If the immodesty is sinful, then you too are sinning by posting these.If just the pictures offend some of you here, you must be living in another planet. Those young girls dress that way at the SSPX chapel because it is “conservative” compared to what they wear every day and what is out there in the world all over.
Why are you perpetuating immodesty by posting these pictures? If the immodesty is sinful, then you too are sinning by posting these.Warning: There was a poster at various Christian forums who posted pictures of cute girls and women and constantly criticized the way they dressed.
Warning: There was a poster at various Christian forums who posted pictures of cute girls and women and constantly criticized the way they dressed.Good warning for any female or male poster on ALL threads of CathInfo, even in the cooking and health threads. The important point is that stalkers can find “friends that think like they do” here. This warning should be posted as a thread by itself.
Several mods checked the username and discovered that the same person using the same username was posting on various boards seeking a second or third wife because he could not control his lustful urges, believed in polygamy, and wanted to have multiple wives.
He would wait until a young modest woman posted, and then would court her by PM, get her email address, and try to add her to his harem.
If just the pictures offend some of you here, you must be living in another planet. Those young girls dress that way at the SSPX chapel because it is “conservative” compared to what they wear every day and what is out there in the world all over.When I first saw the post, I thought the pictures were going to be much worse than they actually are. This is not "hooker fashion". Actually, from what I have observed when driving past areas of town where they ply their wares (pretty much unavoidable, it's the main drag), some "hookers" do not dress all that provocatively. Many women at Novus Ordo Masses dress far more provocatively. I always say that some of those jeans are so tight that if they had a quarter in their back pocket, you could not just read the date on it, but you could also read the mint mark!
LOL. The third picture, the Latina, is a sin against charity.
This is what we see every Sunday at mass. The first picture is how practically all of the young girls, the second picture is how the more "advanced" young girls dress, and the third picture is how the Latina mothers dress, everything skin tight and ready to burst. No class whatsoever! And we hear not a word from the pulpit, not a word every since the new prior arrived almost 10 years ago. This of course is nothing compared to how they dress the rest of the week. By their deeds you shall know them.At my chapel, unless the occasional NOer or a newcomer to the chapel comes in dressed extremely improperly, I would never see it. One of the reasons I never see it is because I sit up front, so if I were to see it at all, it would be when I glance at the communicants during communion when everyone comes up to the altar rail. So that's my first suggestion to you - sit in one of the pews nearest the altar.
Those three pictures are only the tip of the iceberg, for the girls that wear those fashions to mass, wear short shorts, tank tops, tight jeans, belly exposed, bikinis, go to nightclubs etc. In other words they are just like any girls of the world, except they go to mass on Sundays. It is not that they are living Catholic lives just stretching the standards, no, they are not living Catholic lives at all except going to mass on Sundays.Always keep in mind that these girls I am speaking about have been brought up in the SSPX schools K-12, so they learned to dress that way at the SSPX schools. The priests have taught them that is is OK to dress that way. This is EXACTLY what happened after Vatican II in everything.
One of the reasons I never see it is because I sit up front, so if I were to see it at all, it would be when I glance at the communicants during communion when everyone comes up to the altar rail. So that's my first suggestion to you - sit in one of the pews nearest the altar.This is not about an occasion of sin for me, it is about the bad example it sets for all of the other younger girls in the chapel, it is a mortal sin for those girls who wear those clothes and scandalize the little ones:
This is not about an occasion of sin for me, it is about the bad example it sets for all of the other younger girls in the chapel, it is a mortal sin for those girls who wear those clothes and scandalize the little ones:I understand all of that, but you cannot do anything about it, but the priest can.....and should, and might if you spoke with him about it.
“It were better for him, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should scandalize one of these little ones” (Luke 17:2)
A picture is worth a 1000 words. There is no other way to show what they look like except to take the actual pictures at the chapel.
If just the pictures offend some of you here, you must be living in another planet. Those young girls dress that way at the SSPX chapel because it is “conservative” compared to what they wear every day and what is out there in the world all over.
LOL. The third picture, the Latina, is a sin against charity.
