Thursday, December 15, 2016

Banned from, Cathinfo Exposed, Matthew Exposed

Even though Matthew was deemed as a sinner and obstinate by me because of his deeds and actions, he may still be excused according to his conscience from grave sin. Also, since I don't know if he actually was aware of the content of the posts he removed, or even that a reader needed these posts, I desire to make this clear beforehand.

Before I was banned from for being too Traditional and condemning for their secular and sinful lifestyle and occasions of sinnings, as detailed in this post, I was banned from

I am not sure of the exact reason for my ban, but in an email Matthew stated -- as his reason -- that I was a former member he had previously banned. I am not certain this was the only reason that he banned me for, but perhaps this is what he believes.

Either way, a few things of notice happened before and after the ban that is very revealing and that shows what kind of character and morality this "administrator" Matthew of really has.

For starters, I think that everything that is written and exposed about Matthew in this article is absolutely true, and his deeds and actions against me only confirms that this assessment is correct since he, in fact did (and still does) exactly the same evil and shocking things as detailed about him in this article:

I will now expose what I found out about him and his activities in my short stay at his forum.

Deleting posts instructing people how to surf the internet with ad blockers, image blockers and flash blockers

For example, some days before being banned, I wrote the following forum post below (note: everything of what I wrote below was silently deleted from his website without a word and I only noticed it was deleted after someone made a response indicating that she had not read this post that would have helped her to avoid seeing advertisements):
Matto said [quoting me]:
St Jerome said:
Women should avoid using make up, as all the saints teaches and all private revelations teaches. I know people disagree, but then they disagree with all the saints and all private revelations that has spoken on this topic (and there are many).

Matto: I believe it is better for women to not wear makeup but I wonder if it as a sin. If it is then we should never watch any movies because in pretty much every movie the actors wear makeup. I have read quotes from saints that have opposed makeup [. . .] The further you go back in time the more opposed to wearing makeup the saints seemed to be [the saints have always been opposed to makeup, even in more modern times]. I almost never watch movies anymore myself, even old ones and ones that I know are safe to watch, because I don't think watching movies will help me achieve my salvation [which is true, but if you think of God, Mary, Gemma etc. in the movie characters, it may become a spiritual benefit].
I am not as strict as you are while using the internet. I do not block all images on the internet and only listen to audio on youtube videos. I mostly go to Catholic websites which don't have any sinful images but every once in a while when I am getting secular news I may come across an immodest image. When that happens I look away just like I do when I go out of the house. I have to leave the house almost every day and the immodestly dressed women are everywhere so it is almost impossible to not see them. And on youtube I mostly watch religious videos so it is very rare for there to be any immodesty. But a few times I have seen immodesty in the youtube videos and when that happened I scrolled down [which is a good advice since it is stupid to look at things tempting you] so I could not see the video and listened to the rest without seeing the video.
Jerome's forum post reply [which was deleted]: Going out is necessary, and hence God protects us and pardons us for being exposed to such necessary things provided we do what we can, like you do, for example, by looking away. I do not even try to look in the first place, and mostly keep my eyes fixed on the ground. 
But when we expose ourselves to unnecessary dangers, such as you explained, i.e, surfing various dangerous websites with images on (youtube, news sites etc.) then God does not protect us, since we expose ourselves to totally unnecessary occasions without any reason or necessity. The fact that we could choose to surf with images blocked, but refuse to do so, also increases our culpability. Also, those who do not fear exposing themselves like this, must evidently presume a little on themselves.
St. Alphonsus was absolutely clear about this when he wrote: “Brother Roger, a Franciscan of singular purity, being once asked why he was so reserved in his intercourse with women, replied, that when men avoid the occasions of sin [or do what is necessary], God preserves thembut when they expose themselves to danger [i.e., completely unnecessary occasions of sinning and performed for the sake mere pleasure or entertainment!], they are justly abandoned by the Lord, and easily fall into some grievous transgressions.” (St. Alphonsus Liguori, The True Spouse of Jesus Christ, Mortification of the Eyes, p. 221)
You need to use flash blockers, html5 blockers, and image blockers for the webbrowser you use. Start to surf websites without images, and you will see how much more peace and security you will feel.
flash blocker [add your webbrowser name]
html5 blocker [add your webbrowser name]
image blocker [add your webbrowser name]
ad-blocker [add your webbrowser name]

I will write more about the best extensions and how to use them later. Perhaps I will make a blog and post it there as well [I in fact did this already; see this link where all the information I wrote can be read as a single article:].

