Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => SSPX Resistance Chapels => Topic started by: Matthew on January 11, 2013, 10:44:43 PM
-
Short answer: Yes.
The SSPX is going downhill fast, with many CONCRETE ACTIONS that have been completed, and new orientations that have been made manifest through the official organs and statements of the SSPX.
As such, the SSPX is no longer the go-to group for the Resistance in the broad sense -- the Traditional Movement which resists Modernism, Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, Judaism, and Vatican II.
I think many would agree that their local SSPX chapel is far better than the Novus Ordo. It isn't dangerous to the Faith; the sermons might even be decent. But each and every SSPX priest is under the authority of Fr. Rostand, and must send a % of all collection proceeds up the chain to the District, and another % up the chain to SSPX Headquarters in Menzingen.
And if Fr. Rostand orders something, he has to carry it out.
The question is -- should we continue to support the SSPX, who has cast out Bishop Williamson and countless holy, faithful, courageous priests? I answer NO, we should not!
Just to be clear:
By "support" I mean financially. Attending their Masses is a different story. An SSPX Mass is valid AND not harmful to the Faith, so you can't sit at home on Sunday if there is an SSPX chapel reasonably close to your home.
I want OUT of the SSPX. If Bishop Williamson isn't welcome, than neither am I. I want my children to look up to real MEN like +Williamson and great priests like those in the Resistance. How will I ever expose my children to these holy clerics, if I continue to assist exclusively at my local SSPX chapel? It's not going to happen.
When it comes time for Confirmations, the SSPX will be sending any bishop EXCEPT Bishop Williamson. That, my friends, is NOT a good thing. How can you get a good +W sermon when +Fellay is the one doing confirmations? You can't.
It appears that many Catholics in the Resistance are in the same boat -- namely, they are NOT horrified by evil dripping from their SSPX priest -- because their SSPX priest is not evil and agrees with many points brought up by the Resistance. Some priests in this category even give decent sermons! At SSPX chapels with these priests, nothing has really "changed", or at least very little has.
In fact, it sounds like the average Catholic attending Resistance Masses has nothing personally against their SSPX priest. It's the SSPX they are opposing, and they want out from under it.
I fully agree. Under that aspect, I think it IS time to start Resistance chapels EVERYWHERE, NOW.
It's not about waiting for something bad to happen at your SSPX chapel. It's about getting a safety net ready BEFORE you need it. Remember, both priest AND Faithful need that comfort that they won't be out on the streets (or out in the cold without the Sacraments). Think of how much blackmailing power you take away from the bad guys, just by organizing an alternate chapel!
It's not your local SSPX priest that you're opposing. In fact, let him in on it! Recommend to your fellow Resistance parishioners that HE be supported directly with donations, rather than putting $$ in the general collection. Most places don't get Mass every week from the Resistance, and it's certainly NOT better to "stay home" than attend an SSPX Mass. An SSPX Mass is a valid TLM; it's not the Novus Ordo.
Give honor where honor is due; give support where support is due. Show your valued priests that you will support them DIRECTLY, WHEREVER they have to go to be faithful to their priesthood.
That way, they will be less likely to put up with Menzingen's ...crap... and they'll know who their friends are -- the faithful Catholics who wish to continue the legacy of the saintly Archbishop Lefebvre.
-
Ah, but 'independent' chapels are their own can of worms :/
-
If you want to get all philisophical (which is a good thing), I understand where you're coming from.
I've actually thought about that.
The problem is -- monolithic organizations (like the erstwhile SSPX) provide their OWN can of worms that is EASILY as dangerous if not more so.
The real problem is the 42 year nature of the Crisis in the Church, and the fact that it doesn't seem to be ending.
It's like someone pressing down on your diaphragm as hard as they can. Eventually, you have to give in to nature and just pass out from lack of oxygen.
Your brain does that to conserve oxygen, to give your body a few more moments of life.
The real solution to the above situation? For the attacker to go away and let you breathe.
Likewise, what we REALLY NEED is for Rome to convert back to Tradition. Until then, it's going to be a messy, messy situation indeed all over so-called "Traddieland".
-
Agreed, "laying seige" to Rome wasn't working. I think the rank and file 'adherents' of the SSPX who attended Mass at SSPX centers were hoping to 'outlast' Rome??
1)independent chapels are fruity. There's no hierarchy, the pastor is essentially 'Pope'. I've had problems with such a mini-Pope, at an independent chapel, and it was just as I say it can be.
2)It is completely protestant in nature e.g. "I'm holier than the place I left, I'll just hang out a shingle and start our own thing" (total oversimplification, but that's what I saw with protestantism when I was a prot). Then "wash, rinse, repeat" everytime there's some wedge issue.
3)there may be good orgs, I just don't fully know (SSPV? CMRI?), but an organization bigger than a parish is critical. I read horrible things about some gαy clergy issue in the CMRI, but of course don't know if it is true. That's all I need, to join another church to have the same issue: sodomite priests.
-
Problem is... we dont have enough risistance priests, througout the sspx.... and certaintly not in ireland..... whither goest we.....?
-
Agreed, "laying seige" to Rome wasn't working. I think the rank and file 'adherents' of the SSPX who attended Mass at SSPX centers were hoping to 'outlast' Rome??
1)independent chapels are fruity. There's no hierarchy, the pastor is essentially 'Pope'. I've had problems with such a mini-Pope, at an independent chapel, and it was just as I say it can be.
2)It is completely protestant in nature e.g. "I'm holier than the place I left, I'll just hang out a shingle and start our own thing" (total oversimplification, but that's what I saw with protestantism when I was a prot). Then "wash, rinse, repeat" everytime there's some wedge issue.
3)there may be good orgs, I just don't fully know (SSPV? CMRI?), but an organization bigger than a parish is critical. I read horrible things about some gαy clergy issue in the CMRI, but of course don't know if it is true. That's all I need, to join another church to have the same issue: sodomite priests.
Iuvenalis-
There is some truth in all that you say.
Archbishop Lefebvre was always against solitary priests, for precisely the reasons you lay out.
However, you have missed that the priests of the SSPX/SO are not independent.
There is a loose confederation and heirarchy in place.
It just won't be as centralized as in Menzingen.
There will be a seminary, which will impart a uniform formation.
A bishop, though without juridical or institutional authority, will nevertheless command the respect of all the clergy (lest they forfeit his services for confirmation, holy oils, chapel consecrations, and ordinations).
The point being, the nascent SSPX/SO already has safeguards in place to combat the very real dangers of which you speak.
Pax
-
Problem is... we dont have enough risistance priests, througout the sspx.... and certaintly not in ireland..... whither goest we.....?
First, you organize.
Then, when you have 25+ people, you appeal directly to Bishop Williamson, and let him know you can support his visits.
He is your closest option.....you are actually the luckiest of all!
-
the priests of the SSPX/SO are not independent.