Top one is fine. Ideally it would be better, but I wouldn't consider a girl immodest if that's how she dressed. Second is immodest. The third - the t-shirt is immodest, the skirt would actually be fine if it wasn't so tight on her(and I agree, she looks stupid more than anything, she needs clothes that actually fit first of all).
Do you have any daughters?
I ask because the first skirt is nowhere close to “fine”, it is too short and tight. If you compare it to the world, it is fine, but we are not of the world. The first skirt should be loose and 8 inches below the knee. The important point is that when they sit, the dress should not show what you see showing in the picture. That would require the 8” of length. Padre Pio would have thrown all three out of the confession line.
A few months ago I was chatting with the priest after Mass. He looked over at a young woman and then asked me to point out her mother to him. I did and he immediately went over to the mother and discussed the length of the skirt the daughter was wearing. I walked away but did hear him tell the mother that her daughter was not to wear that skirt anymore.
If I feel that a priest might be unaware of something, I might bring it to his attention. Sometimes priests can't see skirt length when the ladies are kneeling in front of a rail. After I inform the priest, it's the priest's responsibility to do something about it. If the priest takes no action, then I might raise it with the SSPX District Superior (assuming you go to an SSPX chapel).
You have been ranting and raving about Sanford for a long time now, as if you're completely obsessed.
what exactly is your point?
This is not about an occasion of sin for me, it is about the bad example it sets for all of the other younger girls in the chapel, it is a mortal sin for those girls who wear those clothes and scandalize the little ones:
“It were better for him, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should scandalize one of these little ones” (Luke 17:2)
the best thing for concerned chapelgoers to do is to respectfully and urgently speak to the Priest about it.
A few months ago I was chatting with the priest after Mass. He looked over at a young woman and then asked me to point out her mother to him. I did and he immediately went over to the mother and discussed the length of the skirt the daughter was wearing. I walked away but did hear him tell the mother that her daughter was not to wear that skirt anymore.
If this is the same priest, then he's doing SOMEthing. But what's the next step if the girl shows up again dressed like that? I could see the girl wearing a similarly immodest dress, but not the same one, and respond, well you didn't tell me not to wear THIS dress.That priest described is doing his job, that is what a priest is supposed to do. Yes, he has to do it over and over and over, it is a daily battle, but no hardship. THAT is what this thread is for. That priest is an example of what ALL SSPX priest should have been doing for the last 10 years. They did it before that.
I knew a priest who regularly preached against immodest dress. For a week or two, things would get better, but then after a little while it would slide again. First you had one woman test the waters with a slightly short skirt. When she got away with it, then a few others came the following week. And within about a month they were back to veritable mini-skirts. Then the priest would preach about it again. And this cycle continued for years. At some point there needs to be SOME kind of actual enforcement.
On an amusing note, I guess, the primary woman who was always the trailblazer in pushing the limits, the one who tested the waters, got poison ivy all up and down her legs shortly after one of these displays of testing the water and had to wear an ankle-length dress for a few weeks to hide the disfigurement caused by the ivy.
Well, I don't disagree, in general. #1, IMO, would be closer to venial in general, but it's certainly compounded by the fact that it was at Mass.Thank you for your opinion, but you do not comprehend the motive or the extend of the problem. The extent - I am not writing here to "vent" about my chapel. I am writing here to expose a problem that has not be addressed at all by the SSPX in the USA and Europe, the two places that I have knowledge of. It is a problem that rose up like 10 years ago and now is common all over the USA and Europe. My area of direct exposer is the USA and specifically the St. Mary's Kansas Church and town where I believe they have 5000 parishioners. The same goes for the school in Syracuse, New York. Sanford Florida also has a school but it is insignificant. What all three have in common is that not a word is being said about the way the young girls and Latina women dress. The Motive, I am here to expose this situation to the SSPX priests worldwide, including Bishop Fellay. This is not about talking to a priest is Sanford.
Is this a systematic problem with the SSPX? Another sign that the SSPX is becoming more modernist?
This could have been handled with a, "At the Sanford SSPX chapel, no attempt is being made to enforce standards of modesty." I just don't think that the excessive huffing and puffing accomplishes anything. Nor does posting pictures of samples. Even if you were to post actual pictures, it's one thing that it's happening and QUITE ANOTHER if the priests are condoning it.
