Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => General Discussion => Topic started by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 24, 2017, 05:57:11 PM

Title: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 24, 2017, 05:57:11 PM
It has occurred to me that I haven't stated my position with regard to the SSPX. Therefore, I would like to take this opportunity to do so. My position is that I have no position. We attend an SSPX Church since it's only 20 minutes from home and have done so for over 20 years.

We have an outstanding priest, who, incidentally, has the complete set of +Williamson's lectures on DVD. He is a graduate of Columbia University with a degree in civil engineering and worked for a prominent Boston consulting firm prior to entering the seminary. So, unlike some of the other newly ordained priests, he's had some experience in the "world". He was also a running back for the Columbia Lions prior to blowing out his knee.

He is filled with zeal for the salvation of souls and urges us all to have the same zeal. His sermons are outstanding; he often interjects them with personal experiences he's had, in the world or spiritual ones related to the world. He's the best priest we've ever had. I've enjoyed many personal conversations with him especially when he joined us for Christmas dinner last year. And, as he indicated, may do so again this year.

He went nuts over my wife's pecan pie: pun intended.

Finally, I should add, that I have no interest in the politics of the SSPX vs Resistance. All have their reasons, and I respect them. My principal goal is to hopefully save my soul, aid my wife in saving her's and anyone else who may cross my path.

I guess you could say this is my manifesto. If I'm to be excoriated for my position, so be it. Cheers!
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on November 24, 2017, 06:02:06 PM
You are blessed by God to have a Holy Priest (and friend).    

Yes, save our souls.  Pray for my husband and me.
On December 14th.  6 month anniversary death of our beloved Pastor and friend.  May he RIP. 

Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 24, 2017, 06:11:38 PM
It has occurred to me that I haven't stated my position with regard to the SSPX. Therefore, I would like to take this opportunity to do so. My position is that I have no position. We attend an SSPX Church since it's only 20 minutes from home and have done so for over 20 years.

We have an outstanding priest, who, incidentally, has the complete set of +Williamson's lectures on DVD. He is a graduate of Columbia University with a degree in civil engineering and worked for a prominent Boston consulting firm prior to entering the seminary. So, unlike some of the other newly ordained priests, he's had some experience in the "world". He was also a running back for the Columbia Lions prior to blowing out his knee.

He is filled with zeal for the salvation of souls and urges us all to have the same zeal. His sermons are outstanding; he often interjects them with personal experiences he's had, in the world or spiritual ones related to the world. He's the best priest we've ever had. I've enjoyed many personal conversations with him especially when he joined us for Christmas dinner last year. And, as he indicated, may do so again this year.

He went nuts over my wife's pecan pie: pun intended.

Finally, I should add, that I have no interest in the politics of the SSPX vs Resistance. All have their reasons, and I respect them. My principal goal is to hopefully save my soul, aid my wife in saving her's and anyone else who may cross my path.

I guess you could say this is my manifesto. If I'm to be excoriated for my position, so be it. Cheers!
Quite edified, really.

Would like to hear a bit more about the pecan pie, however.

You have cut to the quick:

+BW once told me, "Salvation is all that matters.  Everything else is peanuts."

It seems you have understood that much, and that much is enough.

Not trying to be "paternalistic" or condescending; good judgment on the forums is rare enough to warrant a bit of notice.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: JPaul on November 24, 2017, 07:01:23 PM
Gwaredd,
You have a good, a wise, and a realistic view of things.  Much the same as my own, including my beloved wife's cooking as well as her goodness.
If you have a good priest, why look elsewhere as there are so few of them who come into our lives.

Affiliations and factions mean nothing in the greater schema, it is the Religion and the Truth which will save our souls.


Gum beannaicheadh ​​Dia thu

Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 24, 2017, 07:05:57 PM
Gwaredd,
You have a good, a wise, and a realistic view of things.  Much the same as my own, including my beloved wife's cooking as well as her goodness.
If you have a good priest, why look elsewhere as there are so few of them who come into our lives.

Affiliations and factions mean nothing in the greater schema, it is the Religion and the Truth which will save our souls.


Gum beannaicheadh ​​Dia thu

A chi hefyd. 😊 In case anyone is interested chi is pronounced klee and hefyd is hefid. Now, didn't that make your day? 🤣 Well, I'm out, must go and pray my Rosary. I wish everyone a good and restful evening.


Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: cassini on November 25, 2017, 08:35:45 AM
It has occurred to me that I haven't stated my position with regard to the SSPX. Therefore, I would like to take this opportunity to do so. My position is that I have no position. We attend an SSPX Church since it's only 20 minutes from home and have done so for over 20 years.

Finally, I should add, that I have no interest in the politics of the SSPX vs Resistance. All have their reasons, and I respect them. My principal goal is to hopefully save my soul, aid my wife in saving her's and anyone else who may cross my path.

Well said Thomas. Unfortunately my own experience of the SSPX V Resistance does not leave me with the 'respect' you write of. By all means one must respect any individual's conscience in this matter, but what I have seen with my own eyes does not deserve respect. I have seen elderly taken aside and frightened into abandoning their daily masses in a church that is designed to reflect Catholic history, abandoning their numerous devotions etc., replacing these with a sunday Mass in a hotel room. I see some of the active resistance attend Mass on special days of devotion and then go absent again. I saw one Resistance woman bury her brother in a SSPX chapel never to be seen again.

If one word of Modernism had been uttered in the last six years in this same church I would have joined them. But nothing, absolutely nothing had changed, except the loss of so many Masses. Who in the resistance will make up to the Lord and souls for such losses?

I have written to Bishop Williamson asking him who will replace these Masses lost. Needless to say the answer I got totally avoided any such answer.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on November 25, 2017, 08:50:57 AM
SSPX, the resistance ,  NO etc.  The church is divided into so many cliques.    



The 4 marks of The Roman Catholic Church are
One, Holy , Catholic and Apostolic.  

We are CATHOLICS!
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on November 25, 2017, 08:52:25 AM
 :cheers:And Pecan pie
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Matthew on November 25, 2017, 10:22:04 AM
It has occurred to me that I haven't stated my position with regard to the SSPX. Therefore, I would like to take this opportunity to do so. My position is that I have no position. We attend an SSPX Church since it's only 20 minutes from home and have done so for over 20 years.

We have an outstanding priest, who, incidentally, has the complete set of +Williamson's lectures on DVD. He is a graduate of Columbia University with a degree in civil engineering and worked for a prominent Boston consulting firm prior to entering the seminary. So, unlike some of the other newly ordained priests, he's had some experience in the "world". He was also a running back for the Columbia Lions prior to blowing out his knee.

He is filled with zeal for the salvation of souls and urges us all to have the same zeal. His sermons are outstanding; he often interjects them with personal experiences he's had, in the world or spiritual ones related to the world. He's the best priest we've ever had. I've enjoyed many personal conversations with him especially when he joined us for Christmas dinner last year. And, as he indicated, may do so again this year.

He went nuts over my wife's pecan pie: pun intended.

Finally, I should add, that I have no interest in the politics of the SSPX vs Resistance. All have their reasons, and I respect them. My principal goal is to hopefully save my soul, aid my wife in saving her's and anyone else who may cross my path.

I guess you could say this is my manifesto. If I'm to be excoriated for my position, so be it. Cheers!

I must point this out: that it is a rare gift to be able to abstract from your own personal situation, and realize that others' situations are far different.

For example, you seem to be at one of the best SSPX chapels in existence, going by your testimony and description. You don't speak much about propaganda, lies, manipulation of the Faithful, evidence of Modernist infection, spying on the Faithful, various tyrannical behavior, etc. but I assure you, these things have happened and are happening at other chapels.

I'm happy for you that you're on the path to salvation, and that your particular SSPX chapel seems to be the prudential answer in your case. For that matter, there is an older man at my old SSPX chapel who recently passed away -- if I were him, I might have done what he did -- that is to say, stay with the SSPX. For him, it was more important to get the Last Rites, go to weekly Mass, etc. than stand up for the future of Tradition and stand on one's principles. In 2012, he only had a few years of life left, and he has no Traditional children or grandchildren that I'm aware of.