Good post but you shouldn't call them that. They are the Apostles of Jesus and Mary.
-
The question is -- should we continue to support the SSPX, who has cast out Bishop Williamson and countless holy, faithful, courageous priests? I answer NO, we should not!
I am the leader of a resistance group in Toronto. However, I continue to assist at the local SSPX chapel when Fr. Pfeiffer is not here. Some believe that this undermines the resistance and I tend to agree, but I am concerned about not fulfilling my Sunday obligation when I can. I do not believe that my Faith is currently threatened at this chapel. Do you advise me to stop going to the SSPX chapel and if so, what would constitute a valid reason in my case for missing Mass on Sundays?
-
The question is -- should we continue to support the SSPX, who has cast out Bishop Williamson and countless holy, faithful, courageous priests? I answer NO, we should not!
I am the leader of a resistance group in Toronto. However, I continue to assist at the local SSPX chapel when Fr. Pfeiffer is not here. Some believe that this undermines the resistance and I tend to agree, but I am concerned about not fulfilling my Sunday obligation when I can. I do not believe that my Faith is currently threatened at this chapel. Do you advise me to stop going to the SSPX chapel and if so, what would constitute a valid reason in my case for missing Mass on Sundays?
No.
Your current position is correct.
Unless attendance at your SSPX chapel becomes impossible or gravely inconvenient, your obligation is to attend.
If the SSPX gives you the boot, or if false doctrine begins to manifest itself, then you would abstain in order to protect your faith.
Otherwise, neither necessity nor epikeia would apply to justify the abstention.
-
As proof of the correctness of this position, recall the recent letter of Fr Ringrose (ie., a resistance priest) to Fr Rostand, in which he says, "I do not yet give the SSPX a red light..."
-
The question is -- should we continue to support the SSPX, who has cast out Bishop Williamson and countless holy, faithful, courageous priests? I answer NO, we should not!
I am the leader of a resistance group in Toronto. However, I continue to assist at the local SSPX chapel when Fr. Pfeiffer is not here. Some believe that this undermines the resistance and I tend to agree, but I am concerned about not fulfilling my Sunday obligation when I can. I do not believe that my Faith is currently threatened at this chapel. Do you advise me to stop going to the SSPX chapel and if so, what would constitute a valid reason in my case for missing Mass on Sundays?
You need to re-read my post. It bothers me that someone could get such a wrong understanding from something I typed.
I always thought I was good at teaching, and clear in my posts. I guess I was wrong.
I said we should not SUPPORT the SSPX, as in financially. Warming one of their pews on Sunday morning does NOT give them any tangible support. As far as not being a "bum" of some kind, I would recommend putting money directly in the consecrated hands of your priest. That way it's all HIS and he doesn't have to share it with the Machine.
But even better than that, your priest will begin to see that various Faithful will support him no matter where he offers Mass. It's easy for him to imagine getting those same "donations" in a humbler setting. But if you go "by the book" and just toss money in the collection every week like an unoriginal Baby Boomer, your priest is going to be a One Paycheck sort of man, and will surely have a hard time imagining life without his current "job".
He will be very, very tempted to "get along with" the current SSPX authorities -- whatever they command him to do.
There is no justification for sitting at home on Sunday, if you have an SSPX chapel nearby. Their Mass is valid, and there is no danger to the Faith that would justify staying at home. The Novus Ordo is a different story.
-
As proof of the correctness of this position, recall the recent letter of Fr Ringrose (ie., a resistance priest) to Fr Rostand, in which he says, "I do not yet give the SSPX a red light..."
Yes, it also shows how objective and truthful Fr. Ringrose is.
It's true -- the SSPX shouldn't get a red light. Not for attendance, anyway.
I think the time has long since passed to stop putting money in their weekly collection.
I know what I'm talking about: a tithe (or half-tithe) is kicked upstream to the US District HQ as well as Menzingen. There are better ways to support your priest and/or chapel.
-
Another point that needs to be made --
Maybe your local SSPX priest is a good man, but what happens when the SSPX decides to rotate him and you get a new Williamson Free (tm) priest ordained in the last 5 years? What if you get a rabid Accordista?
After all, Accordism IS the new position in the SSPX. More often than not, it's what you're going to get!
Like I said, the SSPX as such IS bad -- already -- and is to be opposed. We just need to attend their Masses on the off-weeks when our Resistance Mass centers are vacant.
There is still SOME good left in the SSPX right now: the valid Masses they offer, many of their priests, and of course many of their Faithful. But what makes the SSPX "the SSPX" is essentially rotten now. Their charter, goals, leadership, etc. are to be rejected in favor of something more complete.
-
For each person, I think there'll be a point where you say "enough". For my family and I, it came when Bp. Williamson was thrown out which then opened my eyes to the can of worms the neo-SSPX had changed into.
Once I realized that our Faith was being compromised (especially during the continuous insipid sermons of pro-Rome, obey Bp. Fellay, the evil internet campaign) and a very special thanks to a good friend who enlightened me on how the plans of this betrayal actually came from Metzingen. That was the breaking point for us.
Knowing all of this being Bp. Fellay's intention with joining Rome, I'm very comfortable with NOT going to a neo-SSPX chapel as I cannot trust them and my conscience would be seriously troubled. Knowing that my hard earned money is going towards the funding of undermining of my Faith......NEVER!!! Yes, it was difficult to pull my children out of their school........yes, we don't have a valid place to attend mass (within 150 miles), yes, we do miss all the "bells & whistles" from attending mass, but I keep reminding myself of where the current SSPX is heading......
For my family & I, we decided a while back that the sole reason we attend the TLM is for.......the true Faith. So, if this one thing is in any danger, we were more than happy to remove ourselves from that environment and not just settle for any/all comforts the neo-SSPX provided.
God knows what's in our hearts and if it means that we can only make a spiritual communion at home, so be it. The rosary is the key.
-
Well, that is between you and God, and I'll keep my nose out of your business.
I can only speak for chapels like mine, where nothing is really different and there is no danger to the Faith.
Remember back in the Vatican II days, when people spoke of being angry during Mass because of what was going on in the Church, or what the priest preached in the sermon? You can't be expected to deal with that.
That might be the point at which you leave no matter what.
Each man has the responsibility for his own family. Just make sure you're honest with yourself (you can't fool God after all) and do your best to be properly informed.
-
I agree on all points. I no longer support the SSPX financially. I support the diocese I live in and charitable organizations from time to time. Obviously I give support not only to the expelled priests but also to those who attend their Masses. I have given money to religious orders as well.
Even if we receive sacraments from an SSPX chapel we are not obligated to support that venture especially since it's remains in some quasi-schismatic state. Rather we can direct our money to our local parish or the diocese. We can even support missionary work (which the Resistance might fall under).