Perhaps it's a misguided prudential judgment about not wanting to harden their hearts and drive them away. Maybe it's cowardice. Perhaps it's that the priests aren't fully aware of the extent of it.
Have you even tried to go to the priest and said, "Father, there are women and young ladies here whose skirts are well above the knee. Can't you do anything about it?" I would be more interested in Father's response than in the mere fact that women are showing up there in short skirts. His response could speak volumes about the state of the SSPX. Would he say, "you're a bit of a prude" (ala the Theology of the Body crowd) or else "You're right, I need to try harder to enforce the standards." or "You're right, but I don't want to drive them away." I know one priest who simply responded with, "Well, that's just what the young people are all doing these days." (Yes, this was a Traditional priest). This seemed to come from a combination of laziness and a fear of confrontation. So I'd be more interested in the Father's response.
THEN, if the response is not acceptable, I would put the US District Superior on the spot, "Father N. said .... Is this the official position of the Society?" That I would be even MORE interested int.
Why don't you track it down this way rather than just venting anonymously here on CI?
Then I'd tell Father, "Father, if some young man came up and told you that he couldn't go to Communion because he was tempted to a sinful thought during Mass by one of these, what would you say or what would you do?" Would he say, "well, that young man needs to become more pure and toughen up"? To which, I would respond, "Well, that's not the Church's teaching on this subject, that this is merely a scandal of the weak. Shouldn't a young man who assists at Mass have the right not to be distracted, much less tempted, by immodest dress?"
That's what this rant reminds me of.I do not think that you have spent the time to read the thread through, or else you would realize that this thread is not just about a few inches on a skirt. Others have made the same mistake.
The big problem with these “Trad on Sunday for two hours” girls is pregnancy and the consequent abortion, single motherhood, or shotgun weddings.You should talk to the priest, lay your problems before him and demand he say something and establish strict enforcement of a proper dress code for both males and females both inside and outside of church, stressing to him that he needs to speak especially to the females more then anyone else. He must be specific, just telling them to dress proper is insufficient, he must go into enough detail that they understand what proper dress is. Then demand that he place the usher guards at the doors of the church so that they let no one in who does not conform!
If this is the same priest, then he's doing SOMEthing. But what's the next step if the girl shows up again dressed like that? I could see the girl wearing a similarly immodest dress, but not the same one, and respond, well you didn't tell me not to wear THIS dress.I have noticed, and perhaps it's just me, that when it comes to questions of modesty in dress, it is as though the girls and women almost want to be disciplined about it, that is, first wear the immodest dress, then be told they shouldn't wear that. I find this way of thinking bizarre, but that's how it seems to be. I can't quite get my head around knowing it is wrong, neglecting to do what they know is right, having their hand called on it, then complying (at least for a while). Do the women like getting the attention of the priest? Do they like having their mode of dress called attention to? I have to wonder.
I knew a priest who regularly preached against immodest dress. For a week or two, things would get better, but then after a little while it would slide again. First you had one woman test the waters with a slightly short skirt. When she got away with it, then a few others came the following week. And within about a month they were back to veritable mini-skirts. Then the priest would preach about it again. And this cycle continued for years. At some point there needs to be SOME kind of actual enforcement.
On an amusing note, I guess, the primary woman who was always the trailblazer in pushing the limits, the one who tested the waters, got poison ivy all up and down her legs shortly after one of these displays of testing the water and had to wear an ankle-length dress for a few weeks to hide the disfigurement caused by the ivy.
The girls dress this way because their fathers take pride in the sɛҳuąƖ attractiveness of their own daughters.Fathers who take pride in the sɛҳuąƖ attractiveness of their daughters border on being pimps --- or worse.
I'm reminded of a young man who posted on CathInfo many years ago saying he wanted to marry a girl who looked like Britney Spears but had the heart of Mother Theresa. He claimed to be a traditional Catholic. Go figure.
The girls dress this way because their fathers take pride in the sɛҳuąƖ attractiveness of their own daughters.
Members of this forum who approve of the attire in the first picture, especially in close quarters to the Holy Sanctuary, is proof that many "trads" have been conditioned to accept modernism, the occassion of sin, and feminism.
