SSPX Press Release on Fr. Arnaud Rostand sexual abuse trial - tried to delete

[Melkor]

That's a very valid point.

[Greg]

Has Matthew from CI (Cathinfo), who logged in to make this post, ever deleted any bad news or embarrassing facts about the chosen ones on his own forum?

I think he has.  Were posts or threads of his praising Fr. Pfeiffer deleted or edited for example?

I think they were.  And others on this forum who were also on Cathinfo previously have noticed it and commented on it before.  In fact, we can see there were two posts about Fr. Pfeiffer praising him made prior to 2016 when he went off the reservation and in fact those posts name Fr. Stephen Abraham as a "resistance priest".  So along with "bishop" Tetherow, consecrated by "Bishop" Pfeifer, the Resistance has some dirty laundry which it hides away with digital manipulation (except where it neglects to do this thoroughly).

Whilst I think it is a bad idea to delete history, pretty much all camps do it.

I'm not for a single minute accusing Matthew of running cover for paedophile and pederast priests. (He'd never do that and is as disgusted by such priests as any red blooded man should be).

But just like the SSPX media officer Matthew does go through his internet postings and delete those that praised those priests who subsequently are exposed as child abusers or home-aloners or SVs or any other outcome he does not wish to be associated with.

Ordinary peons who don't control the website cannot do this of course.

[Bonaventure]

It is for this reason that @Kaesekopf and forum administration does not like to delete posts unless pornographic or blasphemous.

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

does not

*do not