The SSPX is beginning to put financial pressure on the laity. This will backfire as there is already low level anxiety (even among the zombies) over financial management in Menzingen. Much like the revolt in the conciliar dioceses over giving money to pay for lawsuits, I forsee the same thing happening with the Society.
Also, at least in the town I live in, parents of academy students are being pressured to commit to monthly payment plans done ELECTRONICALLY to ensure timely payments of tuitions. And there was that recent begging letter sent out by the pastor because they can't make teacher payroll. It's sad.
If one really feels the need to give to the SSPX do it in ways that it cannot flow back to the District office:
Give food to the priests.
Purchase a product or service for the priests.
Find out if there is a local debt owed for a service and pay it off.
Make a utility payment for the chapel.
Make money orders (don't use personal checks) out to the priest personally.
Buy altar flowers and have them delivered.
Loan your car to a priest who doesn't have one.
Purchase airline tickets for a priest to go home for a visit.
Purchase new vestments or sacred vessels (if needed).
Support the chapel in non-cash ways and you can be assured that the District won't get their hands on it.
I also think it might be worth somebody's time to seek legal counsel about forcing a public audit of the District. This might reveal how much money was used to hire public relations and media consultants and other improper uses of funds.
This post is getting too long so I'm going to stop here.
Short answer: Yes.
The SSPX is going downhill fast, with many CONCRETE ACTIONS that have been completed, and new orientations that have been made manifest through the official organs and statements of the SSPX.
As such, the SSPX is no longer the go-to group for the Resistance in the broad sense -- the Traditional Movement which resists Modernism, Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, Judaism, and Vatican II.
I think many would agree that their local SSPX chapel is far better than the Novus Ordo. It isn't dangerous to the Faith; the sermons might even be decent. But each and every SSPX priest is under the authority of Fr. Rostand, and must send a % of all collection proceeds up the chain to the District, and another % up the chain to SSPX Headquarters in Menzingen.
And if Fr. Rostand orders something, he has to carry it out.
The question is -- should we continue to support the SSPX, who has cast out Bishop Williamson and countless holy, faithful, courageous priests? I answer NO, we should not!
Just to be clear:
By "support" I mean financially. Attending their Masses is a different story. An SSPX Mass is valid AND not harmful to the Faith, so you can't sit at home on Sunday if there is an SSPX chapel reasonably close to your home.
I want OUT of the SSPX. If Bishop Williamson isn't welcome, than neither am I. I want my children to look up to real MEN like +Williamson and great priests like those in the Resistance. How will I ever expose my children to these holy clerics, if I continue to assist exclusively at my local SSPX chapel? It's not going to happen.
When it comes time for Confirmations, the SSPX will be sending any bishop EXCEPT Bishop Williamson. That, my friends, is NOT a good thing. How can you get a good +W sermon when +Fellay is the one doing confirmations? You can't.
It appears that many Catholics in the Resistance are in the same boat -- namely, they are NOT horrified by evil dripping from their SSPX priest -- because their SSPX priest is not evil and agrees with many points brought up by the Resistance. Some priests in this category even give decent sermons! At SSPX chapels with these priests, nothing has really "changed", or at least very little has.
In fact, it sounds like the average Catholic attending Resistance Masses has nothing personally against their SSPX priest. It's the SSPX they are opposing, and they want out from under it.
I fully agree. Under that aspect, I think it IS time to start Resistance chapels EVERYWHERE, NOW.
It's not about waiting for something bad to happen at your SSPX chapel. It's about getting a safety net ready BEFORE you need it. Remember, both priest AND Faithful need that comfort that they won't be out on the streets (or out in the cold without the Sacraments). Think of how much blackmailing power you take away from the bad guys, just by organizing an alternate chapel!
It's not your local SSPX priest that you're opposing. In fact, let him in on it! Recommend to your fellow Resistance parishioners that HE be supported directly with donations, rather than putting $$ in the general collection. Most places don't get Mass every week from the Resistance, and it's certainly NOT better to "stay home" than attend an SSPX Mass. An SSPX Mass is a valid TLM; it's not the Novus Ordo.
Give honor where honor is due; give support where support is due. Show your valued priests that you will support them DIRECTLY, WHEREVER they have to go to be faithful to their priesthood.
That way, they will be less likely to put up with Menzingen's ...crap... and they'll know who their friends are -- the faithful Catholics who wish to continue the legacy of the saintly Archbishop Lefebvre.
-
I agree Catechist99, except for one thing that has me scratching my head:
Support the DIOCESE?
You have to be joking! Why would we support the Conciliar Church? Pardon my saying so, but however bad the Neo-SSPX is, the Conciliar Church is 1000x worse.
The SSPX suppresses the works of Fr. Fahey? Pope Benedict openly appears with Rabbis and prays at the Wailing Wall.
The SSPX is suppressing the works of Archbishop Lefebvre? In the Conciliar Church, the TLM is a faint memory that no one ever sees.
Many SSPX priests give mostly "pious" sermons on the virtues? In the Conciliar Church, the priests are still reading sappy e-mail forwards to the congregation and/or trying to be a comedian.
Some SSPX chapels are moving to the Dialogue Mass? In the Conciliar Church, they use the Novus Ordo Mass and the whole 9 yards -- handshake of peace, altar girls, female lectors, communion in the hand...
Krah has his hand in the financials of the SSPX? You don't want to know who has their hand in the financials of the Conciliar Church!
When I say "withdraw financial support from the SSPX organization" I advocate supporting the RESISTANCE -- not putting money into the Novus Ordo!
Talk about out of the frying pan and into the fire!
iAy caramba!
-
I agree Catechist99, except for one thing that has me scratching my head:
Support the DIOCESE?
For the most part I agree. But there are exceptions. Not every diocese is inherently evil and there might be a particular ministry or program that can be individually supported. This would not apply across the board obviously. Some dioceses have very strong and active ministries for unwed mothers who otherwise might opt for abortion. That could be supported without giving money to the diocese itself. How about a meals on wheels for the homebound? Or giving money to buy school uniforms for Native Americans who attend a Catholic school? Many dioceses have prison outreach. BTW, when was the last time an inmate spoke to a real Catholic and not a NewChurchian?
Maybe I didn't articulate my meaning well or maybe I'm off my rocker. I guess I am reminded of Christ's command
Matthew 25:40 And the king answering, shall say to them: Amen I say to you, as long as you did it to one of these my least brethren, you did it to me.
I just feel moved to extend charity wherever it is needed. Father Pfeiffer teaches us that we will win souls to tradition not by our doctrinal arguments but by our charity and sanctity.
-
The OP has a good premise, and a timely message. My first reaction was
"You could have posted this 9 months ago, just after the nefarious and
revolutionary General Chapter." And I still think that is the case, after
reading the whole thread.
It seems people in general are slow to act. "But there are exceptions."