It's lukewarm scuм like you who are extremely dangerous to the Church and society. Your day of reckoning is coming - Apocalypse of John 3:16
Fathers who take pride in the sɛҳuąƖ attractiveness of their daughters border on being pimps --- or worse.
What I have fond more is the WOMEN who take pride in the attractiveness of their daughters. Most of the fathers just give up and give in after a while.I think you have something there. You can almost sense the mothers saying to their daughters "now, dear, this is the way you need to dress --- you'll get the boys' attention that way, after all, if you can't show a little skin, what's the point?". Very likely the mothers dressed this way, mutatis mutandis for what "tested the boundaries" in their own day, when they were the daughters' ages, possibly for the same reasons. What the girls --- and their mothers --- don't realize is that others are snickering behind their backs. "Chunky-butts" was the term we used in my family to lampoon girls who wore mini-skirts to Mass.
Quote from: Ladislaus on Thu Nov 14 2019 19:04:38 GMT-0600 (Central Standard Time)
You're insane ... with bitter zeal.
You're insane ... with mushy liberalism.PFFT.
You're insane ... with mushy liberalism.
Quote from: Ladislaus on Thu Nov 14 2019 20:28:19 GMT-0600 (Central Standard Time)
Using terms like "lukewarm scuм" cannot be anything but bitter zeal.
I wish that Matthew would abolish the 'anonymous' section. It is just a hide-out place for posters that are of doubtful morality.it's obviously The Last Tradhican.
Pornography is not allowed on CI.
I have to many problems that come from the temptations that comes from the world, and the flesh, and the devil.
And see this trash on CI. This makes my day.
If these 'anonymous' do not identify themselves, them kick them off.
it's obviously The Last Tradhican.Last Tradhican is posting on another thread about the same subject, anyone that has a problem with anything they guess he has wrote, should just go to that other thread and see what he actually really writes. Here is the thread: https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/holy-family-academy-another-scandal-in-phoenix/msg675490/?topicseen#msg675490 (https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/holy-family-academy-another-scandal-in-phoenix/msg675490/?topicseen#msg675490)
Last Tradhican is posting on another thread about the same subject, anyone that has a problem with anything they guess he wrote, should just go to that other thread and see what he actually really writes. Here is the thread: https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/holy-family-academy-another-scandal-in-phoenix/msg675490/?topicseen#msg675490 (https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/holy-family-academy-another-scandal-in-phoenix/msg675490/?topicseen#msg675490)That was me LT who posted that.
A short snip taken from a sermon (https://gofile.io/?c=ck3NBA) that Fr. Wathen gave about St. Agnes, directed mainly to the young ladies.Stubborn,
Stubborn,Strange, I tried attaching it to this post, see if that works, if not I'll upload it to dropbox.
Nothing is coming up when I click the link.
https://www.uscatholic.org/massattire (https://www.uscatholic.org/massattire)Are Trad women reading this garbage?
I have to ask, where are these pictures coming from?What pictures? Show us a quote or a link.
What pictures? Show us a quote or a link.I mean the pictures the OP posted at the beginning of the thread. Where do they come from?
I mean the pictures the OP posted at the beginning of the thread. Where do they come from?The OP has no proof thst these pics are actualy of girls from the Sanford chapel( they could come from anywhere for all we know) If he actually took these pictures from far away, he has serious problems
The OP has no proof thst these pics are actualy of girls from the Sanford chapel( they could come from anywhere for all we know) If he actually took these pictures from far away, he has serious problemsThe women posed for those pictures, they were very happy to pose for those pictures you can tell by smiles and everything. Whoever said what you say is the one with the serious problem for even thinking such a thought.
The OP has no proof thst these pics are actualy of girls from the Sanford chapel( they could come from anywhere for all we know) If he actually took these pictures from far away, he has serious problemsI didn't get the impression that these were actual pictures of girls from the Sanford chapel. I don't think OP said they were. They seem to have been pulled off the internet as examples of what the OP is talking about.