That is why I have to say the decision is one of PRUDENCE, not FAITH or DOGMA.  If it was a matter of Faith, then those who chose wrongly would literally be going to hell. But such is not the case. It's about prudence -- a subjective judgment we make based on the information we have, and our own precise situation.

The SSPX is a monolithic, multi-national corporation. But that doesn't mean that its priests all participate in one "hive mind" or some nonsense like that. They are all individual souls. Some are liberal, and some are not. But they are all loyal to the Monster at this time, and they all have to be subject to it, following its laws and directives, and that is the problem with SSPX chapels:

Even if you had the Cure of Ars offering daily Mass at your SSPX chapel, which happened to be built like a Cathedral, there is still the problem that your SSPX chapel is part of the SSPX Corporation with its liberal-ruled headquarters in Menzingen. You are going to have visits from the District Superior, etc. who will tell you that Vatican II isn't so bad, that we are excessive in our resistance to Vatican II, that we need to be more moderate, that Rome isn't so bad, etc.

Those things were all said recently at my SSPX chapel in San Antonio, by Fr. Wegner. I'm not going to expose my children to priests uttering such lies. Vatican II is heretical and I want no part of it. It IS a superheresy, the biggest crisis to ever befall the Church. I am Traditional Catholic, the son of Traditional Catholics, and was raised Traditional Catholic from birth. The only way to react to Modernism/Vatican II/Conciliar Church is COMPLETE ABSTINENCE, complete aloofness. Everything else is dangerous compromise, supping with the devil.

When someone tries to tone down my resistance and hatred for Vatican II, a huge alarm goes off and I put up a wall of separation.

Furthermore, the SSPX is Wal-mart, and the rest of the Trad world is like the mom & pop stores Wal-mart routinely puts out of business. By attending the SSPX and making donations every Sunday, you're feeding the monster.

As an organization, I hate the SSPX. Not the people in the organization, but the organization itself. Its leaders are my enemies, because they are enemies of the Faith. They are in the same category as Pope Francis, even if the latter is further along in the corruption process. I pray that they be converted and confess their mortal sins before they die. If I could make a phone call and the whole SSPX organization could be shut down and put out of business, I would do it in a heartbeat. The SSPX is worldly, corrupt, liberal, and compromising. They are using techniques normally associated with Freemasonic politicians.

NOTE: I didn't say I want to nuke all the priests, people, etc. I just said put the SSPX out of business. Believe me, those priests would all start independent chapels, and probably in the same places they are in now. But it would be without all the monolithic, Big Business attitude they have right now. Each chapel would be on its own. Some would be liberal, others would be great. It would all depend on the area, the priest, and the congregation.

The SSPX got too big, and for years they've had a problem with avarice (desiring to acquire real estate and power) and they think they ARE the Church. They look down on other non-SSPX Trad priests/groups. I STILL have to routinely chase these thoughts and prejudices out of my head, after attending an SSPX seminary, chapels, etc. for years. They seriously consider non-SSPX chapels and non-SSPX priests as automatically 2nd class or lower, as automatically suspect.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Matthew on November 25, 2017, 10:36:02 AM
Anyone who criticizes having to go to a hotel room for Mass hasn't been Trad long, and/or doesn't understand what the Trad movement is all about.

The Trad movement is about keeping the Faith, and keeping oneself unsullied from the influences of Modernism and Vatican II.

We are in lifeboats. Lifeboats are USUALLY rustic. And in fact, more often than not, when the lifeboats get too comfy, people start mistaking the lifeboat for the sinking boat they left! That's what happened to the SSPX. The SSPX did such a good job re-creating the Church: a network of chapels, seminaries, ordinations, retreat centers, parochial schools, etc. that some people think the Crisis is over, and that the SSPX *IS* the Church!
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: kiwiboy on November 25, 2017, 11:05:44 AM
Going to be yet again, the little boy who says the emperor has no clothes.

NO GOOD CATHOLIC CAN IN CONSCIENCE ATTEND THE SSPX.

The reasoning is the same as not attending the indult Mass.

One of the saints in the time of the Arian crises refused to accept Holy Communion from an Arian Bishop. Perfectly validly ordained and consecrated, perfectly "traditional", but he was an arian and in union with the arian heresy.

Those who are in union with the modernist heresy, are in the exact same way, to be avoided.

The SSPX is included in this because it has already made 4 agreements with Rome.

1. Holy Orders,
2. Confessions
3. Matrimony (will be the most obvious to people)
4. The deal with the Argentinian government and Rome recognising the SSPX.

This position has nothing to do with Sedevacantism or some kind of extremism, or flat earth(some will think that!)

It is just the position that the SSPX has held for many years (before the resistance), and is based on the moral theology and practice of the Church of all ages.

AMDG
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 25, 2017, 11:17:26 AM
Anyone who criticizes having to go to a hotel room for Mass hasn't been Trad long, and/or doesn't understand what the Trad movement is all about.

The Trad movement is about keeping the Faith, and keeping oneself unsullied from the influences of Modernism and Vatican II.

We are in lifeboats. Lifeboats are USUALLY rustic. And in fact, more often than not, when the lifeboats get too comfy, people start mistaking the lifeboat for the sinking boat they left! That's what happened to the SSPX. The SSPX did such a good job re-creating the Church: a network of chapels, seminaries, ordinations, retreat centers, parochial schools, etc. that some people think the Crisis is over, and that the SSPX *IS* the Church!
In reading some of the horror stories regarding the various SSPX chapels, we consider ourselves very fortunate to have what we have. We have never had a pastor who touted some of the things that a few have posted. However, +Fellay is an entirely different matter.

As an example, I had a talk with our former pastor about the situation with +Fellay and Rome. I asked him if +Fellay actually signed this spurious agreement with Rome what would be your position. He replied that in that case, we could not follow him. Our current pastor is of the same mind; in fact, more so. In his sermons, he often demonizes the current Roman regime and warns the faithful that attending a Novus Ordo "mass" would be gravely sinful, since these masses so-called make a mockery out of the Holy Sacrifice. Nor, have we ever heard him claim that the SSPX "is the Church". In fact, he has often stated that "we are in a holding pattern" unless and until there is a complete return to Tradition on the part of Rome. As I stated above, +Fellay is a different matter. What he has in mind or what his real intent is to forge some sort of "agreement" that would essentially put the SSPX out of business. ++Lefebvre was lied to by JPII regarding the ordinations in 1988, so does +Fellay really believe that somehow the situation has changed in 2017?

Personally, I wouldn't trust +Feally to run a carwash much less allow him to run a priestly fraternity: run it into the ground probably but certainly not build it up. As far as finances are concerned, I've watched this with much trepidation. It seems that +Fellay wants to build is fraternity using the Roman model. On the other hand, one has to admit that the SSPX, despite what anyone may think, is growing: a lot. Therefore, I guess it's not surprising that they have built a new seminary in Virginia as the one in Winona was old and dilapidated.

Finally, it's extremely unfortunate that many have experienced such challenges to your Faith by some of the priests in the SSPX; but, as one SSPX priest explained to me +Fellay has his own, hand-picked sycophants who will do anything he tells them. Thus, +Fellay gets "elected" Superior General year in and year out.

That's pretty much my take on it for what it's worth.

Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 25, 2017, 11:31:51 AM
Going to be yet again, the little boy who says the emperor has no clothes.

NO GOOD CATHOLIC CAN IN CONSCIENCE ATTEND THE SSPX.

The reasoning is the same as not attending the indult Mass.

One of the saints in the time of the Arian crises refused to accept Holy Communion from an Arian Bishop. Perfectly validly ordained and consecrated, perfectly "traditional", but he was an arian and in union with the arian heresy.

Those who are in union with the modernist heresy, are in the exact same way, to be avoided.

The SSPX is included in this because it has already made 4 agreements with Rome.