(Cf. Cathechist99 post, below)
What happened in the Philippines when they got news of +Williamson's
exclusion from the GC? A large chunk of them dropped the SSPX like a
bad habit. No questions asked. And rightly so. It seems to me there is
something in the Catholic sense of the Filipino Faithful that a lot of the rest
of us are missing. Where does that come from? How is it they can have
the courage and fortitude of their convictions and we, many of us, can
even turn a blind eye to heresy and "support the local diocese?" (Cf.
Catechist99 post above)
Any organization (read: SSPX or whatever) that can be so improper as
to ILLEGITIMATELY exclude its most conservative if not outspoken bishop
from the internal affairs of said organization deserves NO SUPPORT.
Nada, zero, zilch.
Does that mean you can't attend their Masses? Well, no. It does not.
So the big problem in the mind of a Catholic is, how do you comply with the
5th precept of the Church, to contribute to the support of our pastors?
Catechist99 goes into this in some detail, in the post above to which
Matthew is replying in this post, below. Detail is good.
I agree Catechist99, except for one thing that has me scratching my head:
Support the DIOCESE?
For the most part I agree. But there are exceptions. Not every diocese is inherently evil and there might be a particular ministry or program that can be individually supported. This would not apply across the board obviously. Some dioceses have very strong and active ministries for unwed mothers who otherwise might opt for abortion. That could be supported without giving money to the diocese itself. How about a meals on wheels for the homebound? Or giving money to buy school uniforms for Native Americans who attend a Catholic school? Many dioceses have prison outreach. BTW, when was the last time an inmate spoke to a real Catholic and not a NewChurchian?
Maybe I didn't articulate my meaning well or maybe I'm off my rocker. I guess I am reminded of Christ's command
Matthew 25:40 And the king answering, shall say to them: Amen I say to you, as long as you did it to one of these my least brethren, you did it to me.
I just feel moved to extend charity wherever it is needed. Father Pfeiffer teaches us that we will win souls to tradition not by our doctrinal arguments but by our charity and sanctity.
The necessity of supporting our pastors presumes our pastors are our
pastors and not wolves in the clothing of pastors. EEkk.. :shocked: Why
did Our Lord say "...in sheep's clothing" instead of "...in pastors' clothing?"
We need some posters with the Clothing of Pastors theme. But just try to
find a chapel that would display them! Ha - HA!
It seems to me that it's a weakness of man to just let someone else give
the answer to problems - like organizing a payment schedule for you. You
want, down deep, someone to tell you how much you ought to be
contributing to your pastors, don't you?
No? Well, if not, then you shouldn't have any problem setting up your own
payment schedule, as you see fit. And in so doing, you really ought to
draw a line through the term "local diocese."
Why? Well, because, Matthew gave a good, sample list in the post above.
He gave examples of the principle, that for the same reasons that any
so-called Traditional Catholic* would attend an SSPX parish regularly (that
is, before the Great Scandal Erupted!) and contribute there in the weekly
collection (that is, before the Great Scandal Erupted!), he would not now
attend OR contribute to the local diocese AFTER the Great Scandal Erupted.
In the days of slavery in this country, when the slaves were emancipated,
some of them chose to remain at their master's home, in many cases, if not
all, because it was their comfort zone. It was all they knew. The outside
world was too scary.
Fr. Pfeiffer touches on this topic of charity several times in the recent Family
Conference, held this past Octave of Christmas. At one point, he said:
...We have to bring back an Apostolic spirit, number one... Because right now, we’re discovering, the majority of the people we’re dealing with in this fight... The majority are pretty much focused on themselves. We’ve got to stop that.
The majority of our people, who hold the truth, are focused on themselves. And that includes priests. In other words, “I want to stand firm in the truth, I want to stand firm against the errors, but as long as my priest, or my place is comfortable, no problem. If it’s not, I gotta think about it. I gotta weigh it."
That’s why ... we have to rip that out! It’s either the truth or it’s not. It’s either necessary or it’s not, and if you have no Mass, well then you have no Mass. First, it’s gotta be necessary to hold the truth, it’s gotta be necessary to condemn the errors, it’s gotta be necessary to take whatever consequences come from that...
But... we have to have the mentality: WE’RE CHARGING! And if you want to come along, fine, if you don’t, well, stay home. We’re charging. So, we... have a war going on, and it’s a GLOBAL WAR. And we have to have the heart to want to spread the faith everywhere. That’s the first condition...
Fr. Pfeiffer takes the discussion to a higher level.
You can go around with your head in the sand, spiritually, and just worry
about your own situation, which is a most natural thing to do, and
something that your relatives will expect of you, but is it what God expects
of you?
Everyone has to make his own choices, but I would caution very much
against being involved with the local diocese when it comes to giving
support. Volunteering and donating hard goods is one thing, but you
really should not be putting any money in the collection plate at a diocese
event, including but not limited to their so-called liturgy.
You can be involved, for example, with the prison ministry, but you know,
you don't have to be part of any organization to visit the prisoners. All
you have to do is show up at the prison and wait in line to see anyone
that the prison guards are willing to allow you to see. You don't have to
be a certified member of a prayer group to pray the Rosary in front of any
abortion killing center. Just show up and do it. They'll love to have you.
You don't need to be a registered parishioner to donate canned food to
the local Food Pantry or parish food drive. Just do it. But it will be up to
you to KEEP IT UP. Don't expect any organizer to tell you it's time to make
a contribution. Set up your own schedule.
"Fortify your homes." --a recent EC.
"A loose association of independent priests.." --a recent EC.
Whether we like it or not, the future is coming, and it might not be quite
as "comfortable" as we would like to have it.....................
*Essentially all Catholics are traditional. To the extent that one is not
traditional, also, one is neither Catholic. It is a line that is becoming more
and more vague lately. And the blurring of distinctions is the work of the
devil. It is the grey horse of the Apocalypse. Ambiguity is more pernicious
than open heresy.
-
There is no justification for sitting at home on Sunday, if you have an SSPX chapel nearby. Their Mass is valid, and there is no danger to the Faith that would justify staying at home. The Novus Ordo is a different story.
Why do you think so?
The superiors form the subjects - not the subjects the superiors.
This means that Menzingen forms you if you attend mass at an SSPX chapel. Menzingen has not signed a deal with Conciliar Rome yet but Menzingen wishes to sign a deal. They were not yet in bed with Conciliar Rome but they wish to be. It is FSSP-wannabe-Menzingen (or shorter: Rome) which forms you if you attend mass at an SSPX chapel.
It's not only the sermon, or what's missing in the sermon, but the whole environment which will have influence on you. And you will have comparatively next to no influence at all on the other folks there.
Also: If you think, that your Faith is strong, the Faith of others may not be. If you attend mass at an SSPX chapel, you may feed the impression that all is fine at the SSPX.
The SSPX has always recommended not to attend mass at FSSP or other ED chapels. Consequently it is wrong today to attend mass at their chapels.