The women posed for those pictures, they were very happy to pose for those pictures you can tell by smiles and everything. Whoever said what you say is the one with the serious problem for even thinking such a thought.But how do we know these are girls from the Sanford chapel? If they aren’t, why the hell should we believe that OP who seems to be saying( without proof) that girls at the Sanford chapel dress like this?
The women posed for those pictures, they were very happy to pose for those pictures you can tell by smiles and everything. Whoever said what you say is the one with the serious problem for even thinking such a thought.You're thinking of a different set of photos, there are no "smiles" or even faces at all in OP's pics.
Those of you claiming no photo proof missed the post with the lady & the pastor. :fryingpan:Where?
Do they think that exposing their wrinkled up knees is attractive? The knees are the ugliest part of the legs even for teenage girls, but for older women, it really stands out as a detraction to their looks.
Then stop looking, you sanctimonious creep, and pay closer attention to Mass.(https://media.tenor.com/images/b88aaec19e0ceb4ca47c859f410f6908/tenor.png)
Then stop looking, you sanctimonious creep, and pay closer attention to Mass.LOL!!!!!! There’s the reason why the priests say nothing to women about what they wear.
Then stop looking, you sanctimonious creep, and pay closer attention to Mass.Ahhh! But Mass is only a few hours long. Once this is over, how will feminist trad ladys excuse themselves, as their scandalous dress is openly seen on church grounds?
Then stop looking, you sanctimonious creep, and pay closer attention to Mass.How do you know it was even a man? I assumed it was a woman talking.
(https://media.tenor.com/images/b88aaec19e0ceb4ca47c859f410f6908/tenor.png)On SMAC radio last year, they played a sermon about modesty, (I believe from a FSSP Priest) and he said the girls purposely parade their immodesty at Mass , and that the boys and girls refer to it as the "Communion Cat Walk". I heard of an SSPX Priests say that some girls walk up and down the street of the neighborhoods in which resides certain boy(s) they are trying to attract.
On SMAC radio last year, they played a sermon about modesty, (I believe from a FSSP Priest) and he said the girls purposely parade their immodesty at Mass , and that the boys and girls refer to it as the "Communion Cat Walk". I heard of an SSPX Priests say that some girls walk up and down the street of the neighborhoods in which resides certain boy(s) they are trying to attract.That is disgusting! Why not just become a streetwalker? Better an honest prostitute than a hypocritical, sex-crazed Catholic!
The priests offer communion not only to women dressed like that, but even to ones who have been divorced and remarried. I've seen this first hand at SSPX mass centers.Perhaps those priests know something about the couple's marriage that you do not.
I understand all of that, but you cannot do anything about it, but the priest can.....and should, and might if you spoke with him about it.Ten years ago an extra large family move to our area and begin attending the sspx chapel here. Mostly girls, they all dressed immodestly.
Your only other feasible option is to talk to the girls' parents if you know them. If you don't know the parents, then unless you have the right personality you probably shouldn't talk to them about this because if they don't already know better, a stranger telling them anything is not likely to help matters.
Which is the reason why I made the suggestion that you sit in one of the front pews, which is about the only thing you actually could do, albeit strictly for your own benefit. Of course you can keep posting your complaints about your chapel here, I mean heck, they are certainly legitimate, but that doesn't really fix anything at your chapel.
I told my daughter she is lucky to have found out now, rather than later, about those young men.
Those poor men now, are married to the most high-maintenance, self-centered, young ladies I have ever seen.
And your daughter was fortunate to have been spared from men such as these.All the eligible young men seem the same, at all the chapels we visit. They chase the immodest young ladies and ignore the modest ones.
Poor men? They got what they were looking for.Do you really think this?
All the eligible young men seem the same, at all the chapels we visit. They chase the immodest young ladies and ignore the modest ones.If you are talking exclusively about SSPX chapels, I can comment that the fathers are not raising their sons and daughters properly because the SSPX does not teach them anything about it, they do not say one word about modesty, chaperoning, dress, flirting, boy chasing...… As a matter of fact, the girls sent to St. Mary's Kansas, the "marque" school of the SSPX, all come back bringing the immodest dress and boy chasing back to their home towns and contaminate the local little girls.
Where are the true Traditional Catholic GOOD men?