1. Holy Orders,
2. Confessions
3. Matrimony (will be the most obvious to people)
4. The deal with the Argentinian government and Rome recognising the SSPX.

This position has nothing to do with Sedevacantism or some kind of extremism, or flat earth(some will think that!)

It is just the position that the SSPX has held for many years (before the resistance), and is based on the moral theology and practice of the Church of all ages.

AMDG
"The SSPX is included in this because it has already made [four] agreements with Rome".

By stating that the SSPX has made four agreements with Rome implies that the whole society has made these four agreements. No. These "agreements" can be laid squarely on the shoulders of +Fellay and a few of his henchmen. All the priests we've had have never proclaimed that they thought these so-called agreements were/are a good thing. Maybe this is true with some SSPX priests but this has not been our experience.

Your comments seem a bit strident whereby you wish to toss out the baby with the bath water.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: kiwiboy on November 25, 2017, 11:49:06 AM
"The SSPX is included in this because it has already made [four] agreements with Rome".

By stating that the SSPX has made four agreements with Rome implies that the whole society has made these four agreements. No. These "agreements" can be laid squarely on the shoulders of +Fellay and a few of his henchmen. All the priests we've had have never proclaimed that they thought these so-called agreements were/are a good thing. Maybe this is true with some SSPX priests but this has not been our experience.

Your comments seem a bit strident whereby you wish to toss out the baby with the bath water.

If the truth is "strident" then so be it.

The whole SSPX has made these agreements because the superior has made them. This is the whole point of having a superior of anything. So that one person speaks for many.

The subjective opinion of individual priests is irrelevant. They are objectively tied into the now Neo-Modernist SSPX.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 25, 2017, 11:59:42 AM
If the truth is "strident" then so be it.

The whole SSPX has made these agreements because the superior has made them. This is the whole point of having a superior of anything. So that one person speaks for many.

The subjective opinion of individual priests is irrelevant. They are objectively tied into the now Neo-Modernist SSPX.
"NO GOOD CATHOLIC CAN IN CONSCIENCE ATTEND THE SSPX".

Therefore, I'm a bad Catholic. So, unless I follow your path, whatever it is, I'm going to hell with my shoes and socks on, is that correct? And, here all along, I thought that I only had to account to God for my choices be they good or bad. Now, it seems, I have to also render an account to an uneducated layman for my behaviour.

Let me ask you, what's more important, saving my soul or following your advice? Finally, from where do you derive your authority to render such a judgement? I thought that that was God's prerogative, apparently not.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 25, 2017, 12:03:02 PM

NO GOOD CATHOLIC CAN IN CONSCIENCE ATTEND THE SSPX.


Is this Bp. Williamson's stance as well?

As far as I know, His Excellency has not red-lighted attending SSPX chapels. 
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 25, 2017, 12:12:34 PM
Quote
NO GOOD CATHOLIC CAN IN CONSCIENCE ATTEND THE SSPX.
Oh right, thanks for reminding us all...Outside Sedevacantism there is no Salvation!

We should all meditate on this for 15 min a day (sarcasm alert).
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 25, 2017, 12:28:47 PM
I must point this out: that it is a rare gift to be able to abstract from your own personal situation, and realize that others' situations are far different.

For example, you seem to be at one of the best SSPX chapels in existence, going by your testimony and description. You don't speak much about propaganda, lies, manipulation of the Faithful, evidence of Modernist infection, spying on the Faithful, various tyrannical behavior, etc. but I assure you, these things have happened and are happening at other chapels.

I'm happy for you that you're on the path to salvation, and that your particular SSPX chapel seems to be the prudential answer in your case. For that matter, there is an older man at my old SSPX chapel who recently passed away -- if I were him, I might have done what he did -- that is to say, stay with the SSPX. For him, it was more important to get the Last Rites, go to weekly Mass, etc. than stand up for the future of Tradition and stand on one's principles. In 2012, he only had a few years of life left, and he has no Traditional children or grandchildren that I'm aware of.

That is why I have to say the decision is one of PRUDENCE, not FAITH or DOGMA.  If it was a matter of Faith, then those who chose wrongly would literally be going to hell. But such is not the case. It's about prudence -- a subjective judgment we make based on the information we have, and our own precise situation.

The SSPX is a monolithic, multi-national corporation. But that doesn't mean that its priests all participate in one "hive mind" or some nonsense like that. They are all individual souls. Some are liberal, and some are not. But they are all loyal to the Monster at this time, and they all have to be subject to it, following its laws and directives, and that is the problem with SSPX chapels:

Even if you had the Cure of Ars offering daily Mass at your SSPX chapel, which happened to be built like a Cathedral, there is still the problem that your SSPX chapel is part of the SSPX Corporation with its liberal-ruled headquarters in Menzingen. You are going to have visits from the District Superior, etc. who will tell you that Vatican II isn't so bad, that we are excessive in our resistance to Vatican II, that we need to be more moderate, that Rome isn't so bad, etc.

Those things were all said recently at my SSPX chapel in San Antonio, by Fr. Wegner. I'm not going to expose my children to priests uttering such lies. Vatican II is heretical and I want no part of it. It IS a superheresy, the biggest crisis to ever befall the Church. I am Traditional Catholic, the son of Traditional Catholics, and was raised Traditional Catholic from birth. The only way to react to Modernism/Vatican II/Conciliar Church is COMPLETE ABSTINENCE, complete aloofness. Everything else is dangerous compromise, supping with the devil.

When someone tries to tone down my resistance and hatred for Vatican II, a huge alarm goes off and I put up a wall of separation.

Furthermore, the SSPX is Wal-mart, and the rest of the Trad world is like the mom & pop stores Wal-mart routinely puts out of business. By attending the SSPX and making donations every Sunday, you're feeding the monster.

As an organization, I hate the SSPX. Not the people in the organization, but the organization itself. Its leaders are my enemies, because they are enemies of the Faith. They are in the same category as Pope Francis, even if the latter is further along in the corruption process. I pray that they be converted and confess their mortal sins before they die. If I could make a phone call and the whole SSPX organization could be shut down and put out of business, I would do it in a heartbeat. The SSPX is worldly, corrupt, liberal, and compromising. They are using techniques normally associated with Freemasonic politicians.

NOTE: I didn't say I want to nuke all the priests, people, etc. I just said put the SSPX out of business. Believe me, those priests would all start independent chapels, and probably in the same places they are in now. But it would be without all the monolithic, Big Business attitude they have right now. Each chapel would be on its own. Some would be liberal, others would be great. It would all depend on the area, the priest, and the congregation.

The SSPX got too big, and for years they've had a problem with avarice (desiring to acquire real estate and power) and they think they ARE the Church. They look down on other non-SSPX Trad priests/groups. I STILL have to routinely chase these thoughts and prejudices out of my head, after attending an SSPX seminary, chapels, etc. for years. They seriously consider non-SSPX chapels and non-SSPX priests as automatically 2nd class or lower, as automatically suspect.
"You are going to have visits from the District Superior, etc. who will tell you that Vatican II isn't so bad..."
I know for sure that any of this type of propaganda will be met with howls of scorn at least in our chapel. Having been around there for 22 years I've gotten to know quite a few people and from what I know of them, none would fall for that subterfuge. I appreciate your comments but +Fellay hasn't set foot in our chapel for years, and that's just fine with us.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 25, 2017, 12:31:48 PM
:cheers:And Pecan pie
Ha, Cheers back mate.  :cheers: Yes, by all means, don't forget the pecan pie. 😜
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 25, 2017, 12:34:57 PM
Oh right, thanks for reminding us all...Outside Sedevacantism there is no Salvation!

We should all meditate on this for 15 min a day (sarcasm alert).
😂😂🤣🤣 Thanks for the bit of cheeky humour.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: JPaul on November 25, 2017, 04:16:37 PM
Is this Bp. Williamson's stance as well?