“Wizmage Image Blocker” is the most convenient and user friendly image blocker that I know of. With one click, you can display the image or hide it again. It is only available for Chrome, sadly [but it can be installed in Opera and other Chromium based browser too!].
Direct download link:
Use it with “Fast Image Blocker for Google Chrome” and have it activated on the Google Chrome webbrowser at the same time as “Wizmage Image Blocker” since wizmage does not always block all images on certain sites nor does the programs always block all the images immediately. The Wizmage features still work in most cases with this one installed alongside.
Here is the direct download link to Fast Image Blocker for Google Chrome:
Here is the direct download link to Fast Image Blocker for Opera:
Here is the direct download link to Fast Image Blocker for Firefox:
After installing it, click on the camera icon and remove every single site already put into the “exceptions list”. Press the X icon in order to remove a website from the list. There are a lot of websites put into this list as exceptions as you will see after having installed the program (not a smart move, since it makes people think the program doesn’t work!).
Only add exceptions (the + icon with the address already inserted) that are absolutely necessary or needed, since it won’t block images on that site if you have it added.
Also, when clicking the camera icon, if the camera icon in the menu is colored, this means the image blocker is activated; if it is grey, it means it is disabled for all websites.
[For more detailed instructions:]

Source: [cache already deleted]

Compare the above with how the same thread looks currently at his own forum:

Now, was there anything wrong with the above forum post? Certainly not! Was it even a good and spiritually fruitful post that would help souls to avoid being exposed to lasciviousnesses when surfing the internet? Yes! Why then was it deleted?

Can it have something to do with Matthew receiving an income from the ads being displayed on his website? Or that he cares more about a filthy income then the good of souls? It certainly seems like it, sadly. [I have warned him about not displaying ads on his website in the past, but he has not listened even to this day.]

Matthew, instead of allowing the above post to stay so that it could have helped souls to surf the internet and watch videos in a more safe way, made sure to delete it so that nothing of the sort now can be found anymore in the thread [perhaps he just deleted the post and did not even read it? all is possible]; and it is just a fact that you will never see anyone else teach these things -- and that is why this information is so important. (I mean, how often have you seen anyone else teach about this? I certainly know of no one except for the Swedish guys at ( etc.) and my self).

But Matthew is already notoriously known for deleting and removing good and soul saving material from his forum for no apparent reason other than his contempt for being rebuked [formerly: "utter hatred for the truth," but I don't know if this judgment is correct or charitable]; and because of his filthy lucre [he gets an income from the ads, which is the only reason for him displaying them, since they have no other spiritual benefit, but even harms souls, as he himself has admitted]; and because he is influenced by the devil when doing so (since he is doing the devils works), as detailed in this article:

[Even though the devil is blamed for almost all bad or evil influences by spiritual writers, I don't know if it is correct to accuse Matthew of only being influenced by the devil in this case, since it is evident that he desires to receive the income from the ads being displayed on his website, and since he seems to think he is in need of this income to support himself.]
So his actions does not surprise me that much since I had already read examples of him doing this from years ago, as detailed in the above link.

And what is even worse about all of this is that it is to be feared that a woman, who much needed to see this first post about ad blockers etc., failed to see it because this evil* admin removed the post, and removed it again after banning me, thus depriving all on his forum of this important, life-soul saving information!
[If he did understand the woman mentioned a problem of evil ads and images and yet removed the post, it was an evil action, otherwise, it is believed that he might not even have read the post or her response, since he has admitted in the past he just removes posts of people he don't like and wants to ban, which is reasonable, since one cannot possibly read every post of a user if there are very many unless you have the will and time to do so.]
[* "evil" might be a too harsh word and uncharitable, since it is better to be kind even though it is not wrong to be just or severe. Many people fail to be corrected through want of kindness and charity, since it is very hard to humble oneself before a person who is attacking you and your character, as experience show.]

Gabriella said:
And please do not even lecture about the evils of TV and Movies if you use the internet. There are exponentially more dangers on the internet. And you mention you are on YouTube...lets be is this any different?? There are bad ads and things that are evil popping up on that.