Why aren't fathers rearing their sons and daughters properly?
If you are talking exclusively about SSPX chapels, I can comment that the fathers are not raising their sons and daughters properly because the SSPX does not teach them anything about it, they do not say one word about modesty, chaperoning, dress, flirting, boy chasing...… As a matter of fact, the girls sent to St. Mary's Kansas, the "marque" school of the SSPX, all come back bringing the immodest dress and boy chasing back to their home towns and contaminate the local little girls.That was me Last Tradhican.
Maybe you should look into the sedevacantes chapels?
If you are talking exclusively about SSPX chapels, I can comment that the fathers are not raising their sons and daughters properly because the SSPX does not teach them anything about it, they do not say one word about modesty, chaperoning, dress, flirting, boy chasing...… As a matter of fact, the girls sent to St. Mary's Kansas, the "marque" school of the SSPX, all come back bringing the immodest dress and boy chasing back to their home towns and contaminate the local little girls.I am not sedevecanti and won't go to their masses.
Maybe you should look into the sedevacantes chapels?
I am not sedevecanti and won't go to their masses.Then you are stuck just like I am. Keep writing and maybe the SSPX might open their eyes.
Then you are stuck just like I am. Keep writing and maybe the SSPX might open their eyes.We won't go to the sspx, either.
God Bless and Keep up the good work.
I don’t live in the neighborhood of the SSPX Sanford Chapel. The neighborhood where the Sanford Florida SSPX Priory is located is like a small enclosed private community, so anyone that lives there sees what everyone is doing. I don’t live in the neighborhood of the SSPX Sanford Chapel, and don’t go to mass weekdays.1. Maybe they LIKE seeing young ladies dress this way.
The other day I was going to mass and I saw one of the young school teachers walking around in the tightests shortest shorts and a tight form fit sleeveless top and flip flops. I never go there, the priests live there. Does anyone think that 6 priest living there have not seen the girl dressed like that many times? A person that lives in the neighborhood told me he sees her walk by like that all the time.
That is a TEACHER in the school!
The SSPX priests either don’t care what anyone wears or they are cowards like the Novus Ordo priests, afraid to lose parishioners by saying anything.
The SSPX usually tries to have their priests live in community, with three being the minimum. Sanford would thus be a priory, and the priest will go to other mission chapels for Sunday and return tot he priory.
I wonder why are there SIX priests living at one SSPX chapel?
Though not in the church itself in the link above, it's not uncommon to see people dressed in "less than modest attire."
I don’t live in the neighborhood of the SSPX Sanford Chapel. The neighborhood where the Sanford Florida SSPX Priory is located is like a small enclosed private community, so anyone that lives there sees what everyone is doing. I don’t live in the neighborhood of the SSPX Sanford Chapel, and don’t go to mass weekdays.A teacher who teaches the children in an SSPX Priory school dresses like that when she is off work and no priest says anything? What a bad example for the little girls. They will probably grow up to dress the same way.
The other day I was going to mass and I saw one of the young school teachers walking around in the tightests shortest shorts and a tight form fit sleeveless top and flip flops. I never go there, the priests live there. Does anyone think that 6 priest living there have not seen the girl dressed like that many times? A person that lives in the neighborhood told me he sees her walk by like that all the time.
That is a TEACHER in the school!
The SSPX priests either don’t care what anyone wears or they are cowards like the Novus Ordo priests, afraid to lose parishioners by saying anything.
If only one SSPX priest would be manly enough to say anything. So many young girls being lost to the world while going to mass every Sunday and being told nothing about their immodesty.
LINK (https://www.instagram.com/p/Bl64515AYXO/?utm_source=ig_twitter_share&igshid=ndqcrm03syyz)Here's Bergolio giving a similar sign ( the hidden hand masonic sign) as the proud Florida SSPX prior in the link picture next to the exposed breast young girl.
Though not in the church itself in the link above, it's not uncommon to see people dressed in "less than modest attire."