As far as I know, His Excellency has not red-lighted attending SSPX chapels.
Why would he, he has not done so with the Novus Ordo so why would he do it with a valid Traditional Mass?
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 25, 2017, 04:37:39 PM
Why would he, he has not done so with the Novus Ordo so why would he do it with a valid Traditional Mass?
"...he has not done so with the Novus Ordo..." What? 😳 Even our SSPX priest has done that. Whew!
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 25, 2017, 04:40:44 PM
Why would he, he has not done so with the Novus Ordo so why would he do it with a valid Traditional Mass?

I was waiting for someone to bring that up....it didn't take long. 
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: kiwiboy on November 25, 2017, 05:25:55 PM
Oh right, thanks for reminding us all...Outside Sedevacantism there is no Salvation!

We should all meditate on this for 15 min a day (sarcasm alert).

Thanks for showing how us how stupid you are and incapable of reading other peoples posts.

It would be almost irrelevant to say that I am not a sedevacantist.

But that would be because you aren't really interested in the truth of the argument but rather using the label of sedevacantism to distract from it.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: kiwiboy on November 25, 2017, 05:40:48 PM
Is this Bp. Williamson's stance as well?

As far as I know, His Excellency has not red-lighted attending SSPX chapels.

Probably correct, but do you agree with Bishop Williamson on everything? Like his saying you can attend the Novus Ordo if it nourishes your faith?

Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: kiwiboy on November 25, 2017, 05:41:33 PM
"NO GOOD CATHOLIC CAN IN CONSCIENCE ATTEND THE SSPX".

Therefore, I'm a bad Catholic. So, unless I follow your path, whatever it is, I'm going to hell with my shoes and socks on, is that correct? And, here all along, I thought that I only had to account to God for my choices be they good or bad. Now, it seems, I have to also render an account to an uneducated layman for my behaviour.

Let me ask you, what's more important, saving my soul or following your advice? Finally, from where do you derive your authority to render such a judgement? I thought that that was God's prerogative, apparently not.

Let the truth of the argument speak for itself.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: kiwiboy on November 25, 2017, 05:43:01 PM
I was waiting for someone to bring that up....it didn't take long.

Yes but it is true. Relating to my post above.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: JPaul on November 25, 2017, 07:13:16 PM
I was waiting for someone to bring that up....it didn't take long.
A valid point, isn't it?
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: JezusDeKoning on November 25, 2017, 07:18:13 PM
NO GOOD CATHOLIC CAN IN CONSCIENCE ATTEND THE SSPX.
No good Catholic can in conscience attend a ѕуηαgσgυє on Friday or Saturday and the local parish on Sunday mornings. Nameless, faceless bytes of text on the internet ostensibly from New Zealand are not the Church.

The SSPX is Catholic.

Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: St Ignatius on November 25, 2017, 08:07:33 PM
It has occurred to me that I haven't stated my position with regard to the SSPX. Therefore, I would like to take this opportunity to do so. My position is that I have no position. We attend an SSPX Church since it's only 20 minutes from home and have done so for over 20 years.

We have an outstanding priest, who, incidentally, has the complete set of +Williamson's lectures on DVD. He is a graduate of Columbia University with a degree in civil engineering and worked for a prominent Boston consulting firm prior to entering the seminary. So, unlike some of the other newly ordained priests, he's had some experience in the "world". He was also a running back for the Columbia Lions prior to blowing out his knee.

He is filled with zeal for the salvation of souls and urges us all to have the same zeal. His sermons are outstanding; he often interjects them with personal experiences he's had, in the world or spiritual ones related to the world. He's the best priest we've ever had. I've enjoyed many personal conversations with him especially when he joined us for Christmas dinner last year. And, as he indicated, may do so again this year.

He went nuts over my wife's pecan pie: pun intended.

Finally, I should add, that I have no interest in the politics of the SSPX vs Resistance. All have their reasons, and I respect them. My principal goal is to hopefully save my soul, aid my wife in saving her's and anyone else who may cross my path.

I guess you could say this is my manifesto. If I'm to be excoriated for my position, so be it. Cheers!

You're very fortunate. 

We were not so fortunate... our mission was told that we must sudmit, in principle, to the proposed conditions of the  General Chapter in 2012. Unfortunately, we had to decline and now we are on very meager rations provided by others.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: St Ignatius on November 25, 2017, 08:18:22 PM
Is this Bp. Williamson's stance as well?

As far as I know, His Excellency has not red-lighted attending SSPX chapels.

I think +W was referring to circuмstances just like Gwaredd Thomas has explained... how could one "red- light" such a scenario in these times?
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 25, 2017, 11:55:11 PM
Probably correct, but do you agree with Bishop Williamson on everything? Like his saying you can attend the Novus Ordo if it nourishes your faith?

No, I don't agree with +W on everything, but I'm not all that concerned that I don't agree on everything. I don't like that he bought that mansion on the east coast of the U.S., but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Bishop Williamson didn't make a general statement that the Novus Ordo nourishes our faith. He stipulated that trads know better, and that they should avoid the Novus Ordo, and he was speaking specifically to a particular woman and her situation when he stated that. I don't have a problem with the circuмstances in which he said it.

I was amused by something that he said just before he answered the woman's question. He said something like...." I know that this going to sound like trad heresy," or something to that effect. What I like about Bishop Williamson is that he says what he thinks, and not necessarily what people want to hear.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 26, 2017, 12:04:44 AM
A valid point, isn't it?

Yes, it is, but I suppose we might disagree about why it's valid.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 26, 2017, 12:08:47 AM
I think +W was referring to circuмstances just like Gwaredd Thomas has explained... how could one "red- light" such a scenario in these times?

I think I agree. We get the sacraments where we can, while trying to avoid as much nonsense as possible. Not always an easy thing to do. 
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 26, 2017, 04:45:30 AM
You're very fortunate.

We were not so fortunate... our mission was told that we must sudmit, in principle, to the proposed conditions of the  General Chapter in 2012. Unfortunately, we had to decline and now we are on very meager rations provided by others.
Ouch! We've never heard of anything like this. There must be something in the water in certain parts of the country. Either that or some of the priests I mentioned in a previous post are some of +Fellay's yes men.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: kiwiboy on November 26, 2017, 09:04:53 AM
No good Catholic can in conscience attend a ѕуηαgσgυє on Friday or Saturday and the local parish on Sunday mornings. Nameless, faceless bytes of text on the internet ostensibly from New Zealand are not the Church.

The SSPX is Catholic.

Gosh, well if you say so...
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: kiwiboy on November 26, 2017, 09:07:23 AM
No, I don't agree with +W on everything, but I'm not all that concerned that I don't agree on everything. I don't like that he bought that mansion on the east coast of the U.S., but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Bishop Williamson didn't make a general statement that the Novus Ordo nourishes our faith. He stipulated that trads know better, and that they should avoid the Novus Ordo, and he was speaking specifically to a particular woman and her situation when he stated that. I don't have a problem with the circuмstances in which he said it.

I was amused by something that he said just before he answered the woman's question. He said something like...." I know that this going to sound like trad heresy," or something to that effect. What I like about Bishop Williamson is that he says what he thinks, and not necessarily what people want to hear.

Whether the advice is general or specific it doesn't matter. He said it was possible to go "if it nourishes your faith". The SSPX (before 2012), never gave that as a reason to attend the Novus Ordo. It is entirely an invention of Bishop Williamson and contrary to common sense. The Novus Ordo can NEVER nourish ones faith because the thing is not Catholic. The people attending might be Catholic, but only God knows for certain. We judge the thing they are attending.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: kiwiboy on November 26, 2017, 09:08:27 AM
Ouch! We've never heard of anything like this. There must be something in the water in certain parts of the country. Either that or some of the priests I mentioned in a previous post are some of +Fellay's yes men.

