The argument I took from the discussion I had with one of the superiors in the Society, was that the forum websites out there speaking about the SSPX, have items on there of disinformation, which if believed, is causing a lot of headaches for the people in charge of the Society.
This attitude of crybaby poor me whiney whiney boo-hoo we're so
persecuted blah blah blah makes me just SICK, I tell you. S-I-C-K ... :barf:
We have so many headaches
because the pew-sitters are not kowtowing
to our every whim! Basically..
The Menzingen-denizens are SPOILED!!!!! Humility my A**!! They wouldn't know humility if it hit them like a TRAIN.
The ill-informed, reading the forums, sometimes absorb erroneous things, and regurgitate them as fact, to their priests/other laity/the superiors, and this causes a lot of confusion. I can personally see this being a problem, considering some of the venomous remarks, and ad hominem attacks some people resort to regarding the issues enveloping the Society.
Well DUUUUH! Why do the ill-informed even bother going to the stupid
Internet in the first place??? Because, THE MENZINGEN-DENIZENS ARE
HELL BENT ON KEEPING THEM IN THE DARK. THAT'S WHY.
So don't Boo-Hoo me, you misfits. Take it like a man or
Shut-
Up.
If you don't hear that from the priests you're kicking out don't think they're
not tempted - but they've got more dignity that the
wee folk like me.
You made your bed, now sleep in it, as my mother used to say, bless her
soul. She was Irish, partly. Enough, anyway. Enough to know better.
However, I do believe that people have a responsibility to transmit the truth as Catholics, and not resort to language uncharitable. One can sound the alarm bells when something comes out of the Society, or expounds on an experience had in direct contact with a priest/bishop/superior. Keeping this in mind, I do not feel that the baby should be thrown out with the bath water.
I'm sorry, maybe I'm dense, but what "baby" are you talking about?
Does "resorting to language uncharitable" waste some resource?
What? Pixels on the monitor? Bytes on the hard drive? Touchy-feelies
in a Menzingen-denizen who's too spoiled to be a man??
Maybe an alarm bell or two before they face their particular judgment
could save them from hell in eternity! Then again? ... Maybe not.
I disagree with said superior, in the fact that God gave us reason, and an intellect, ..
Actually, our reason and our intellect are one and the same thing....
.. and there are those of us that feel sufficiently informed and intelligent, to be able to sift through things, and find the truth amidst all the lies and disinformation out there, and feel that they we have sufficient prudence to be able to take all the information they we gather with a grain of salt. The old adage, "Believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear," is a pretty good saying to go by.
I hope you don't mind the edits, because the first time I read this I could
not make heads or tails out of what it means: who are "they?" Some of
"us" would be "we," and now there are "they??" &c.
When speaking with said superior, I used the example of "traditio," where I scan the headlines they post, and google the actual headline to check for sources to confirm voracity of stories. I don't believe anything that "traditio" reports, because of their coarse, always irritating and unnecessary commentaries.
This is good.. I have found that you cannot even mention Traditio to some
people because then they fly off the handle. They pigeon-hole you, and
forever and ever you are no longer credible and must be SHUNNED. So
it's much better to not even mention the word. You can go to the site
and read what helps you, and like you say, check the sources. But we
are now getting to the point where the Internet is on the verge of being
saddled with international controls, such that any given topic can be
scrubbed. There are companies that specialize in removing information
that their client has hired them to remove from the entire Internet.
Imagine that. But it's true. So one day even sites like CI might be subject
to intervention where by certain threads will have to comply to norms, or
else the entire website may be shut down by "authority." Wouldn't +Fellay
love to have that power? You bet he would!! Can you think of a better
reason for him wanting to be on the "right side" of the fence when this
kind of tyranny becomes implemented? He sure won't "be there," if he lets
any "αnтι-ѕємιтєs" have any elbow room in his cult! That's for SURE!
Regarding this forum, I agreed that there are some people that take what they read, and absorb it like it's from the tongue of God. Those people should avoid this, and other sites, if they haven't the ability to sift through things, and perhaps talk to someone more educated on these matters, to gather information.
