" of the Church will eventually end up in the dustbin of history (to say nothing of the "dustbin" of Eternity, unless they repent) along with all the rest of those who have opposed the Church and the Magisterium and the Holy Fathers. It is reasonable to expect that other villains will one day arise to take their place and the fundamental war of good versus evil will continue. However, the real enemies are not those present villains nor the villains yet to come, but the sins that beset mankind, and each of us individually. If it weren't for the nature of besetting sin, those villains who oppose the Church, and now one of whom opposes me personally as though I somehow personified the Church for him, would get no attention except that of qualified psychological experts. Since those with a taste for reading about evil and scandalous people might enjoy all this, I have prepared an essay which deals not only with the human villains (and some "useful idiots"), but with the REAL Enemies of our Faith, the sins of Pride, Lust, Envy, Coveteousness, Anger, Sloth, and Gluttony, and especially the particular ways these temptations are used against traditional Catholics. Unlike human enemies who are soon gathered and burned (cf Matthew 13:30), sin itself will be with us until the end of this world, ever trying to worm its way into the lives of Catholics.
I will continue to scan for any new arguments against the true Faith and Church, but in recent years very few have been forthcoming, and so far, every one of them is successfully refuted somewhere on my site, some directly and others indirectly. As new issues come up I will address them too, but merely as anonymous issues or questions that need answers. But as for these pharisaical spawn of Hell themselves and their spiritual progeny, the useful idiots who repeat their vacuous accusations, these paragraphs here and that essay represent my last word on that unpleasant subject, as this has already been far more attention than they deserve.
From: [name deleted - "Lust"]
Dear Mr. Griff Ruby:
I have read http://www.the-pope.com/there.htm your calumny and definite libel wherein you not-so-subtly associate and reduce my good name and theological convictions to mortal sins. You seem to have moved from polemics to a (nevertheless legally culpable) psychosis. Thinking you hide yourself behind not using my Christian name will not help you.
You are requested to remove such garbage or be prepared to answer and pay for them in the proper forum. otherwise we will be doing an asset search on you as well as your web provider.
Response (to [name deleted - "Lust"])
Am I to contrue this as some sort of threat? If you plan to try and exploit the arm of the law to prevent me from telling the truth about you, be prepared for a countersuit against you and your site for the "calumny and definite libel" it contains against the SSPX corporately, several of its priests and bishops individually, Michael Matt, the Remnant, several other writers who are published therein, the "In the Spirit of Chartres" committee, Fr. Morrison, and by implication against all other Catholics of integrity such as myself. The file shall not be removed until such time (if any) that some court should order it.
From: [name deleted - "Lust"]
You are blocked now from our email servers, effective immediately. So don't trouble yourself. Our effectiveness against your "invisible church" sect (once a Jehovah's Witness always one, no?) is shown by the perverse and psychotic extremes of your fantasies, imagination, and lies.
Your site is of no consequence, little man. [name deleted - "Envy"] forwarded your "clairvoyant" nonsense, hearsay, and lies to us and I have asked him not to again. I have also urged him to consider discarding any reference to you at his site since it only makes you look worthy of it and feeds your well known desire for attention. We have never visited your kooky site and never will. My wife was amused with your accusations.
We shall give "The Grid" no publicity or forum to feed your ego at [our website], to be sure. You are known as a kooky guy and shall remain there until you turn to the Church and be converted. Then you shall ask to be forgiven your lies.
Commentary on above: I am happy to be counted as "small," or as a "little man" in the Kingdom of this world. It is the price of bearing witness of our Lord Jesus Christ before men. Really, I just have to marvel at the carefree way these villains can speak ill of others and then get so up in arms when it comes home to roost. They dish it out easily enough, but they can't take it themselves. I don't need their attention, and am frankly grateful to be without it. Interesting to note, "Envy" has not "discard[ed] any reference to [me] at his site" but merely transferred it to another place in his site's link structure. I knew "Envy" would be like that; I just knew it! It proves me right, I had him pegged: the (relatively) sagely advice given by "Lust" to "Envy," as he mentioned above, gets ignored by "Envy."
From: Mark Trieger
After looking at your web site, I have to ask what type of Catholic are you?
I know you claim to be a Traditinalist, but when you support those who have seperated themselves from the Church ie Sede Vacanists and the SSPX, one must suspect that you yourself have left the Church. As the saying goes, birds of the feather flock together. You can argue till you are blue in the face that Sedes and the SSPX are in union with the Church, but both they are in Schism. The Sede's reject the Pope John Paul II and the validilty of Vatican II. They are just like the Schmatic Eastern Orthodox. The SSPX was founded on a Schismatic act as the Pope said and the Bishops have admitted that they are excommunicated from Rome and have admitted that they are not in true union with Rome.
Again, how can a Traditional Catholic support Schismatic groups and still call themselves loyal to the Church? I have seen this many times with Tradtionalists as they follow Schismatic groups out of the Church as with Conservative Catholics who leave the Church supporting Modernist groups.
Response to above: Point one: Don't call me Father, as I am not ordained clergy, nor have I ever claimed to be.
Point two: I am simply an authentic Catholic, totally attached to the authentic universal and historic Magisterium of the Church, adhering to all of it.
Point three: "birds of a feather..." Would that that were true. The Sede, SSPX, and Indult clergy are indeed all "of the same feather," since they all belong to the same One true Holy and Catholic and Apostolic Church, where the Fr. Bozo's of the world do not. In all Divine justice, they cannot be separated from each other, nor can their own cantankerousness lawfully separate them from each other. By trying to pit one valid and lawful clergyman against another, it is YOU who attempt to sow division in the Church, a truly schismatic act.