Heresy is not always implemented with the same rigor everywhere. But it is still heresy
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: JPaul on November 26, 2017, 10:38:06 AM
No, I don't agree with +W on everything, but I'm not all that concerned that I don't agree on everything. I don't like that he bought that mansion on the east coast of the U.S., but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Bishop Williamson didn't make a general statement that the Novus Ordo nourishes our faith. He stipulated that trads know better, and that they should avoid the Novus Ordo, and he was speaking specifically to a particular woman and her situation when he stated that. I don't have a problem with the circuмstances in which he said it.

I was amused by something that he said just before he answered the woman's question. He said something like...." I know that this going to sound like trad heresy," or something to that effect. What I like about Bishop Williamson is that he says what he thinks, and not necessarily what people want to hear.
But he was right it is an untenable position for a Traditional Catholic to hold. If what he went on to say is true then there has been no need or justification for the SSPX, the consecrations or any of it.  But, the SSPX has always been compromised on this issue, the only problem is a lot of Traditionals were under the mistaken impression that the SSPX was really opposed to the council and the New Mass. So the shock wasn't in what he said but that Traditionals woke up to what he was saying.
In these times, we cannot hope for perfection in clerics, we can only appreciate validity where it is found and try to ignore the rest.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 26, 2017, 03:05:20 PM
Whether the advice is general or specific it doesn't matter. He said it was possible to go "if it nourishes your faith". The SSPX (before 2012), never gave that as a reason to attend the Novus Ordo. It is entirely an invention of Bishop Williamson and contrary to common sense. The Novus Ordo can NEVER nourish ones faith because the thing is not Catholic. The people attending might be Catholic, but only God knows for certain. We judge the thing they are attending.

I'm going by what +W himself said. If you think he was wrong, that's fine. I don't have a problem with the situation, or what he said, and that's not going to change.

To reiterate: Bishop Williamson has not, to my knowledge, red-lighted attending an SSPX chapel. Maybe that will change someday, if the SSPX formally reconciles with Rome.

As an aside, the SSPX priest today, during the homily, spoke out quite strongly against Vll, and religious liberty in particular. I see that as a good thing. 
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 26, 2017, 03:10:54 PM
But he was right it is an untenable position for a Traditional Catholic to hold. If what he went on to say is true then there has been no need or justification for the SSPX, the consecrations or any of it.  But, the SSPX has always been compromised on this issue, the only problem is a lot of Traditionals were under the mistaken impression that the SSPX was really opposed to the council and the New Mass. So the shock wasn't in what he said but that Traditionals woke up to what he was saying.
In these times, we cannot hope for perfection in clerics, we can only appreciate validity where it is found and try to ignore the rest.

I'm not going to hash over the situation in great detail. If you have an issue with it, that's fine. Most who post here do, since most trads are easily offended. It's no surprise that they don't like what he said. That's just how it goes. 
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: kiwiboy on November 26, 2017, 03:41:43 PM


To reiterate: Bishop Williamson has not, to my knowledge, red-lighted attending an SSPX chapel. Maybe that will change someday, if the SSPX formally reconciles with Rome.


Historically, Bishop Williamson has been very weak on the question of Mass attendance. While Bishop Tissier has been strong.

Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Neil Obstat on November 27, 2017, 01:18:38 PM
.

Ha, Cheers back mate.  :cheers: Yes, by all means, don't forget the pecan pie. 
.
I realize this is off-topic but I don't know where else to put it except maybe a PM.
.
It would be great if you could post a thread in the Health and Nutrition sub-forum, Gwaredd, for your wife's pecan pie and pasta sauce!
.
The post with this paragraph in it has been deleted:
Quote
Ah, the pecan pie. Truth be told, my wife is an outstanding cook. All her recipes are made mostly from her long years engaging in the art. And it is an art. She adds spices to dishes not from recipes from experience. That's all I can say. Her spaghetti sauce is, indeed, a work of art.
.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 27, 2017, 01:22:39 PM
.
.
I realize this is off-topic but I don't know where else to put it except maybe a PM.
.
It would be great if you could post a thread in the Health and Nutrition sub-forum, Gwaredd, for your wife's pecan pie and pasta sauce!
.
The post with this paragraph in it has been deleted:.
I'll see what I can do. Many of my wife 'recipes' are in her head. She doesn't use a set script. But, I'll talk to her when she gets home tonight. :ready-to-eat:
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Neil Obstat on November 27, 2017, 01:28:22 PM
Historically, Bishop Williamson has been very weak on the question of Mass attendance. While Bishop Tissier has been strong.
.
Historically, kiwiboy has shown himself to be a Pfeifferite flat-earther.
.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 27, 2017, 01:36:12 PM
.
Historically, kiwiboy has shown himself to be a Pfeifferite flat-earther.
.
A Catholic "Flat-Earther"?? I thought one only found those nutters on Jєωtube. Hm, guess not. Pretty scary, what? 🙄

Incidentally, what on earth--the round one--is a "Pfeifferite?"

Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 27, 2017, 02:14:39 PM
A Catholic "Flat-Earther"?? I thought one only found those nutters on Jєωtube. Hm, guess not. Pretty scary, what? 🙄

What's even scarier is that most Catholics believed in a flat-earth up until the sixteenth century or so.   :o  No Jєωtube around then, though. Thank goodness for Galileo, right?

That is, Catholics believed in a flat-earth before the Reformation Protestants, deluded Catholics and Freemasons got a foot in the door of science and changed what Catholics traditionally believed.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 27, 2017, 02:19:18 PM
What's even scarier is that most Catholics believed in a flat-earth up until the sixteenth century or so.   :o  No Jєωtube around then, though. Thank goodness for Galileo, right?

That is, Catholics believed in a flat-earth before the Reformation Protestants, deluded Catholics and Freemasons got a foot in the door of science and changed what Catholics traditionally believed.
Ah, yes, your quite right. I recall reading somewhere that people were worried about sailing since they were fearful of falling off the end of the earth.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 27, 2017, 02:21:33 PM
Ah, yes, your quite right. I recall reading somewhere that people were worried about sailing since they were fearful of falling off the end of the earth.

Yes, I think you may be right. Little did they know that they could not fall off the flat earth, due to the ice wall that surrounds and protects the flat earth.

;D
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 27, 2017, 02:31:46 PM
Yes, I think you may be right. Little did they know that they could not fall off the flat earth, due to the ice wall that surrounds and protects the flat earth.

;D
Right again! I know this is true because I saw it on Jєωtube and this is a factual source of information. 🤣
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Jaynek on November 27, 2017, 02:32:46 PM
Ah, yes, your quite right. I recall reading somewhere that people were worried about sailing since they were fearful of falling off the end of the earth.
That's not true.  Queen Isabella was told by the Catholic scientists of the time, that Columbus should not attempt to sail to India because the circuмference of the earth was too big for him to make it with the amount of supplies he could carry.  And they were right.  If there had not been an unknown continent for them to land on, that is exactly what would have happened.  Queen Isabella allowed the voyage, in spite of this, because, being extremely devout, she believed if there were any chance at all of bringing the Gospel to new people, the risk must be taken.

You probably did read it somewhere, though.  This idea that Catholics were ignorant is so-called "Enlightenment" propaganda.  Even the term "middle ages" comes from their false idea that the Roman Empire was civilized and so was the Renaissance, and the time in the middle was a time of ignorance and superstition (as they liked to label the true Faith.)
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 27, 2017, 02:39:17 PM
That's not true.  Queen Isabella was told by the Catholic scientists of the time, that Columbus should not attempt to sail to India because the circuмference of the earth was too big for him to make it with the amount of supplies he could carry.  And they were right.  If there had not been an unknown continent for them to land on, that is exactly what would have happened.  Queen Isabella allowed the voyage, in spite of this, because, being extremely devout, she believed if there were any chance at all of bringing the Gospel to new people, the risk must be taken.

