Author Topic: Fr. Z sort of talks about SSPX legitimacy (Read 1557 times)

LaramieHirsch · « **on:** February 13, 2016, 06:57:27 PM »

So, the acceptability of whether or not we can go to an SSPX chapel is being discussed over at Fr. Z's blog. Yours truly took a small part, referring to a Society book someone gave me. I got some responses from Fr. Z, as well.

If anyone is interested in adding any further insight into the discussion, I am all ears.

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2016/02/card-burke-on-attending-sspx-chapels-only-when-absolute-necessity/

Stubborn · « **Reply #1 on:** February 14, 2016, 10:41:11 AM »

Laramie, I hope you realize that Fr. Z is and has been a known compromiser and a liberal, and his answers in your reply demonstrate those facts.

Have you read The Great Sacrilege (PDF file)? If not, please read it.
It was written in 1970 when the revolution was strikingly fresh, but it could have easily been written today - iow, the book is prophetic in many things about the NO and offers the best explanation as to why the new "mass" must be avoided.

If you have not read it, please do then come back and see if it answers your questions - and more.

The Penny Catechism · « **Reply #2 on:** February 15, 2016, 07:34:12 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Have you read The Great Sacrilege (PDF file)? If not, please read it.
It was written in 1970 when the revolution was strikingly fresh, but it could have easily been written today - iow, the book is prophetic in many things about the NO and offers the best explanation as to why the new "mass" must be avoided.

I claim ignorance on Fr. Wathen with the exception of 3rd party opinions. From what I've read so far; an interesting perspective through the lens of a priest with the balls to put his criticisms in print when others refused.

He was swimming upstream for sure and most likely knew that he would get payback. Thank you so much for providing the link.

LaramieHirsch · « **Reply #3 on:** February 19, 2016, 05:16:11 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Laramie, I hope you realize that Fr. Z is and has been a known compromiser and a liberal, and his answers in your reply demonstrate those facts.

Perhaps. However, such people should not just go about unchallenged.

Today, he touched a bit on the scandalous things Pope Francis said about contraception and Donald Trump "obsessing" about building a wall against Mexico.

And then he said he was going to open up comments. His specific words were:

Quote

The moderation queue is ON. I will cull comments severely. Don’t even bother if you simply want to bash the Pope.

UPDATE: I’ve deleted a lot of comments. Some of them were not bad, but I knew they would just stoke a fire I don’t want burning. The others… some of you lost my respect.

What do you say to that? What can you say? Does he want comments or not?

When I checked in to this blog post of his, there were only four comments up--all of the posts except one was sucking up to him.

So, what really interested me in Fr. Z's conversation was not, exactly, a discussion about Pope Francis. Rather, I was interested in his censorship.

I threw this out there, and it's awaiting moderation. I highly doubt it'll be posted. And if it is posted, I highly doubt it'll be put up and not have bolded red text next to it, passively-aggressively chiding me for dancing around the idea of being rude to the pope, or some such thing.

Quote

What can I possibly say, then? I love lamp. Water is delicious. The three primary colors are colorful. How can outrage not be expected?

The pope says these kinds of things. And I am upset by it. I want to talk about it in public spheres, and I could be silenced, labeled, or ostracized.

I have no hope for our world’s future.

Meh. Why obsess over it? Does little crap like this mean anything at all, really?

Stubborn · « **Reply #4 on:** February 19, 2016, 08:04:06 AM »

To each his own but personally, I would never bother with him. He is part of the Michael Voris and Fr. Nickelodeon trio.

Being the liberal compromiser that he is, he can talk as orthodox as ever one time, then flip around to his compromiser self the next. Blows hot and cold out of both sides of his mouth can easily confuse the unknowing.

He only wants the type of comments that won't make him look bad to other compromisers. Anyone who posts that the pope speaks heresy and abomination likely will never show up on the screen, not unless he needs it to serve a purpose.

Viva Cristo Rey · « **Reply #5 on:** February 19, 2016, 02:09:30 PM »

Quote from: LaramieHirsch

So, the acceptability of whether or not we can go to an SSPX chapel is being discussed over at Fr. Z's blog. Yours truly took a small part, referring to a Society book someone gave me. I got some responses from Fr. Z, as well.

If anyone is interested in adding any further insight into the discussion, I am all ears.

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2016/02/card-burke-on-attending-sspx-chapels-only-when-absolute-necessity/

Father z should be more concerned about the gαy parishes, pro sodomist priests in his back yard.
Recently, an Irish priest called the police on a fellow priest who was molesting children. It was the priest who did the right thing who was punished.