1) Are you saying that immodestly dressed women posing in the middle of the photo as the centerpiece is a faithful of the priory??So, after searching around a bit more, it looks like the photo you submitted of the immodestly dressed woman is not a parishioner at all, nor are the pics taken at the Sanford priory. Apparently this was some kind of reception for Fr. Vernoy when he became an American citizen, and likely had no control or influence over what attire was worn by those attending at a neutral venue.
2) And that this was posted on the Sanford priory website (If so, can you supply the link)?
3) And that Fr. Vernoy is the priest next to her?
I have been largely discounting your allegations of immodesty in Sanford because of the anonymity, but now that you are submitting pictorial evidence (if the above are all true), I have to say that I am disgusted.
But I am withholding judgment until you respond...
So, after searching around a bit more, it looks like the photo you submitted of the immodestly dressed woman is not a parishioner at all, nor are the pics taken at the Sanford priory. Apparently this was some kind of reception for Fr. Vernoy when he became an American citizen, and likely had no control or influence over what attire was worn by those attending at a neutral venue.That was me ^^^^
Yes, it looks bad for 7 SSPX members to be posing with this woman in a picture, and I'm not sure why they are, but my guess woud be that despite any smiles, they felt just as uncomfortable with the situation they walked into as you or I would.
Unless there is some evidence to the contrary, it is also your duty to render the same benefit of the doubt (and there is plenty of doubt).
So, after searching around a bit more, it looks like the photo you submitted of the immodestly dressed woman is not a parishioner at all, nor are the pics taken at the Sanford priory. Apparently this was some kind of reception for Fr. Vernoy when he became an American citizen, and likely had no control or influence over what attire was worn by those attending at a neutral venue.The picture was posted as a link on this thread on post #38, posted as a link likely because the girl was so scandalously dressed, the picture was a closeup, this was the posting:
Yes, it looks bad for 7 SSPX members to be posing with this woman in a picture, and I'm not sure why they are, but my guess woud be that despite any smiles, they felt just as uncomfortable with the situation they walked into as you or I would.
Unless there is some evidence to the contrary, it is also your duty to render the same benefit of the doubt (and there is plenty of doubt).
The prior pictured with a lady dressed as the original poster described; https://scontent.ftpa1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/s960x960/38160595_1866071290153618_7337076340945846272_o.jpg?_nc_cat=107&_nc_oc=AQnTihzQnbT6uq7u8M2GFbKsjK8bDDyl7cmC-Fpu4TA5xZ7-lbSKUuqMWmZCFhXHCkYSk7Dhb9KS2cNbxljd8iaj&_nc_ht=scontent.ftpa1-1.fna&oh=a15f5c34d6feba971e319b7e0624c81d&oe=5E57C343 (https://scontent.ftpa1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/s960x960/38160595_1866071290153618_7337076340945846272_o.jpg?_nc_cat=107&_nc_oc=AQnTihzQnbT6uq7u8M2GFbKsjK8bDDyl7cmC-Fpu4TA5xZ7-lbSKUuqMWmZCFhXHCkYSk7Dhb9KS2cNbxljd8iaj&_nc_ht=scontent.ftpa1-1.fna&oh=a15f5c34d6feba971e319b7e0624c81d&oe=5E57C343)
The girl is not a parishioner (but it is striking in that it shows that at Fr. Vernoy’s own home, at his private party in his own home, he does not pull the girl apart and tell her to cover up. Instead, he lets her parade around scandalizing all the priests and parishioners there. Moreover, he proudly posts the picture on the STM Facebook page to further scandalize others. That just shows that he will never tell a parishioner to dress modestly, he does not care in the least.)
The picture was posted as a link on this thread on post #38, posted as a link likely because the girl was so scandalously dressed, the picture was a closeup, this was the posting:Thank you for these clarifications and corrections.
The picture was posted by someone else, I am the OP and I had never seen the picture before the link was provided. Furthermore I did not want to post it because it is too scandalous.
Then on posting #103 someone posted the complete picture, which again was the first time I had seen it.
A few days ago I Googled St. Thomas More Church Sanford to get the church bulletin and the Google map page that comes out on the right had a link to the St. Thomas More Church Sanford Facebook page and when I clicked it I found that picture as a featured picture. I just looked it up now and the picture has been removed. I thought the original picture poster on CI had exposed a secret private picture, but instead I found that it was proudly posted as a featured picture on the STM Facebook page. That is when I posted my comment on posting #111:
Even more amazing is that the picture of the Florida SSPX prior with the exposed breasts young girl was taken at the priory and is proudly posted on the SSPX Florida Priory Website, that is where it was copy and pasted from!