You probably did read it somewhere, though.  This idea that Catholics were ignorant is so-called "Enlightenment" propaganda.  Even the term "middle ages" comes from their false idea that the Roman Empire was civilized and so was the Renaissance, and the time in the middle was a time of ignorance and superstition (as they liked to label the true Faith.)
Come now Jaynek, we were just joking around. Don't always try to be so precise with "facts and figures". I'm sure both of us are aware of that. 😊
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 27, 2017, 02:40:55 PM
Right again! I know this is true because I saw it on Jєωtube and this is a factual source of information. 🤣

Did Jєωtube exist when the Book of Genesis was written a long, long, time ago? I mean, it was Jєωs, after all, who wrote down God's word in Genesis, right? 
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Jaynek on November 27, 2017, 02:46:22 PM
Come now Jaynek, we were just joking around. Don't always try to be so precise with "facts and figures". I'm sure both of us are aware of that. 😊
You are joking.  From Meg's posts in the Flat Earth subforum (where we really ought to discuss this if we want to continue), it appears that she actually does believe it.  
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 27, 2017, 02:47:49 PM
You are joking.  From Meg's posts in the Flat Earth subforum (where we really ought to discuss this if we want to continue), it appears that she actually does believe it.  

I do actually believe it. That doesn't mean that I can't joke around about it.  ;)
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 27, 2017, 02:50:17 PM
Did Jєωtube exist when the Book of Genesis was written a long, long, time ago? I mean, it was Jєωs, after all, who wrote down God's word in Genesis, right?
Sure, it existed, I saw it on Jєωtube. If I recall it was some kind of soup can and string contraption. Later, they made it so one could look inside the soup can and see images. Pretty neat, huh? Later, the Jooz saw Moses leading the folks through the Red Sea. Unfortunately, once they got to the other end, they fell off the side of the earth. That's what's known as the Lost Tribe. 🙄
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 27, 2017, 02:57:50 PM
Sure, it existed, I saw it on Jєωtube. If I recall it was some kind of soup can and string contraption. Later, they made it so one could look inside the soup can and see images. Pretty neat, huh? Later, the Jooz saw Moses leading the folks through the Red Sea.🙄

Uh....no....wait. Are you sure you're not getting your stories mixed up? Wasn't it Joseph Smith who invented Mormonism by looking at a rock inside of a hat? Then he wrote down the words that magically appeared on the rock, and....Wah Lah!....the Book of Mormon was born? Or something like that. 
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 27, 2017, 03:01:41 PM
Pretty neat, huh? Later, the Jooz saw Moses leading the folks through the Red Sea. Unfortunately, once they got to the other end, they fell off the side of the earth. That's what's known as the Lost Tribe. 🙄

Good one!  

Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 27, 2017, 03:12:16 PM
Uh....no....wait. Are you sure you're not getting your stories mixed up? Wasn't it Joseph Smith who invented Mormonism by looking at a rock inside of a hat? Then he wrote down the words that magically appeared on the rock, and....Wah Lah!....the Book of Mormon was born? Or something like that.
No, I believe that was Joseph Stalin.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Jaynek on November 27, 2017, 03:16:29 PM
What's even scarier is that most Catholics believed in a flat-earth up until the sixteenth century or so.   :o  No Jєωtube around then, though. Thank goodness for Galileo, right?

That is, Catholics believed in a flat-earth before the Reformation Protestants, deluded Catholics and Freemasons got a foot in the door of science and changed what Catholics traditionally believed.
This looked like a serious statement to me, rather than a joke.  Just in case Meg meant these incorrect claims:

Quote
It is not difficult to see how the story of Columbus was adapted so that he became the figure of progress rather than a lucky man who profited from his error. According to Jeffrey Burton ussell here (http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/russell/FlatEarth.html), the invention of the flat Earth myth can be laid at the feet of the nineteenth century writer Washington Irving, who included it in his historical novel on Columbus, and the wider idea that the everyone in the Middle Ages was deluded has been widely accepted ever since.

The myth that Christians in the Middle Ages thought the world was flat was given a massive boost by Andrew Dickson White's weighty tome The Warfare of Science with Theology (http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/andrew_white/) published in 1896. This book has become something of a running joke among historians of science and it is dutifully mentioned as a prime example of misinformation in the preface of most modern works on science and religion. The flat Earth is discussed in chapter 2 (http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/andrew_white/Chapter2.html) and one can almost sense White's confusion that hardly any of the sources support his hypothesis that Christians widely believed in it. He finds himself grudgingly admitting that St Clement, Origen, St Ambrose, St Augustine, St Isodore, St Albertus Magnus and St Thomas Aquinas all accepted the Earth was a globe - in other words none of the great doctors of the church had considered the matter in doubt. Although an analysis of what White actually says suggests he was aware that the flat Earth was largely a myth, he certainly gives an impression of ignorant Christians suppressing rational knowledge of its real shape.
http://jameshannam.com/flatearth.htm (http://jameshannam.com/flatearth.htm)


And speaking of St. Augustine believing the earth is a globe, he wrote:
Quote
Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he hold to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. [1 Timothy 1.7]
:
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 27, 2017, 03:20:57 PM
No, I believe that was Joseph Stalin.

Yes, quite so!  :)  I think that Stalin was Jєωιѕн, right? 
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 27, 2017, 03:22:25 PM
This looked like a serious statement to me, rather than a joke.  Just in case Meg meant these incorrect claims:
http://jameshannam.com/flatearth.htm (http://jameshannam.com/flatearth.htm)


And speaking of St. Augustine believing the earth is a globe, he wrote::

Jayne, if you are going to seriously discuss the Flat Earth, then you ought to take your own advice and post it in the Flat Earth subforum.


Yes, I was mixing in truth with joking. It happens. Try to not worry about it too much. 
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 27, 2017, 03:26:24 PM
Jayne, if you are going to seriously discuss the Flat Earth, then you ought to take your own advice and post it in the Flat Earth subforum.
"Flat Earth subforum". Whaaaat??

I thought this was Catholic Info, not some Jootube love fest. 😳
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Jaynek on November 27, 2017, 03:29:50 PM
Jayne, if you are going to seriously discuss the Flat Earth, then you ought to take your own advice and post it in the Flat Earth subforum.


Yes, I was mixing in truth with joking. It happens. Try to not worry about it too much.
If you were just joking when you falsely claimed that Catholics before the Reformation believed the world was flat , then there is no need for me to post there.  Since it is difficult to tell what you really mean, it is not clear how or where I should respond.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 27, 2017, 03:32:54 PM


"Flat Earth subforum". Whaaaat??

I thought this was Catholic Info, not some Jootube love fest. 😳


Surprise! Surprise! 

Yes, Cath Info actually has a FLAT EARTH subforum, and may I say that you are privileged to be a member of the ONLY Traditional Catholic forum that actually has its own FLAT EARTH subforum.

Isn't that awesome!?


:cheers:
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 27, 2017, 03:34:53 PM
If you were just joking when you falsely claimed that Catholics before the Reformation believed the world was flat , then there is no need for me to post there.  Since it is difficult to tell what you really mean, it is not clear how or where I should respond.

I guess you don't know as much about Catholic history as thought you did. That happens when you get a degree in theology from a Novus Ordo institution.

If you want to discuss it further, post something in the FE subforum.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 27, 2017, 03:38:45 PM

"Flat Earth subforum". Whaaaat??

I thought this was Catholic Info, not some Jootube love fest. 😳


Surprise! Surprise!

Yes, Cath Info actually has a FLAT EARTH subforum, and may I say that you are privileged to be a member of the ONLY Traditional Catholic forum that actually has its own FLAT EARTH subforum.

Isn't that awesome!?


:cheers:
Yeah, well, I guess so. 🤔
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 27, 2017, 03:40:52 PM
Yes, quite so!  :)  I think that Stalin was Jєωιѕн, right?
Some say he was, some say he wasn't. I do know, however, that as a young squirt he studied for the 'priesthood'. Obviously, it didn't take.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 27, 2017, 03:47:33 PM
Yeah, well, I guess so. 🤔

Not to worry. The discussion of anything Flat Earth has been quite brief lately. Though, in the not-so-distant past, before you joined, the Flat earth discussions were quite....should I say....lively. 