Jerome's forum post reply [which was deleted]: If you did not know, I [am] advocating in this very thread that people must start surfing the internet with Ad-blockers, Flash-blockers and Image-blockers, in order not to get exposed to such things you mentioned.
I WROTE THIS ON PAGE 4, PLEAS READ IT [Note: This evil* [*as above] admin removed this information also]: 
I don't watch any movies at all for that matter; nor do I watch the television, and mostly only listen to the audio on youtube by having the video screen blocked or downloading it in mp3. It is much more safe and wise to do so and I advise all those who wish to be more sure of their salvation, and of pleasing God and avoiding occasions of sinning, to do the same since watching media is like playing with fire--one could easily get burned, so to speak. The same with surfing the internet which is why people need to surf with images off, since lascivious images is the norm today on almost all websites.
See this thread for information about that: Why people who visit immoral news sites with images on commit mortal sin 
[Jerome continues:] WARNING, I CAN'T BELIEVE SOMEONE DELETED THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION [i.e., I had to repeat the same information I wrote about Adblockers etc. since it had previously been deleted; and yes, he deleted it again after banning me! which was the reason I suspected he was aware of what he was doing, but perhaps he was not, and he just removed my posts without considering the content under discussion.] THAT INFORMATION IS SO IMPORTANT IN ORDER TO AVOID BEING EXPOSED TO SIN! STOP IT PLEASE OR [DON'T] REMOVE SUCH AUTOMATIC DELETIONS! 

Source: [cache already deleted]

When a person obstinately removes such above important information needed for the good of souls and the avoidance of the occasion of sinning (so that they can avoid being exposed to harmful material on the internet), and this information is denied them and even removed because of a filthy lucre and an evil and demonic disposition, know this this is a sign of a reprobate and damned soul* -- and that is exactly what Matthew is, as is absolutely proven in this article: -- and as we will see as we move along in this post.

[* I don't agree with with calling Matthew "damned" anymore (since I am of the opinion that all souls will be saved in some way through repentance and good will, and since I cannot possibly be the judge of Matthew's future), nor am I as harsh as I was before since I have come to understand that all people view things differently. For example, the things I consider severe other people will find minor and almost unimportant. However, the reason for me being so severe on Matthew is because he has admitted in the past that the bad ads that are actually being displayed on his homepage are bad and harmful for souls; and souls have also complained to him of being severely tempted by his actions of allowing advertisements.]

Deleting posts instructing people to avoid dangerous and evil films, tv-series, youtube clips and shows etc.

The following forum post was deleted by Matthew after he banned me (I did post more, but I cannot find them through Google search or webcache). One would think that even if he thought I was really someone he had previously banned in the past, he should still let the good forum posts remain, since they instruct people in how to live a good and better life. Right? But no! Since the Devil don't like people to be instructed in virtue and on avoiding occasions of sinnings, it is obvious that he will inspire his dark and spiritually blind servants (i.e., Matthew*) to delete it instead; and that is especially more true if the information is about adblockers, avoiding occasions of sinnings, or sexual morality! “St. Bernardine of Sienna assures us that among the counsels of Jesus Christ the counsel of fleeing from the occasion of sin is the most important, is, as it were, the foundation of religion.” (St. Alphonsus Liguori, On the Flight from Dangerous Occasions)

[*Again, I am not accusing Matthew of committing a mortal sin per se for his actions nor do I say anymore he is truly the Devil's servant (as I indicated above), but I am also not wholly excusing him. Either way, when a person does a bad thing, it is evident he is influenced by Dark Spirits. Similarly, when a person does a good thing, he is inspired by Good Spirits. Even though I don't know all of Matthew's reasons for having deleted the posts nor if he actually was aware of the content or the discussions (which would then wholly excuse him) the fact remains that he has remained obstinate several times in the past in displaying advertisements, and in deleting my posts instructing people in virtue.]

Gabriella said:
You can ease your mind-- Amelie [film] is not filled with sex scenes or lasciviousness. I would know, I own the movie and have seen it many times.
Jerome's forum post reply [which was deleted]: It is.
It is filled with lascivious scenes, and also nudeness. It is R rated and was given a 7 out of 10 for sexual content and lasciviousness on the IMDb - Movies, TV and Celebrities website.
You have just hardened your conscience by being exposed to such things daily. That is what happens when one do not avoid bad occasions. Hardening of the heart is a punishment for sin and living a bad life and always end badly, unless repentance and change of life follows.
Tell me, do you think that this movie would have been the greatest scandal a 100 years ago, and would an uproar would have been made about it? [If the secular world even though Elvis Presley's hip swirling movement was immodest 60 years ago, what would they have said about this film?]
Your answer will prove the point.
Oh, blind people!

Gabriella said:
but I can promise you that nothing in the movie is done in such a way to evoke sexual desires. There are a couple scenes I could do without, but again there are no "sex scenes". There are parts where you know that has happened but again nothing was done in such a way to cause sexual desire. I would not recommend the movie for children but it is fine for adults.

