[ultima ratio]

Interesting aside about Lefebvre. I have always believed divide and conquer was the strategy of the left. It was necessary to pit conservatives against traditionalists for the left to get its way.

[american colleen]

Good point and sadly, it seems history bears out your thoughts.

[Maximilian]

>>Interesting aside about Lefebvre.

Good point - I had missed this when I first read the article. What is really interesting about those quotes from Huels is that he admits and describes the deceptive "dialectical process" that was put in place at Vatican II.

He says that during the Council the wording was kept deliberately vague in order to generate consensus acceptance.

Then after the council, the reactionaries were driven out of the Church, allowing the liberal viewpoint to interpret the documents according to their original intention. Once their opponents have been marginalized, they are free to have a field day, exposing the time bombs that they had hidden in the documents.

This policy is lifted verbatim from the communist playbook. This is the way they think, and they're proud of it.

When Peter Vere praises Huel's tremendous intellect, he praising a mastermind of dialectical combat against the Church. When he writes articles attacking traditionalists, he's forwarding the dialectical process of destruction put in place at Vatican II.

Maybe Vere's not aware of this, maybe he's only a "useful idiot." That's why it's essential to expose revolutionaries like Huels so we can see whom he's been using to promote his agenda.

[dsc]

"It was necessary to pit conservatives against traditionalists for the left to get its way"

I don't follow your distinction between conservatives and traditionalists.

Wouldn't a conservative by definition be a traditionalist?