Unfortunately, discussion of FE causes some anti-flat earth trads to go foaming-at-the-mouth-infuriated, almost causing them to pass out from the anxiety of thinking that there could actually be trads who believe in a Flat earth. Poor things. I do bear some responsibility for causing some of their great distress. Oh well.

Maybe Jayne will be brave enough to venture into the dreaded FE subforum to post her anxieties there. Can't wait.

:popcorn:
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 27, 2017, 03:51:51 PM
Not to worry. The discussion of anything Flat Earth has been quite brief lately. Though, in the not-so-distant past, before you joined, the Flat earth discussions were quite....should I say....lively.

Unfortunately, discussion of FE causes some anti-flat earth trads to go foaming-at-the-mouth-infuriated, almost causing them to pass out from the anxiety of thinking that there could actually be trads who believe in a Flat earth. Poor things. I do bear some responsibility for causing some of their great distress. Oh well.

Maybe Jayne will be brave enough to venture into the dreaded FE subforum to post her anxieties there. Can't wait.

:popcorn:
Well, thanks, but I believe I'll take a pass. My interests tend to lay in other areas. 😊
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 27, 2017, 03:54:11 PM
Well, thanks, but I believe I'll take a pass. My interests tend to lay in other areas. 😊

That's okay. In all seriousness, discussion of FE can be a bit of a distraction.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 27, 2017, 04:08:41 PM
That's okay. In all seriousness, discussion of FE can be a bit of a distraction.
Well, to be honest, even this blog can be a distraction especially if it keeps one from doing the things that need to get done. Like me for instance. 😤
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Meg on November 27, 2017, 04:24:18 PM
Well, to be honest, even this blog can be a distraction especially if it keeps one from doing the things that need to get done. Like me for instance. 😤
Oh, I absolutely agree with that! I keep telling myself to not spend so much time here, but here I am. Oh well. 
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Neil Obstat on November 27, 2017, 10:34:33 PM
It has occurred to me that I haven't stated my position with regard to the SSPX. Therefore, I would like to take this opportunity to do so. My position is that I have no position. We attend an SSPX Church since it's only 20 minutes from home and have done so for over 20 years.

We have an outstanding priest, who, incidentally, has the complete set of +Williamson's lectures on DVD. He is a graduate of Columbia University with a degree in civil engineering and worked for a prominent Boston consulting firm prior to entering the seminary. So, unlike some of the other newly ordained priests, he's had some experience in the "world". He was also a running back for the Columbia Lions prior to blowing out his knee.

He is filled with zeal for the salvation of souls and urges us all to have the same zeal. His sermons are outstanding; he often interjects them with personal experiences he's had, in the world or spiritual ones related to the world. He's the best priest we've ever had. I've enjoyed many personal conversations with him especially when he joined us for Christmas dinner last year. And, as he indicated, may do so again this year.

He went nuts over my wife's pecan pie: pun intended.

Finally, I should add, that I have no interest in the politics of the SSPX vs Resistance. All have their reasons, and I respect them. My principal goal is to hopefully save my soul, aid my wife in saving her's and anyone else who may cross my path.

I guess you could say this is my manifesto. If I'm to be excoriated for my position, so be it. Cheers!
.
Why would you be excoriated for you position?
.
Perhaps you're unaware of the history of the Menzingen intrigue.
.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Nadir on November 28, 2017, 12:44:28 AM
"Flat Earth subforum". Whaaaat??

I thought this was Catholic Info, not some Jootube love fest. 😳
Matthew decided to tidy up! They had to be confined to a ghetto, (wah lah, I mean voila!) as they were causing havoc with the rest of us reasonable folk. 
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: kiwiboy on November 28, 2017, 04:40:11 AM
.
Historically, kiwiboy has shown himself to be a Pfeifferite flat-earther.
.

I'm no pfeifferite.

But this is again a tactic to distract from the issue. There are many priests in the resistance who are red lighters. They don't all say because the bishops have squirmed on the issue. Presumably to get money from benefactors.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: kiwiboy on November 28, 2017, 04:45:20 AM
Jaynek
You should read the following citations.
http://flatearthtrads.forumga.net/t60-pertinent-quotes-from-fathers-and-tradition

Showing clearly, it is NO myth to say that the Church was flat earth.

The us of Ptolomy's Almagest in the middle ages muddied the waters a bit, but overall most Catholics held to the truth.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Jaynek on November 28, 2017, 07:36:42 AM
Jaynek
You should read the following citations.
http://flatearthtrads.forumga.net/t60-pertinent-quotes-from-fathers-and-tradition

Showing clearly, it is NO myth to say that the Church was flat earth.

The us of Ptolomy's Almagest in the middle ages muddied the waters a bit, but overall most Catholics held to the truth.
I have conclusively shown this to be incorrect with my posts in the proper subforum.  A few cherry-picked quotes from early writers do not disprove the consensus eventually reached by the Church.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 28, 2017, 07:47:20 AM
.
Why would you be excoriated for you position?
.
Perhaps you're unaware of the history of the Menzingen intrigue.
.
"Perhaps you're unaware of the history of the Menzingen intrigue".

Yes, I am unaware. I don't keep up with all the politics of the SSPX; it interests me not at all. I go to Mass, pray my Rosary and try and keep my nose clean. I can't do anything about intrigues anyway. The reason that I thought I might be excoriated because there's are many folks here who have little use for the SSPX, that's all.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 28, 2017, 07:53:55 AM
.
Historically, kiwiboy has shown himself to be a Pfeifferite flat-earther.
.
I asked yesterday but I didn't get a response. Would someone please tell me what is a "PFEIFFERITE"?
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 28, 2017, 07:58:35 AM
I have conclusively shown this to be incorrect with my posts in the proper subforum.  A few cherry-picked quotes from early writers do not disprove the consensus eventually reached by the Church.
"...the Church was flat earth"❓

So, was the Church flat to the earth? Did people have to crawl along to go to Mass? Or, did you mean that the Church supported the flat-earth theory? 🤔
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: RoughAshlar on November 28, 2017, 10:25:49 AM
I asked yesterday but I didn't get a response. Would someone please tell me what is a "PFEIFFERITE"?
It refers to someone who blindly follows and supports Father Pfeiffer and the Our Lady of Mount Carmel Sect in Boston, Kentucky.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 28, 2017, 10:34:42 AM
It refers to someone who blindly follows and supports Father Pfeiffer and the Our Lady of Mount Carmel Sect in Boston, Kentucky.
Ah, finally, thank you! 😊
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: kiwiboy on November 28, 2017, 12:25:33 PM
"Perhaps you're unaware of the history of the Menzingen intrigue".

Yes, I am unaware. I don't keep up with all the politics of the SSPX; it interests me not at all. I go to Mass, pray my Rosary and try and keep my nose clean. I can't do anything about intrigues anyway. The reason that I thought I might be excoriated because there's are many folks here who have little use for the SSPX, that's all.

The menzingen intrigue is ultimately irrelevant.

What matters is that the SSPX has made four agreements with Rome so far.

These put it under Rome, even if in an "imperfect" way. One bit of poison is enough to spoil the whole cake.

I don't agree with Fr. Pfeiffers disrespectful attitude towards the Bishops, and his arguments against them can be exaggerated. However on the issue of Mass attendance he is broadly speaking correct.

One priest who is a red-lighter is Fr. Edward MacDonald, who visits New Zealand from time to time. Another is Fr. Pivert in France. Neither of them are "Pfeifferites", but rather courageous priests who think for themselves. Would that most in the resistance act like that....
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Gwaredd Thomas on November 28, 2017, 12:33:16 PM
The menzingen intrigue is ultimately irrelevant.

What matters is that the SSPX has made four agreements with Rome so far.

These put it under Rome, even if in an "imperfect" way. One bit of poison is enough to spoil the whole cake.

I don't agree with Fr. Pfeiffers disrespectful attitude towards the Bishops, and his arguments against them can be exaggerated. However on the issue of Mass attendance he is broadly speaking correct.

