Author Topic: Just met a second fssp priest. (Read 4378 times)

Jovita · « **on:** February 23, 2017, 04:43:59 PM »

The first one convinced me that fssp was created to capture traditionalists. This second guy at a growing community must have the folks duped or they are just sooo desperate that they oversee the obvious flaw in this priest. He is NOT a traditionalist. I am willing to give it one more try, just to say, three strikes your out.

MMagdala · « **Reply #1 on:** February 23, 2017, 11:24:43 PM »

Quote from: Jovita

The first one convinced me that fssp was created to capture traditionalists. This second guy at a growing community must have the folks duped or they are just sooo desperate that they oversee the obvious flaw in this priest. He is NOT a traditionalist. I am willing to give it one more try, just to say, three strikes your out.

Innocent question: What makes him not traditional? Is he promoting the N.O., the "new" "catechism," the Council, modern canonizations, or the Conciliar Popes? Does he say two forms of Masses?

Nadir · « **Reply #2 on:** February 24, 2017, 04:57:44 PM »

Some of the Compromises of FSSP:

Priests Trained to Say N.O. Masses;
New Rite for Confirmations;
New Calendar for Feast Days

http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/B556_FSSP.html

Arsenius · « **Reply #3 on:** February 24, 2017, 06:32:34 PM »

Quote from: Nadir

Some of the Compromises of FSSP:

Priests Trained to Say N.O. Masses;
New Rite for Confirmations;
New Calendar for Feast Days

http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/B556_FSSP.html

That's all false. I personally attended a confirmation done at a FSSP parish. The rite of confirmation was the traditional form. They also follow the 1962 calendar. I've never met a Fraternity priest who knew how to say the New Mass, let alone offer it.

JezusDeKoning · « **Reply #4 on:** February 24, 2017, 06:48:48 PM »

Quote from: Arsenius

Quote from: Nadir
Some of the Compromises of FSSP:

Priests Trained to Say N.O. Masses;
New Rite for Confirmations;
New Calendar for Feast Days

http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/B556_FSSP.html

That's all false. I personally attended a confirmation done at a FSSP parish. The rite of confirmation was the traditional form. They also follow the 1962 calendar. I've never met a Fraternity priest who knew how to say the New Mass, let alone offer it.

The Fraternity of St. Peter is basically a diocesan-approved Society of St. Pius X, even with its own seminary in Nebraska dedicated to saying the Latin Mass.

If they were to be trained to say the Novus Ordo, then what would be the point? They would go to their local diocesan seminary.

Nadir · « **Reply #5 on:** February 24, 2017, 09:26:12 PM »

The point is that some priests of the FSSP serve in non-FSSP parishes, and so have to fullfil the requirements of the newchurch parishes and newchurch bishops, even if they are on the conservative side. They also acknowledge the Novus Ordo as valid, in fact calling it the "ordinary" rite, as opposed to the "extraordinary" rite. And that these are one and the same Mass. Therefore their "Ordinary Rite" is a preferred option for which they are trained. That does not mean that they do not learn to say the Novus Ordo. If you read the link I posted and opened the links at the bottom of that page you might understand the compromised situation they are in.

Arsenius · « **Reply #6 on:** February 24, 2017, 09:53:56 PM »

Quote from: Nadir

The point is that some priests of the FSSP serve in non-FSSP parishes, and so have to fullfil the requirements of the newchurch parishes and newchurch bishops, even if they are on the conservative side. They also acknowledge the Novus Ordo as valid, in fact calling it the "ordinary" rite, as opposed to the "extraordinary" rite. And that these are one and the same Mass. Therefore their "Ordinary Rite" is a preferred option for which they are trained. That does not mean that they do not learn to say the Novus Ordo. If you read the link I posted and opened the links at the bottom of that page you might understand the compromised situation they are in.

No need. I've attended FSSP masses in multiple states for almost 10 years now. The use of the terms "ordinary" and "extraordinary" are complex and usually misunderstood. Ordinary really just means that it is the "rite" being used by the ordinary (i.e., the bishop). Dr. Peter Kwasniewski has written various articles/essays about the misuse of this terminology on both sides of the liturgical line. The SSPX and the Resistance priests also recognize the Novus Ordo as being valid. Fr. Ripperger, while no longer with the FSSP, has published extensively on the objective superiority of the pre-Vatican 2 mass based on sound Thomistic philosophy. I've certainly never heard a FSSP priest say that the Novus Ordo and the 1962 are one and the same mass - if they truly believed that, there are far more lucrative positions available in the Conciliar Establishment. As for FSSP priests functioning within Novus Ordo parishes - I've personally attended the 1962 at such parishes before. In the case which I observed, the FSSP set up a totally separate chapel and functioned as a totally separate community temporarily borrowing space from the Novus Ordo parish. Absolutely no commingling of anything other than office space. That doesn't preclude the existence of other places where the sanctuary is indeed shared; that setup, however, certainly isn't the rule of thumb - neither is it traditionally unprecedented for that matter- think of the Holy Sepulchre which is shared with various schismatic Orthodox sects.

The TIA article is 5 years old. Things change.

Arsenius · « **Reply #7 on:** February 24, 2017, 10:03:19 PM »

Also regarding the TIA article: It's basically just hearsay and published anonymously. Where are the pictures and supporting evidence? None of it sounds impossible, but you need to have evidence to back up these claims.

songbird · « **Reply #8 on:** February 25, 2017, 04:39:21 PM »

Say it like it is: There is no ordination, that is no consecration, that is no sacraments/no Precious Blood. What do you have, nothing.