-
There is no justification for sitting at home on Sunday, if you have an SSPX chapel nearby. Their Mass is valid, and there is no danger to the Faith that would justify staying at home. The Novus Ordo is a different story.
Why do you think so?
The superiors form the subjects - not the subjects the superiors.
This means that Menzingen forms you if you attend mass at an SSPX chapel. Menzingen has not signed a deal with Conciliar Rome yet but Menzingen wishes to sign a deal. They were not yet in bed with Conciliar Rome but they wish to be. It is FSSP-wannabe-Menzingen (or shorter: Rome) which forms you if you attend mass at an SSPX chapel.
It's not only the sermon, or what's missing in the sermon, but the whole environment which will have influence on you. And you will have comparatively next to no influence at all on the other folks there.
Also: If you think, that your Faith is strong, the Faith of others may not be. If you attend mass at an SSPX chapel, you may feed the impression that all is fine at the SSPX.
The SSPX has always recommended not to attend mass at FSSP or other ED chapels. Consequently it is wrong today to attend mass at their chapels.
Excellent points and post Faber!!
Even the good priests at SSPX chapels will have to subject themselves to Menzigen's plan sooner or later.
If anyone thinks that Bp. Fellay has given up his "mission to convert Rome", is fatally deceiving themselves. He thought that after 12 years of waiting, the time was right (with the elimination of all the "disobedient" priests/Bp. Williamson and "we must embrace the Holy Father" into sermons), but the faithful's reaction is what disrupted his plan.
So, now "the deals off".......(until we gently massage them into the mush of the neo-SSPX thinking) and in time, they won't notice any changes as it's going to be a slow & methodical spoon feeding campaign. The few that may or may not complain when they see these changes taking place will eventually be looked on as an "odd and insignificant bunch" as the majority will already have embraced the changes.
Most SSPXers that state "I haven't seen any changes yet, or when they actually move the altar, that's when I'm done, or when they use alter girls, or when they give communion in the hand etc..that's when I'm done...... like what Fr. Pfieffer says "they are just raising the bar" until they're actually participating in the N.O. mass.
With all the evidence that's stacked up against Bp. Fellay, and knowing of his intentions to join liberal Rome, it makes no sense to say you're in the Resistance, when you're actively participating in this downfall. What are you really resisting?
-
This SSPX-Resistance is a organic, grass-roots Catholic movement, like the Cristeros.
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS4dRwSpyz_KWLM_z5PVmN3jiAw8PHFQSJNmFkjdxqO-LPt9dHBsA)
We have to support it anyway we can. There is no turning back.
Going to neoSSPX chapels for the Sacraments is a temporary fix, since Msgr. Fellay has stated he will forgoe a doctrinal agreement in lieu of a practical ageement with newRome.
How could we trust a man who hires a zionist and accepts Gutman/Rothchild inheritance funds, while sacking many holy priests and Bp. Williamson?
We have have to put our hearts into the SSPX-Resistance and fight!
-
There is no justification for sitting at home on Sunday, if you have an SSPX chapel nearby. Their Mass is valid, and there is no danger to the Faith that would justify staying at home. The Novus Ordo is a different story.
Why do you think so?
The superiors form the subjects - not the subjects the superiors.
This means that Menzingen forms you if you attend mass at an SSPX chapel. Menzingen has not signed a deal with Conciliar Rome yet but Menzingen wishes to sign a deal. They were not yet in bed with Conciliar Rome but they wish to be. It is FSSP-wannabe-Menzingen (or shorter: Rome) which forms you if you attend mass at an SSPX chapel.
It's not only the sermon, or what's missing in the sermon, but the whole environment which will have influence on you. And you will have comparatively next to no influence at all on the other folks there.
Also: If you think, that your Faith is strong, the Faith of others may not be. If you attend mass at an SSPX chapel, you may feed the impression that all is fine at the SSPX.
The SSPX has always recommended not to attend mass at FSSP or other ED chapels. Consequently it is wrong today to attend mass at their chapels.
Faber-
You have been a long time trying to wean Catholics away from their SSPX chapels.
If there is no compromise at the particular chapel, there is no reason (or justification) to leave.
How can you be more resistance than the resistance?
Bishop Williamson, Fr Ringrose, and Fr Pfeiffer all contradict your contrived logic and position.
Do you accuse them of false doctrine?
-
I think it depends on the individual priest. That being said, going to such a chapel can present a temptation towards compromise.
-
How can you be more resistance than the resistance?
Bishop Williamson, Fr Ringrose, and Fr Pfeiffer all contradict your contrived logic and position.
Do you accuse them of false doctrine?
I know that Fr. Pfeiffer has stated that, objectively speaking, all priests of the SSPX need to jump ship now. This is because the principles outlined in the 2012 SSPX General Chapter Declaration and the corresponding Six Conditions are a danger to the Faith.
-
There is no justification for sitting at home on Sunday, if you have an SSPX chapel nearby. Their Mass is valid, and there is no danger to the Faith that would justify staying at home. The Novus Ordo is a different story.
Why do you think so?
The superiors form the subjects - not the subjects the superiors.
This means that Menzingen forms you if you attend mass at an SSPX chapel. Menzingen has not signed a deal with Conciliar Rome yet but Menzingen wishes to sign a deal. They were not yet in bed with Conciliar Rome but they wish to be. It is FSSP-wannabe-Menzingen (or shorter: Rome) which forms you if you attend mass at an SSPX chapel.
It's not only the sermon, or what's missing in the sermon, but the whole environment which will have influence on you. And you will have comparatively next to no influence at all on the other folks there.
Also: If you think, that your Faith is strong, the Faith of others may not be. If you attend mass at an SSPX chapel, you may feed the impression that all is fine at the SSPX.
The SSPX has always recommended not to attend mass at FSSP or other ED chapels. Consequently it is wrong today to attend mass at their chapels.
I generally agree with your comments. However, what needs to be taken into account is the need of the indiviudal person.
-
Bishop Williamson, Fr Ringrose, and Fr Pfeiffer all contradict your contrived logic and position.
Bp Williamson, on the contrary, uses the very same logic:
It follows that if the celebration of a Tridentine Mass is surrounded by circuмstances that threaten to undermine my faith, then depending on the gravity of the threat, I may not attend such a Mass. [...] If then Catholics were forbidden to attend Mass in Orthodox circuмstances, would not the same Church in her right mind forbid to attend a Tridentine Mass celebrated in Conciliar circuмstances?
Then what is meant by Conciliar circuмstances? The answer must be, any circuмstances which, over a shorter or longer period of time, are going to make me think that the Second Vatican Council was not an utter disaster for the Church.
Now, how grave is the threat? Bp Williamson and Fr Ringrose signal yellow light. A vigilant driver will choose to stop. In case you drive on, you're warned about the risk.
Bishop Williamson, Fr Ringrose, and Fr Pfeiffer do not recommend to attend Mass at an SSPX chapel. And they much less say that one has to attend Mass at an SSPX chapel to fulfill ones Sunday obligation in case there's no alternative.