Mark Trieger's Response:
Point ONE: Sorry for calling you Father. [Apology accepted]
Point Two: Ok, you say you are a authentic Catholic, but do up submit yourself to the Living Magistrium today on issues of faith and morals? Do you believe that John Paul II is the current Pope? [Living Magisterium: Yes; Current Pope: No.]
Point three, The Sede, and SSPX do not belong to the One True Holy Catholic Church. The Sedes have left the Church by rejecting Vatican II and reject all the Popes from John XXIII to JP II. They admit that the do not submit to the authority of the current Pope, John Paul II. They are in Schism ie outside the Church. The SSPX are not apart of the Church since the ordinations. They had the chance to be reconciled to the Church, but the majory of the Bishops rejected it due to the Sede position found within the SSPX. Both groups are like the Eastern Orthodox Churches ... in Schism. ["Sede position found within"? That sure would be news to the SSPX!]
Point Four: The Indult Clergy are a part of the Church. Many of the Indult clergy came from the Schismatic SSPX which they do mention that the SSPX is not within the bosom of the Church. [They're not allowed to tell the truth, a very high and unhappy price for trying to bring a little bit of Catholicism (which they obviously got from the SSPX) into the present Vatican institution.]
Point Five: A Liturgy of the Mass does not unit a person to the Church. It is baptism, faith, morals, and submitting themselves to the Holy Father and the Living Magistrium on issues of faith and morals. [But adhering to the entirety of the Church's doctrines and disciplines does, and that requires restricting one's participation to authentically traditional Masses, Roman (Tridentine) and other Particular historic Rites (such as Byzantine).]
Point Six: The Latin Mass was not the original Mass. The Latin Mass was intended just for Rome not any other dioceses. I wonder if you know that? [Tell that to John Paul II, who recommended that the Mass be performed on a "wide and generous" basis, throughout the world. On second thought, don't. He just might decide to listen to you and renounce what severly limited credibility he has left. The Tridentine Roman Rite is the universal Rite of the Church, permissions for other Rites notwithstanding.]
Point Seven: Although I believe the Latin Mass is a far better spiritaully than the New Mass, the New Mass is valid just because it contains the three necessities to make the Mass valid. All one has to do is read the Last supper to see what makes a Mass Valid. [Mere validity (on what few occasions it is attained any more among the Novus Ordos) is not enough. The Mass must be offered in union with the Church, and for that it must be an approved Mass of the Church, and for that it must be Tridentine or any long-approved Eastern Rite or similar Particular Rite of some recognized community. The Novus Ordo has never been approved by the Church, but instead condemned at every turn, and so can never be offered in union with the Church.]
Point Eight: I am not causing division like the SSPX and the SEDEs. I am trying to bring fallen or confused Catholics back into the fold through the graces of God. There is a difference. [If you were really interested in Catholic unity, you would work for that instead of sitting on your duff trying to excommunicate the hell out of everyone who happens to disagree with you. False accusations do not build Christian Unity.]
Final Response to this: Such types as that cannot be reasoned with. They will not read the information in full; they will not check the references to see for themselves the will of the Church in these matters, so there is no point continuing any further discussion with them.
From: "Palm Tree" [Anonymous]
With all your wording and "explaining" and nonexplaining of how it is possible that "catholics" can come in 20 varieties or 2,000 or 20,000, never once has it occurred to you that there is only ONE variety without sub-categories.
Something is missing in a link in your cognitive powers. You cannot connect. Probably due to your Protestant lineage. Often Protestants bring with them their own version of how they still want to figure out things. It never works.
Our Lord said His Church will prevail against the Gates of Hell. True. But He never said that His Church needed to prevail against the Earth. Man's concupiscience is necessary to ruin the Faith, concupiscience no less such as that of deceivers and innovators such as yourself, not only clerics and Wojtyla. It is here in this world that the Devil will prevail, is prevailing, and MUST prevail in order for scripture to be fulfilled.
It takes more intelligence to understand this than the average "griff" can handle. On earth, the Church will succumb, and He will "hardly find the Faith" when He returneth.
Too bad we have spokesmen such as you lurking about trying to confuse yourself and others with this "Gates of Hell" business. The Gates of Hell belong to the next world, not to this one.
My suggestion is that all you have written ought to be trashed and start over. This time understand scripture. This time stop preaching against Christ. It is He Who said His Church will not survive this world, and certainly not with millions of varieties of "believers" being called "catholics" in spite of how many priests schismatic you have spoken to. They are post Vatican II also and have a poor understanding of the Apocalypse and St. John.
From: Nunsexmonkrock [Anonymous]
I wish I could say something positive about your web site or more correctly the pathetic sad life that led to your mental breakdown, but unfortunately I can't! Just seeing your comments concerning the pictures of Pope Paul VI is enough insight into your mindless trips into space. Do, you, have some private revelations that Pope Paul didn't? Are you theologically more qualified than he? Are you within the realm of sanity to tell if you were or not? I swear, Thank God people like you never get to places of power and influence .. I bet Jesus is glad too! To think you would be speaking in His name is enough to make Jesus resign..unreal! You need to get out and have a life .. You need to get help.. you are a disgrace to the Christ who came and taught love, hope and peace and not the minute, stupid and non important things that consume your pathetic life. Maybe one day you'll realize why people like you never do get to those positions of power and influence .. because you are nutty! .. GET HELP BOZO
Return to Main Next Level Up