So,why do you bother?

josefamenendez · « **Reply #9 on:** February 25, 2017, 05:55:38 PM »

I didn't think it is the priest's ordination directly that is the issue, but the consecration of the Bishop doing the ordination that is the problem. If the Bishop was consecrated prior to 1968 ( even Novus Ordo 1968) it was a valid consecration and not a Vll "installation" as the consecration for bishop was changed to the point of nullity at that time.
I know this is not news here at CI, but point being there may be (rare) valid priests left in the NO and FSSP that were consecrated by a (old) valid Bishop. Doesn't validate the NO Mass however, but I wonder about the FSSP.
I knew an FSSP priest that was ordained by JPll- a modernist Pope, but a Bishop prior to 1968. I suspect he is validly ordained. Few and far between, however, and getting thinner by the year.

mw2016 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 25, 2017, 07:09:38 PM »

Quote from: Nadir

Some of the Compromises of FSSP:

Priests Trained to Say N.O. Masses;
New Rite for Confirmations;
New Calendar for Feast Days

http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/B556_FSSP.html

Yes, this is all false.

We had to attend an FSSP parish for three years. They follow the Traditional calendar and Holy Days.

Confirmations were done in the Traditional Rite.

I don't know if there are any combined N.O./Trad parishes in the FSSP (the way there are at Indult Masses) but our FSSP parish had no Novus Ordo Masses at all. ANd I am not sure if those priests even knew how to say it. Maybe they learn it in the seminary or something, but I never saw one do it in our parish.

MMagdala · « **Reply #11 on:** February 25, 2017, 11:45:42 PM »

Obviously I haven't met every traditionalist priest in the world, but none of those I have met know how to say the N.O. In fact, they also don't know the traditional English hymns even, such as Immaculate Mary, O God Almighty Father, etc.

magdalena59 · « **Reply #12 on:** February 26, 2017, 07:31:18 PM »

Quote from: Jovita

The first one convinced me that fssp was created to capture traditionalists. This second guy at a growing community must have the folks duped or they are just sooo desperate that they oversee the obvious flaw in this priest. He is NOT a traditionalist. I am willing to give it one more try, just to say, three strikes your out.

Sorry to hear that.

The FSSP priests I know do not celebrate the N.O. One expressly stated that he does not know how to celebrate the N.O. Mass and couldn't even describe it. They may share chapels if necessary but FSSP follow the 1962 calendar and offer the Traditional Latin Mass.

I have never felt that the FSSP was trying to pull me away or "capture" me from the traditional Church but has actually led me deeper into the traditional Church.

I am wondering what it is that convinced you that he was not a traditionalist?

--------------------------------------------------
http://ourdomesticcalling.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------

Ekim · « **Reply #13 on:** February 26, 2017, 09:03:57 PM »

I was pursuing a vocation back in the early 90's. I met Fr. Bissig and Emerson. Both very nice. I also communicated with +Williamson. He told me the problem with the Fraternity was not the validity of the Mass, it was the sin of omission. By their refusal to point out modernism and modernists in Rome they place Souls in grave danger. +Fellay use to say that they make the true Mass just another side show in the Ecuмanism Circus. About eight years ago I attended a FSSP Mass in Knoxville TN. It was held at a joint parish. I got there early to find the tambourine / guitar "Spanish Mass" was just wrapping up. Then came the set change...quickly push the table up to the altar and change the candlesticks. When the FSSP was finished...this is no lie...the Byzantines rolled out Icons and rearranged the sanctuary once again for the "Divine Liturgy ".

It made me sad to see how true +Fellay was...the True Mass was just another show in the tent...sad that he no longer cares about that.

+Williamson was write as well. As can be seen by the Neo SSPX. They now commit the same sin of omission. Their priests have been compromised. They are no longer "Worriors" of the faith ready to do battle for Christ the King but rather "Gentlemen", prepared to discuss the differences between Eternal Rome and Conciliar Rome...if they even still use those terms.

The FSSP (etc...) is not dangerous necessarily because of what they do, but because of what they don't do.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #14 on:** February 26, 2017, 11:03:32 PM »

Quote from: Ekim

I was pursuing a vocation back in the early 90's. I met Fr. Bissig and Emerson. Both very nice. I also communicated with +Williamson. He told me the problem with the Fraternity was not the validity of the Mass, it was the sin of omission. By their refusal to point out modernism and modernists in Rome they place Souls in grave danger. +Fellay used to say that they make the true Mass just another side show in the Ecuмenism Circus.

About eight years ago I attended a FSSP Mass in Knoxville TN. It was held at a joint parish. I got there early to find the tambourine / guitar "Spanish Mass" was just wrapping up. Then came the set change...quickly push the table up to the altar and change the candlesticks. When the FSSP was finished...this is no lie...the Byzantines rolled out Icons and rearranged the sanctuary once again for the "Divine Liturgy ".

It made me sad to see how accurate +Fellay [used to be]...the True Mass was just another show in the tent...sad that he no longer cares about that.

+Williamson was right as well. As can be seen by the Neo SSPX. They now commit the same sin of omission. Their priests have been compromised. They are no longer "Warriors" of the faith ready to do battle for Christ the King but rather "Gentlemen", prepared to discuss the differences between Eternal Rome and Conciliar Rome...if they even still use those terms.

The FSSP (etc...) is not dangerous necessarily because of what they do, but because of what they don't do.

It seems you're lumping the FSSP, +Fellay and +Williamson all in the same group together, no? Progressively becoming capitulant?