-
Bishop Williamson, Fr Ringrose, and Fr Pfeiffer all contradict your contrived logic and position.
Bp Williamson, on the contrary, uses the very same logic:
It follows that if the celebration of a Tridentine Mass is surrounded by circuмstances that threaten to undermine my faith, then depending on the gravity of the threat, I may not attend such a Mass. [...] If then Catholics were forbidden to attend Mass in Orthodox circuмstances, would not the same Church in her right mind forbid to attend a Tridentine Mass celebrated in Conciliar circuмstances?
Then what is meant by Conciliar circuмstances? The answer must be, any circuмstances which, over a shorter or longer period of time, are going to make me think that the Second Vatican Council was not an utter disaster for the Church.
Now, how grave is the threat? Bp Williamson and Fr Ringrose signal yellow light. A vigilant driver will choose to stop. In case you drive on, you're warned about the risk.
Bishop Williamson, Fr Ringrose, and Fr Pfeiffer do not recommend to attend Mass at an SSPX chapel. And they much less say that one has to attend Mass at an SSPX chapel to fulfill ones Sunday obligation in case there's no alternative.
1) EC 263 considers the case of Catholics attending an ICK or FSSP (ie., an indult) Mass, and is therefore off point.
2) We are talking about the permissibility of attending an SSPX Mass at a chapel in which nothing has changed.
3) The two situations are not even remotely close.
4) Therefore, you are misapplying the principles of Bishop Williamson to suit your agenda.
5) You have gone on record as claiming nobody can any longer attend an SSPX Mass, even if nothing has changed, and no error crept in.
6) Bishop Williamson, Fr Ringrose, and Fr Pfeiffer are all on record as NOT forbidding attendance at SSPX Masses in which no error has crept in, just in the last month.
6) Please produce quotes from them prohibiting SSPX Mass attendance at chapels in which no error has been introduced, and I will concede the point.
-
Please produce quotes from them prohibiting SSPX Mass attendance at chapels in which no error has been introduced, and I will concede the point.
My point is not, that anybody should be prohibited to attend Mass at SSPX chapels, or that Bp Williamson has forbidden to attend Mass at SSPX chapels.
Also, the SPPX never prohibited to attend Mass at FSSP chapels.
The SSPX named good reasons not to attend Mass at FSSP chapels, and recommended to rather stay at home, where appropriate.
I don't claim that Bp Williamson or Frs Ringrose, Pfeiffer etc. have forbidden to attend Mass at SSPX chapels. But they are warning. They switched the traffic lights from green to yellow. So it's safe to stop attending Mass at SSPX chapels, and there is no need whatsoever to wait for the red light.
EC 263 considers the case of Catholics attending an ICK or FSSP (ie., an indult) Mass, and is therefore off point.
That's not true. The criterion of Bp Williamson is not indult or not indult. Rather his criterion is, whether the celebration of a Tridentine Mass is surrounded by any circuмstances which, over a shorter or longer period of time, are going to make me think that the Second Vatican Council was not an utter disaster for the Church.
-
This SSPX-Resistance is a organic, grass-roots Catholic movement, like the Cristeros.
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS4dRwSpyz_KWLM_z5PVmN3jiAw8PHFQSJNmFkjdxqO-LPt9dHBsA)
We have to support it anyway we can. There is no turning back.
Going to neoSSPX chapels for the Sacraments is a temporary fix, since Msgr. Fellay has stated he will forgoe a doctrinal agreement in lieu of a practical ageement with newRome.
How could we trust a man who hires a zionist and accepts Gutman/Rothchild inheritance funds, while sacking many holy priests and Bp. Williamson?
We have have to put our hearts into the SSPX-Resistance and fight!
Whilst Matthew and Faber make sense in their comments, I do agree there is no turning back. This resistance network is the way forward. Rome wishes to change the thinking of Traditionalists.
With what you have written in mind, I must admit, I was annoyed when I informed people of the expulsion of Bishop Williamson only for them to inform me, they had been to Mass via the Institute Christ the King the week before.
There has been a tendency in Ireland that because Tradition is so small that people must support each other. For many once they are getting the Latin Mass it matters little if it is from a Society priest or the local Diocesan priest.
I see this new resistance as something good but ultimately it is providential. A more purified resistance is emerging.
-
The SSPX suppresses the works of Fr. Fahey?
Many who attend the SSPX have never read the works of Fr Fahey yet at same time a new generation of people, who never attend a Traditional Mass are reading the works of this "pure saint".
Again a personal opinion and some might say it is deluded but this resistance will flourish. God is directing Bishop Williamson,Fr Pfeiffer and the resistance in this noble crusade.
-
I attended Mass at the SSPX chapel where Fr. Hewko was one of our priests.
If you want to know what's going on at that chapel today, ask him. See what he tells you.
Our family left when the priest in charge began directing everyone to stay off the internet and he started stalking me here at CathInfo.
Other families left after he assaulted a parishioner.
I attend Mass now at an independent chapel. It's a heck of a lot less crazy than what is happening in the Society.
In my opinion, we all have to be prepared to leave the Society just like people had to be prepared to leave NO.
The Society is NOT the Church.
My husband and I are 100% certain we made the right decision.
-
I think it depends on the individual priest. That being said, going to such a chapel can present a temptation towards compromise.
I agree with Tele.
If you have a very liberal and domineering priest who gives ridiculous sermons and kicks out anyone who objects to a deal with Rome, it's best to leave that chapel. But if your local SSPX parish has a good priest who doesn't act like that, you should attend Mass there if it's your only option.
-
Chapter 12 of Daniel is on us. We had priest that were not priest when I was a teen. We had the trad. Mass and such, but the priest kept their secret that they were not priest, infiltrators and that meant no sacraments were taking place, although everything else seemed to be ok. I attend trad. Mass for the sacraments. I pray they are still there. (CMRI) After this group, I don't see anything else. It is very sad, but God wants us to know what life on this earth is like without the Precious Blood. And it will take place, it is just a matter of when.
-
Let's see Pablo. Were you there? Do you know what happened? Or are you a troll for this priest?
This priest indeed assaulted a parishioner. There were witnesses. I was a witness to a part of the incident. I assure you, it was very unpriestly.
The priest lives in fear???? There are plenty of men, women, and children who live in fear that this priest will become irate and either confront or attack them.
Two years of agony for a priest?? What about the agony that parishioners are experiencing because they are watching their chapel, a chapel they worked hard to purchase, and prayed hard to fill, go down in flames? What about the agony of not being "allowed" to go back into your chapel? What about being removed from your volunteer positions? What about that agony?
And yes, they wouldn't call the police on a priest. Although, in my opinion, they should have.
Perhaps YOU should know what your are talking about before you make comments.