It looks like the picture was posted by three different people.
Now to answer your questions:
The girl is not a parishioner (but it is striking in that it shows that at Fr. Vernoy’s own home, at his private party in his own home, he does not pull the girl apart and tell her to cover up. Instead, he lets her parade around scandalizing all the priests and parishioners there. Moreover, he proudly posts the picture on the STM Facebook page to further scandalize others. That just shows that he will never tell a parishioner to dress modestly, he does not care in the least.)
The picture was taken at the priory back patio. That is where they have all the parties, get togethers. Anyone that knows the priory can attest to the fact that the picture was taken there.
I’m told the picture was taken at a celebration of Fr. Vernoy becoming a US Citizen, but I’m surprised that Fr. De Chambour is in the picture, since he left the SSPX for the Resistance, but time flies, so maybe he was there when Fr. Vernoy became a citizen.
Thank you for these clarifications and corrections.
In light of them, I am modifying my opinion somewhat.
I had wanted to believe that Fr. Vernoy has found himself in an uncomfortable and awkward social situation, and therefore, perhaps from human weakness (to which we are all continually subject) rendered a human respect which caused him to pretend not to notice.
At least that would have been understandable (which is not to say condoned).
But if it is true, that removed from an awkward situation, Fr. Vernoy loaded the immodest picture to the chapel website, it becomes rather difficult to continue to extend the benefit of the doubt.
The least that can be said, is that Fr. Vernoy exercised poor judgment in uploading that picture (if he did; could it have been uploaded by a secretary, or someone else?).
I’m told the picture was taken at a celebration of Fr. Vernoy becoming a US Citizen,but I’m surprised that Fr. De Chambord is in the picture, since he left the SSPX for the Resistance, but time flies, so maybe he was there when Fr. Vernoy became a citizen.
Agreed. Posting the picture on their website crosses a line. Prudence does not always required a correction, so, as you said, given the circuмstances, I could see someone just ignoring it. But posting it online is an altogether different matter.Will Banezian and Xavier come to explain this away? Afterall the SSPX has not changed!
If Traditional Catholic women/girls see the picture, they could easily be confirmed in their inclination to claim that there's nothing wrong with dressing like that. After all, a Traditional Catholic priest has posted the picture. It's grave scandal due to the bad example given.
A few months ago I was chatting with the priest after Mass. He looked over at a young woman and then asked me to point out her mother to him. I did and he immediately went over to the mother and discussed the length of the skirt the daughter was wearing. I walked away but did hear him tell the mother that her daughter was not to wear that skirt anymore.
I am willing to bet Fr. Pieroni will put a stop to that. He has no qualms about correcting people on their irreverent dress or behavior.
There is no way Fr. Pieroni will interfere with Prior Toupee, who is in the middle of selling chapels off in Florida like candy. Money is the priority for the $$PX Florida.So sad.
Regarding Father toupee he is also a committeeman for the local Republican Party. While the republicans are a degree above the democrats for the most part, why is a priest so involved in politics of this manner? Arent there any other duties the priest has?
Nope, they have no presence there. The bizarre thing is that they seem to have missions in the most obscure parts of Florida. For example, there is one in Miramar Beach, a tourist destination with about 8,000 in population. In Brookville's population of approximately 7,00, there is one. Total waste of resources.Miramar is extremely wealthy, that's why.
Miramar is extremely wealthy, that's why.
It fits in perfectly with the new SSPX; give us money, and we will provide you with a priest. A pay play, So to speak.Absolutely.
Also with Miramar Beach I believe a benefactor passed away within the last year or two and left the building to the Sspx as well.
I feel sorry for the benefactors or priest who will their chapels or buildings to the SSPX. Eventually, they will just be sold off.Yep.
The Mennonite has excellent literature about the subject too..
for the record have never seen anyone at any SSPX chapel dress like that.You are very fortunate.