One priest who is a red-lighter is Fr. Edward MacDonald, who visits New Zealand from time to time. Another is Fr. Pivert in France. Neither of them are "Pfeifferites", but rather courageous priests who think for themselves. Would that most in the resistance act like that....
"What matters is that the SSPX has made four agreements with Rome so far".

As I stated above I'm not really interested in agreements or non-agreements. I'm only interested in keeping myself, as much as I am able, free from serious sin, praying the Rosary, receiving the Sacraments and trying to lead the best Catholic life I can. To me, the rest is ALL irrelevant.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: graceseeker on November 29, 2017, 02:13:45 PM
It has occurred to me that I haven't stated my position with regard to the SSPX. Therefore, I would like to take this opportunity to do so. My position is that I have no position. We attend an SSPX Church since it's only 20 minutes from home and have done so for over 20 years.

We have an outstanding priest, who, incidentally, has the complete set of +Williamson's lectures on DVD. He is a graduate of Columbia University with a degree in civil engineering and worked for a prominent Boston consulting firm prior to entering the seminary. So, unlike some of the other newly ordained priests, he's had some experience in the "world". He was also a running back for the Columbia Lions prior to blowing out his knee.

He is filled with zeal for the salvation of souls and urges us all to have the same zeal. His sermons are outstanding; he often interjects them with personal experiences he's had, in the world or spiritual ones related to the world. He's the best priest we've ever had. I've enjoyed many personal conversations with him especially when he joined us for Christmas dinner last year. And, as he indicated, may do so again this year.

He went nuts over my wife's pecan pie: pun intended.

Finally, I should add, that I have no interest in the politics of the SSPX vs Resistance. All have their reasons, and I respect them. My principal goal is to hopefully save my soul, aid my wife in saving her's and anyone else who may cross my path.

I guess you could say this is my manifesto. If I'm to be excoriated for my position, so be it. Cheers!
not being critical but we should not be concerned only w/ those who cross our paths. We should go out of our way to talk to people about Jesus
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: cindy gibson on November 29, 2017, 03:27:37 PM
I must point this out: that it is a rare gift to be able to abstract from your own personal situation, and realize that others' situations are far different.

For example, you seem to be at one of the best SSPX chapels in existence, going by your testimony and description. You don't speak much about propaganda, lies, manipulation of the Faithful, evidence of Modernist infection, spying on the Faithful, various tyrannical behavior, etc. but I assure you, these things have happened and are happening at other chapels.

I'm happy for you that you're on the path to salvation, and that your particular SSPX chapel seems to be the prudential answer in your case. For that matter, there is an older man at my old SSPX chapel who recently passed away -- if I were him, I might have done what he did -- that is to say, stay with the SSPX. For him, it was more important to get the Last Rites, go to weekly Mass, etc. than stand up for the future of Tradition and stand on one's principles. In 2012, he only had a few years of life left, and he has no Traditional children or grandchildren that I'm aware of.

That is why I have to say the decision is one of PRUDENCE, not FAITH or DOGMA.  If it was a matter of Faith, then those who chose wrongly would literally be going to hell. But such is not the case. It's about prudence -- a subjective judgment we make based on the information we have, and our own precise situation.

The SSPX is a monolithic, multi-national corporation. But that doesn't mean that its priests all participate in one "hive mind" or some nonsense like that. They are all individual souls. Some are liberal, and some are not. But they are all loyal to the Monster at this time, and they all have to be subject to it, following its laws and directives, and that is the problem with SSPX chapels:

Even if you had the Cure of Ars offering daily Mass at your SSPX chapel, which happened to be built like a Cathedral, there is still the problem that your SSPX chapel is part of the SSPX Corporation with its liberal-ruled headquarters in Menzingen. You are going to have visits from the District Superior, etc. who will tell you that Vatican II isn't so bad, that we are excessive in our resistance to Vatican II, that we need to be more moderate, that Rome isn't so bad, etc.

Those things were all said recently at my SSPX chapel in San Antonio, by Fr. Wegner. I'm not going to expose my children to priests uttering such lies. Vatican II is heretical and I want no part of it. It IS a superheresy, the biggest crisis to ever befall the Church. I am Traditional Catholic, the son of Traditional Catholics, and was raised Traditional Catholic from birth. The only way to react to Modernism/Vatican II/Conciliar Church is COMPLETE ABSTINENCE, complete aloofness. Everything else is dangerous compromise, supping with the devil.

When someone tries to tone down my resistance and hatred for Vatican II, a huge alarm goes off and I put up a wall of separation.

Furthermore, the SSPX is Wal-mart, and the rest of the Trad world is like the mom & pop stores Wal-mart routinely puts out of business. By attending the SSPX and making donations every Sunday, you're feeding the monster.

As an organization, I hate the SSPX. Not the people in the organization, but the organization itself. Its leaders are my enemies, because they are enemies of the Faith. They are in the same category as Pope Francis, even if the latter is further along in the corruption process. I pray that they be converted and confess their mortal sins before they die. If I could make a phone call and the whole SSPX organization could be shut down and put out of business, I would do it in a heartbeat. The SSPX is worldly, corrupt, liberal, and compromising. They are using techniques normally associated with Freemasonic politicians.

NOTE: I didn't say I want to nuke all the priests, people, etc. I just said put the SSPX out of business. Believe me, those priests would all start independent chapels, and probably in the same places they are in now. But it would be without all the monolithic, Big Business attitude they have right now. Each chapel would be on its own. Some would be liberal, others would be great. It would all depend on the area, the priest, and the congregation.

The SSPX got too big, and for years they've had a problem with avarice (desiring to acquire real estate and power) and they think they ARE the Church. They look down on other non-SSPX Trad priests/groups. I STILL have to routinely chase these thoughts and prejudices out of my head, after attending an SSPX seminary, chapels, etc. for years. They seriously consider non-SSPX chapels and non-SSPX priests as automatically 2nd class or lower, as automatically suspect.
Well Said Matthew, I agree 100% Thank you :applause:
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: kiwiboy on November 30, 2017, 11:30:37 AM
"What matters is that the SSPX has made four agreements with Rome so far".

As I stated above I'm not really interested in agreements or non-agreements. I'm only interested in keeping myself, as much as I am able, free from serious sin, praying the Rosary, receiving the Sacraments and trying to lead the best Catholic life I can. To me, the rest is ALL irrelevant.


That's what all indulters say. I clearly can't convince you that you are committing a sin.

"Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad"
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Neil Obstat on November 30, 2017, 12:29:12 PM
"What matters is that the SSPX has made four agreements with Rome so far".

As I stated above I'm not really interested in agreements or non-agreements. I'm only interested in keeping myself, as much as I am able, free from serious sin, praying the Rosary, receiving the Sacraments and trying to lead the best Catholic life I can. To me, the rest is ALL irrelevant.
.
You have said repeatedly you're not interested in agreements, non-agreements or intrigue. Then you want to know about Pfeifferites. 
So it would seem that as soon as someone tries to explain what that is, you'll say you're not interested, and it's ALL irrelevant. So why bother?
.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: Neil Obstat on November 30, 2017, 12:32:10 PM
It refers to someone who blindly follows and supports Father Pfeiffer and the Our Lady of Mount Carmel Sect in Boston, Kentucky.
.
That's what could be called a nice, superficial and inadequate definition. But it doesn't really matter, does it?
.
After all, superficiality is the norm, and it gets a lot of popular appeal support, so it must be okay, right?
.
Title: Re: Me and the SSPX
Post by: JPaul on November 30, 2017, 06:44:44 PM
.
That's what could be called a nice, superficial and inadequate definition. But it doesn't really matter, does it?
.
After all, superficiality is the norm, and it gets a lot of popular appeal support, so it must be okay, right?
.
That about gets it, doesn't it? As if you sweep all of Father Pfeiffer's objections into a nice neat pile so they don't spill out onto the neat resistance floor.
Father Pfeiffer is a boogeyman so anything that he might say is to be discounted, as the ravings of a crazy man.