The Priests are NOT God! They are still men. And as such, we do not have to bow down to them. They HAVE to be held accountable for their actions. PERIOD.
Just how do you think this pedo-priest mess in the NO was allowed to fester for so long? Because everyone was afraid to call the police. Bull hockey!
-
The SSPX suppresses the works of Fr. Fahey?
Many who attend the SSPX have never read the works of Fr Fahey yet at same time a new generation of people, who never attend a Traditional Mass are reading the works of this "pure saint".
Again a personal opinion and some might say it is deluded but this resistance will flourish. God is directing Bishop Williamson,Fr Pfeiffer and the resistance in this noble crusade.
Please tell me:
Why have they suppressed the works of Fr. Fahey?
-
The SSPX suppresses the works of Fr. Fahey?
Many who attend the SSPX have never read the works of Fr Fahey yet at same time a new generation of people, who never attend a Traditional Mass are reading the works of this "pure saint".
Again a personal opinion and some might say it is deluded but this resistance will flourish. God is directing Bishop Williamson,Fr Pfeiffer and the resistance in this noble crusade.
Please tell me:
Why have they suppressed the works of Fr. Fahey?
For the same reason they removed most SSPX.org articles concerning the Jews and for making clarifications of +Fellay's reference to them as "enemies of the Church": fear of them
-
Is that priest still there at your chapel, or was he removed?
-
The SSPX suppresses the works of Fr. Fahey?
Many who attend the SSPX have never read the works of Fr Fahey yet at same time a new generation of people, who never attend a Traditional Mass are reading the works of this "pure saint".
Again a personal opinion and some might say it is deluded but this resistance will flourish. God is directing Bishop Williamson,Fr Pfeiffer and the resistance in this noble crusade.
Please tell me:
Why have they suppressed the works of Fr. Fahey?
Were you genuinely unaware the SSPX suppressed and purged the writings of Fr Denis Fahey? This is old news. The Irish Dictrict publicly bent down to International Jewry by declaring the 'h0Ɩ0cαųst' beyond discussion. It must be accepted there was a systematic killing of Jews by these nasty nαzι/Germans. Utter nonsense but yes, the SSPX appeased Jews. This was all before 'Krahgate' and many were not aware of the Zionist control of the 'pious union'.
-
Were you genuinely unaware the SSPX suppressed and purged the writings of Fr Denis Fahey? This is old news. The Irish Dictrict publicly bent down to International Jewry by declaring the 'h0Ɩ0cαųst' beyond discussion. It must be accepted there was a systematic killing of Jews by these nasty nαzι/Germans. Utter nonsense but yes, the SSPX appeased Jews. This was all before 'Krahgate' and many were not aware of the Zionist control of the 'pious union'.
I wasn't aware of it.
Was this Fr Angles' decision, or Fr Morgan's?
-
Were you genuinely unaware the SSPX suppressed and purged the writings of Fr Denis Fahey? This is old news. The Irish Dictrict publicly bent down to International Jewry by declaring the 'h0Ɩ0cαųst' beyond discussion. It must be accepted there was a systematic killing of Jews by these nasty nαzι/Germans. Utter nonsense but yes, the SSPX appeased Jews. This was all before 'Krahgate' and many were not aware of the Zionist control of the 'pious union'.
I wasn't aware of it.
Was this Fr Angles' decision, or Fr Morgan's?
Again very old news and well docuмented.
http://www.cathinfo.com/index.php/The-Irish-District-of-the-SSPX-have-betrayed-Bishop-Williamson
The Irish District of the SSPX have betrayed Bishop Williamson. They still have this note on their website.
http://ireland.sspx.net/miscellaneous/old%20but%20useful/Motu%20Proprio/note.htm
"NOTE CONCERNING RECENT EVENTS
February 2009
Recent events make it necessary to say a word about the Jєωιѕн h0Ɩ0cαųst.
We want to stress that all the members of the Society in Ireland condemn as false, offensive, and unacceptable any form of anti-Semitism, including the denial or minimization of the Jєωιѕн genocide during World War II. For us it is beyond discussion that a systematic and organized evil plan of persecution and extermination of the Jєωιѕн race took place during the nαzι regime"
Posted Apr 21, 2010, 12:18 am
-
Were you genuinely unaware the SSPX suppressed and purged the writings of Fr Denis Fahey? This is old news. The Irish Dictrict publicly bent down to International Jewry by declaring the 'h0Ɩ0cαųst' beyond discussion. It must be accepted there was a systematic killing of Jews by these nasty nαzι/Germans. Utter nonsense but yes, the SSPX appeased Jews. This was all before 'Krahgate' and many were not aware of the Zionist control of the 'pious union'.
I wasn't aware of it.
Was this Fr Angles' decision, or Fr Morgan's?
The only thing worse than an Irishman who has lost his Catholic Faith is a judaized Irishman.
-
http://revisionistreview.blogspot.ie/2010/04/some-questions-for-hierarchy-of-society.html
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Some Questions for the Hierarchy of the Society of St Pius X (SSPX)
Is the Derogation of Calvary and the Ascendance of Auschwitz "your fight"?
Anonymous said...
In regard to the notice on the Irish District website it should be noted that the District Superior (a Spaniard who had relatives who fought for the Anarchist butchers against Catholicism during the cινιℓ ωαr; they subsequently died in German labour camps during WWII) ordered that his notice be read out from the pulpit of every SSPX church in Ireland when he produced the statement one year or so ago.
After its first reading-out, at a particular church, the news spread across Ireland so quickly that queues of protesting faithful lined up to literally besiege the priests in other parts of the country with complaints and remonstrations.
Consequently the notice was not read out at several of the churches in Ireland.
All the priests are foreign but the Irish are no fools.
The British District of SSPX and its faithful are not fools either. The attempted pacifying of the тαℓмυdists and the outrageous and disgraceful way that Bishop Williamson has been treated by a few of his confreres is utterly rejected throughout the District.
Neither are the great bulk of French or Italians taken in by this scandalous attempt to kowtow to the тαℓмυdic power.
If it were possible for you to supply French and Italian translations of your work you would surely find an enormous and very appreciative audience, Mr. Hoffman.
-
I attended Mass at the SSPX chapel where Fr. Hewko was one of our priests.
If you want to know what's going on at that chapel today, ask him. See what he tells you.
Our family left when the priest in charge began directing everyone to stay off the internet and he started stalking me here at CathInfo.
Other families left after he assaulted a parishioner.
I attend Mass now at an independent chapel. It's a heck of a lot less crazy than what is happening in the Society.
In my opinion, we all have to be prepared to leave the Society just like people had to be prepared to leave NO.
The Society is NOT the Church.
My husband and I are 100% certain we made the right decision.
Who is this priest that assaulted a parishioner???
-
http://revisionistreview.blogspot.ie/2010/04/some-questions-for-hierarchy-of-society.html
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Some Questions for the Hierarchy of the Society of St Pius X (SSPX)
Is the Derogation of Calvary and the Ascendance of Auschwitz "your fight"?