Jerome's forum post reply [which was deleted]: That is just your hardened opinion, which the Church rejects. Those who watch such things cannot be absolved and hence cannot be saved according to the Church's teaching [which is true only if they truly live in an deliberate occasion of sinning, which only God and our own conscience can be the final judge of]. You are not permitted to watch lascivious movies just because you are addicted to media. That's a fact.
St. Alphonsus: “And when the occasion [of sin] is voluntary and is actually existing at the present time, the penitent cannot be absolved until he has actually removed the occasion of sin. For penitents find it very difficult to remove the occasion; and if they do not take it away before they receive absolution they will scarcely remove it after they have been absolved.” (The complete ascetical works of St. Alphonsus, vol. 15, pp. 539-546)

Gabriella said:
I can guarantee you that NO ONE watches this movie to emote sexual desire.

Jerome's forum post reply [which was deleted]: Has nothing to do with the point. Sexual desire/sin is a result that will flow from watching such films, even if not directly intended. Why do you think people have such problems living chaste today? Why do  you think so many mortal sins are being committed daily? Why do you think Our Lady of Fatima said "sins of the flesh" leads most people to Hell? Answer: Because they willfully expose themselves to the fire, and those who do so will infallibly get burned.
“Now, says St. John Chrysostom, if all flesh is grass, it is as foolish for a man who exposes himself to the occasion of sin to hope to preserve the virtue of purity, as to expect that hay, into which a torch has been thrown, will not catch fire. "Put a torch into hay, and then dare to deny that the hay will burn." No, says St. Cyprian; it is impossible to stand in the midst of flames, and not to burn. "Impossibile est flammis circumdari et non ardere." (De Sing. Cler.) "Can a man," says the Holy Spirit, "hide fire in his bosom, and his garments not burn? or can he walk upon hot coals, and his feet not be burnt?" (Prov. 6.27, 28) Not to be burnt in such circumstances would be a miracle. St. Bernard teaches that to preserve chastity, and, at the same time, to expose oneself to the proximate occasion of sin, "is a greater miracle than to raise a dead man to life." In explaining the fifth Psalm, St. Augustine says that "he who is unwilling to fly from danger, wishes to perish in it."” (Hell’s Widest Gate: Impurity, by St. Alphonsus Liguori, Sermons (nn. 2-4) taken from Ascetical Works, Volume XVI: Sermons for all Sundays in the Year (1882) pp. 152-173)

Gabriella said:
Your reading a description of something in the movie and using your imagination to make it something that it actually is not may cause much more.

Jerome's forum post reply [which was deleted]: No, I am being honest, which you are not, since you want to defend your evil film watchings.
I won't encourage you on this path, but will rebuke you. It is up to you to change or face the consequences when you are judged before Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Gabriella said:
I have a very devout traditional Catholic friend* who speaks fluent French, serves daily Mass on most days and he loves this movie.

Jerome's forum post reply [which was deleted]: Many who appears to be devout probably are not so devout at it seems after all, as will be shown in the day of judgment. This I read frequently said by the Saints themselves in their biographies and holy books, and it seems it has always been the case. No different today. Most people are damned. 
[*I am not judging this man to be evil or damned or spiritually inferior, I am just pointing out a fact that it is a bad sign to love an evil and immoral film, and that it is not a good indication of spiritual clearness.]
Devoutness and holiness are not to be judged by external acts of piety, but rather judged by how they live their life and how their internal dispositions are and what opinions they have. 
The fact that anyone could "love this" piece of crap movie, tells me all I need to know.
No one with even a little sense of modesty and morality can love this movie, but they would hate it with their whole soul since it is offensive to God and morals and injurious to souls. 

Source: [cache already deleted]

And why did Matthew have to delete the above post? Take a guess. To delete good and instructing posts that readers are in need of just because he thought (or even if I was) a former banned member, is illogical. As a matter of fact, he was not even sure I was a former banned member, yet he just deleted all myst posts either way as if that would make things better (it did not, since it removed essential information).

Related post:
Banned from, SuscipeDomine Exposed, Kaesekopf Exposed

Censoring the word ad block on his forum and in forum posts

This one was really strange, but it was something I found out when posting on his forum: that the word "ad", such as in "ad block", was censored! The post just showed " block" completely having removed "ad". That is why I had to add "ad-block" in my above post for the word to rightly appear.

Perhaps it was just a coincidence and only happens occasionally? I don't know, but if someone has an account they could easily see for themselves if this is the case; if not, then he might have changed it, or there was some other reason for this having happened to me.

Again, see this article below for a much more in depth expose of his evil deeds, actions, heresies, mortal sins etc.:

No comments:

Post a Comment