Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
SSPX Resistance News / Re: Bishop Fellay Back in Power (Kind of)
« Last post by klasG4e on Today at 05:42:46 PM »
From the SSPX’s official Twitter account:





SSPX News: Society of St. Pius X

@SSPXEN

The General Chapter of the SSPX has elected two additional Assistants General to assist Fr. Davide Pagliarani: Bishop Bernard Fellay, former Superior General (1994-2018) and Father Franz Schmidberger, former Superior General (1982-1994).

Seen at https://twitter.com/SSPXEN?lang=en
3
Your argument makes no sense.  Is the NO perfect?  
Can the Church give us an imperfect liturgy?
If it is perfect, why do I not have to attend/accept it?
If it’s imperfect, does one not have a MORAL DUTY to attend one that is perfect (ie True Mass)?
If they don’t have a duty to attend the most perfect mass, why not?
If the laity are educated on why the NO is imperfect, THEN do they have a duty to leave it?
Or are the laity allowed to childishly hide behind the “I didn’t do it” excuse forever?
Why does it matter who created the NO, when the effects (ie Protestant theology) are wrong?
Do the effects not matter?  
No liturgy is absolutely perfect, as it has changed and developed over the years prior to VII
We attend the liturgy because it is the crucifixion of Christ in an unbloody manner, which gives praise to God and spiritual food to man.
The Church vouches for the efficacy of the Mass, as it does not stand alone without Her. 
Everyone has the duty to attend a good Mass, not profaned by novelties, yet culpability can be low for those unknowing (at first)
Those who are educated should seek the best Mass possible because they are judged on their knowing.  
The laity are not allowed to childishly hide behind anything, but to come to a more perfect union with God.  
It matters who created the NO because if the Church provided a Mass for the ignorant like the king in scripture who called in the dregs of society because His own wouldn't come, who are we to deny Him that?
The effects do matter.  I attended the NO for years, raised a huge family, who also raised Catholic kids and all love Mary, Jesus in the Eucharist, etc.  Not to say we didn't benefit far greater from the TLM but the grace needed for that wasn't provided early on.  Or, we didn't respond to the grace.  I consider the NO a low income housing for the very poor (in spirit), designed to keep them fed until they get on their feet.  <----It seems.  I admit, I'm only guessing, but I can't see that the Church failed so miserably, but that in being generous to men, God permitted them to do only what was technically possible within the Church.  True, they took it further than permitted to the loss of Faith of many, promoting all manner of novelties.  Perhaps the difference between the two liturgies opened the eyes of many who might otherwise not bothered to know more.  I don't know.  I just can't blame the Church.   
4
Fortunately, the sacraments operate according to the Divine Will, not the subjective feelings about Christ's presence of absence by someone on the internet. 
5
How logical St. Terese is!  See below.  She has a lot more than this to say about how she used force on herself.  And to think I couldn't even dare to pray for fear really getting it - as I now do - would take my mind away from the responsibilities on my plate and 18 not 16 hour days including the 2:30 am departure time on bike.

Not until I quit the job was the fire lit... and it took a while to memorize St. Louis de Montfort's bead by bead method which now is the mainstay of a certain type of prayer from which I benefit.  Plan to post on this particular contribution of St. Louis de Monfort later in this thread.

Oh... the true frustration of not being able to share anything of Catholicism with my students, especially the 5th and 6th graders in special education, who probably could have handled it better than the 'regular ed' group.  Except for the trad calendar posted in the classroom with a different picture for each month.

'Now if the Lord bore for so long with such a wicked creature as I -- and it is quite clear that it was in this way that all my wrong was put right -- what other person, however wicked he may be, can have any reason for fear? For, bad though he be, he will not remain so for all the years I did after having received so many favours from the Lord.'
6
SSPX Resistance News / Re: Bishop Fellay Back in Power (Kind of)
« Last post by JPaul on Today at 04:36:04 PM »
A new, and perhaps more articulate mouth piece. The puppeteer remains the same.
7
I say athesists should pay double.  
The thing is that businesses should not have to cave in to pseudo atheists. 
8
JPaul :
"Your eyes have (finally) opened?"  Is that what you mean. If so, I think my eyes were opened some years ago.  i don't wish to cast aspersions upon the memory of ABL.  Relative to numbers of others, wearing the clerical garb of traditional Catholicism, ABL shines forth and excels above them.  It is just that I don't presently view him as a saint, nor that he was the prelate envisioned by Sr. Mariana.  A certain mythology has sprung up around the Archbishop which I think it may be wise to either ignore, and maybe, even repudiate.
What I meant is that, your thinking on this subject has advanced far beyond what it was, a few years ago.(mine as well)
 One can certainly appreciate the Ab's value and accomplishments without insisting that they rise to the level of sainthood.  It is apparent that early on, the SSPX became more interested in their growth and survival that bringing the Church back to pre-conciliar sanity.
The mythology of which you speak is still alive and well in the SSPX corral.  We are in a time now where the appearance of Traditionalism is enough to satisfy the masses.  I think that you would agree that that is not not  enough to roll back or counter the revolution.
We still await the predicted prelate who will help the Church recover sound doctrine and the morality of the Saints.
 
9
SSPX Resistance News / Re: Bishop Fellay Back in Power (Kind of)
« Last post by X on Today at 04:03:51 PM »
Just more proof that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Will the Society be begging back in Rome next week? While +Fellay was the face of “we love Rome” Schmidberger was in the background advancing the cause. Plus +Galarreta was the first to jump back to +Fellay after the three bishops letter to +Fellay, and Bouchacourt is just a judaizied liberal. Pagliarani is just the “conservative” face so that it all looks well and good. The Society has truly played it hand, it’s clearly written on the wall and adding +Fellay and Fr Schmidberger to the “Argentine trio” shows CLEARLY and EXACTLY what we all knew the purpose of this Chapter was. Well played, Menzingen, now you’re all set, cap in hand to ask Francis to oh please, recognize us, we are all Catholics after all!

If the SSPX was trying to portray Pagliarani as a "conservative face," it was a failed attempt from the beginning:

His 2012 intervention at the General Chapter, as well as his past statements regarding an openness to a practical accord with unconverted Rome, made that impossible, except for those who wanted to be lied to about his advent representing a possible change of direction (meaning, those who only wanted to notice Bishop Fellay was gone, but not consider the qualities of the man who replaced him).

The SSPX did not create and assign two new counselors, just so Pagliarani could ignore them (but as they are on the same page anyway, there is little risk of that).

Now we only await the General Chapter Declaration for the whole mosaic to become a coherent picture.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10