I have no idea where this quote came from. It's not found on the link provided.
Who is "Anonymous?"
Anonymous said...
In regard to the notice on the Irish District website it should be noted that the District Superior (a Spaniard who had relatives who fought for the Anarchist butchers against Catholicism during the cινιℓ ωαr; they subsequently died in German labour camps during WWII) ordered that his notice be read out from the pulpit of every SSPX church in Ireland when he produced the statement one year or so ago.
After its first reading-out, at a particular church, the news spread across Ireland so quickly that queues of protesting faithful lined up to literally besiege the priests in other parts of the country with complaints and remonstrations.
Consequently the notice was not read out at several of the churches in Ireland.
All the priests are foreign but the Irish are no fools.
The British District of SSPX and its faithful are not fools either. The attempted pacifying of the тαℓмυdists and the outrageous and disgraceful way that Bishop Williamson has been treated by a few of his confreres is utterly rejected throughout the District.
Neither are the great bulk of French or Italians taken in by this scandalous attempt to kowtow to the тαℓмυdic power.
If it were possible for you to supply French and Italian translations of your work you would surely find an enormous and very appreciative audience, Mr. Hoffman.
h0Ɩ0cαųstianity --- now is that a word that will ever catch on? If we start
using it, maybe it will! Wouldn't the Zionists hate that? They might make it a
crime to say this word in public, you know. Would a law like that wake people
up, or would it just convince them of the Zionism dogma?
The link above provides a page with a Hoffman article that ends thusly:
...Most Catholics would pour scorn on the idea that a bishop must be suppressed to placate Arabs because he cast doubt on the Israeli h0Ɩ0cαųst in Palestine. But "The h0Ɩ0cαųst," as the suffering of Judaic persons during World War II has come to be known as a result of the imposition of a type of Newspeak, has in fact entered the Catholic Church and assumed a position as a de facto sacred dogma.
We must no longer run from the fact that the religion-of-Judaism-for-gentiles which this writer terms "h0Ɩ0cαųstianity" derogates the Passion of Our Lord in favor of the notion that the supreme suffering of all history was experienced at Auschwitz by Judaics. This is the stated position of Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley and of many other bishops and cardinals of the modern Catholic Church.
The SSPX, said to be a priestly fraternity that wishes to defend the Church as it existed prior to Vatican Council II, would appear to be complicit in cooperating with the modernist infiltration of the rabbinic Shoah theology into the Church, and priests and laity of the SSPX are told that this modernist infiltration is not their fight. Indeed, by their silence and inaction they are party to this subversion.
I have a question for the hierarchy of the SSPX: If the derogation of Calvary in favor of Auschwitz as the supreme martyrdom in world history is not your fight, what is?
I have witnessed the SSPX hierarchy expending a significant amount of time and energy kowtowing to h0Ɩ0cαųstianity. I have seen them do nothing noteworthy, however, about the rapidly increasing use of the name of Jesus Christ in Hollywood movies as a swear word.
I have not the seen the SSPX expend any energy whatsoever on James Cameron's campaign to convince the world that Jesus Christ did not resurrect from the dead. Mr. Cameron, one of the wealthiest and most powerful directors in Hollywood, produced a docuмentary movie for the Discovery television channel entitled, "The Lost Tomb of Jesus." This sophisticated movie, broadcast to millions, endeavors to show that the decomposing bones of Jesus were once held inside a tomb located by Cameron's team of Resurrection-deniers.
Last I knew the Apostle Paul had nothing to say about gas chamber denial, but he did solemnly warn about the consequences of Resurrection-denial: "If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain." (I Cor. 15:14). There is no Church and no Faith if Christ did not rise from the dead. It would seem that Hollywood Resurrection-deniers such as James Cameron are striking at the very heart of what it means to be Catholic, yet resistance to this diabolism has been neutralized. How has this neutralization come to pass?
Against James Cameron's campaign of Resurrection-denial, the SSPX have had nothing to say. Cameron's most recent New Age science fiction movie "Avatar" is the highest grossing movie of all time. No Catholic boycott was launched against it.
What the SSPX forgets, whether willfully or not, is that h0Ɩ0cαųstianity is akin to the "smoke of Satan" which afflicted another and earlier pontificate of unhappy memory. By embracing the Vatican's acceptance of the revolutionary, modernist Shoah theology which has as its goal the ascent of Auschwitz to the ontological position of the greatest and most egregious suffering in all of human history -- ahead of Christ -- the SSPX is breathing an infectious smoke which in many other respects perverts its judgment and skews its priorities. It has certainly perverted the judgment of Pope Benedict, who has entered three ѕуηαgσgυєs in less than five years, wherein he encouraged the assembled Pharisees to continue in their traditions. This papal abomination in the ѕуηαgσgυєs is a symptom of a profound spiritual malaise, undoubtedly emanating from the grave disorder that inclusion of Shoah theology in the Church has sown.
About this horror, the SSPX is oblivious. In fact, in so far as the evidence indicates, the SSPX has become a party to it. I draw the reader's attention to an article published in the December, 2009 issue of The Angelus, the official organ of the SSPX in the United States, entitled "Saint of the Sanhedrin" containing grotesque praise for the wicked Pharisee Hillel, elementary errors in the history of the тαℓмυd, and a flattering fantasy about the Pharisee Gamaliel. The editor of The Angelus has refused to retract this misleading and deceptive article which would have been suitable for publication in the bulletin of the B'nai B'rith or the journal of the Scottish Rite of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ. Meanwhile in Ireland the SSPX has issued a statement affirming the "h0Ɩ0cαųst" that reads like a press release from the Simon Wiesenthal Center.
No reasonable person expects the SSPX to join the ranks of World War II revisionists and debate the forensic chemistry of Zyklon B in Auschwitz-Birkenau. Rather, we are calling on them to resist the modernist heresy of h0Ɩ0cαųstianity, which the Vatican, with unprecedented lawlessness, has made a litmus test for holding ecclesiastical office.
To the SSPX we say, since Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre founded your order, resistance to modernism has been "your fight." Since there is no more pernicious manifestation of modernism in our time than h0Ɩ0cαųstianity, why then have you fled the field of combat under cover of anemic alibis and whining subservience to the new Vatican theology which has substituted Auschwitz for Calvary?
................. and what does this have to do with Resistance Chapel and good priests?
-
FYI- Fr. Pfeiffer has personally told me there is "NO SIN IN STAYING AWAY FROM A MASS THAT HAS FOR YOU, BECOME A NEAR OCCASION OF SIN." This is in reference to the continual harassment and stress at an SSPX Chapel that has resulted in physical illness. Our Lord obliges nobody to hear Mass under these conditions. "Stay home. Rest. Read the missal. Pray your Rosary. Wait until a Mass becomes available."