I'd say it's part of the process of learning. Anyone goes through a learning
curve where at the start they are prone to mistakes. To claim that
anyone making mistakes is destroying something sacred and therefore
nobody should be given the opportunity to make mistakes is like saying
it should be illegal to ride a horse. Or drive a car. Or fly an airplane.
The way you learn to sift through things is by sifting through things. So
what if you miss a micron here or there? The reason the Menzingen-
denizens want to discourage you from using the Internet is, this thing
is taking away their power to DECEIVE YOU. And they don't like to have
their power taken away, because they want to deceive you with impunity.
Of course, if you ask about that they'll bristle and deny it. That's how
you know it's TRUE.
I did not appreciate the tone of this superior, regarding, "We don't -need- to come here, you know. We have -plenty- of other places that we're needed, and if you don't want us here, we can leave and take the sacraments elsewhere." In my opinion, this was a spit in the face. It is not OUR fault that our priest died.
Good for you! Don't let them bamboozle you. Keep your wicks trimmed
and be wise as a serpent yet gentle as a dove. There is absolutely no
excuse for them to behave in such an arrogant and contemptuous way.
They wouldn't have any job if it were not for the faithful! What would
they do on a remote island all together with no laymen to domineer?
They would eat each other alive, that's what! So they're trying to eat
you alive instead. It's a predatory mindset that is INAPPROPRIATE for
the shepherds of souls.
Our Lord told Saint Peter, "Feed my sheep."
He did NOT say, "Feed on my sheep."We are trying to carry on what the generous and wise man that began our Church [little chapel] started, and what Father subsequently carried on for 23 years after his death.
"If you don't trust us, why receive sacraments from us?" Pardon me, but the faithful have little choice, considering that Father searched for a good three years before he died, for a replacement, and could not find one.
I believe this is not a unique problem, and it is the reason that +W is
advocating a loose association of independent priests worldwide, so that
they can all help each other. The Menzingen-denizens don't like that,
either, because, the same reason: it takes away their power. They crave
power like a monster with an insatiable appetite. Absolute power corrupts
absolutely.
I detect in this a note of consanguinity with the Novus Ordo already. They
are saying to you, why don't you just go to the local parish? Because the
Neo-SSPX already considers itself as equivalent to the local parish, only
without the formality of jurisdiction. That is their goal: jurisdiction. It's
what they crave, and they do NOT crave the salvation of souls, which is
the highest law of the Church. That is, they have allowed their
covetousness of jurisdiction obscure their true mission. This is a problem.
You can have a priest that is an alcoholic, and he would still have a valid sacraments, even if you loathe his faults.
Read between the lines!
He's not talking about "alcoholism." He's talking about the BIG PROBLEM
that hangs over the Church, the one Our Lady somehow put into words
that innocent shepherd children in Fatima could understand, something
that made them tie chains and ropes around their waists even at night
until she came to tell them to take it off at night time. The BIG PROBLEM
that caused the mature Sister Lucia of the Immaculate Conception to be
unable to put pen to paper and write it down, even 25 years later. THAT
BIG PROBLEM. He's talking about the "unnatural vice" the "sin against
nature" the sin of Sodom.
Do not be fooled by his diversionary tactics. He means the consecrated
souls who would turn to devour the souls of their charges instead of
leading them to salvation! THAT BIG PROBLEM. Otherwise known as
the Third Secret of Fatima.
I venture to say, even if you disagree with a priest on certain issues regarding the crisis, but not [on] matters of the Holy Catholic Faith, that if you can get to Holy Mass on Sunday, you should GO, EVEN if you disagree with them him, as long as they're he's not rejecting the dogmas or doctrines of the Faith.
He spoke of "trust." Father, when he was alive, told us to approach him directly if he were saying something contrary to the truth, or was speaking dogmatically on things not dogmatic. In my opinion, I believe that some in the society, especially this superior, are speaking dogmatically on things that are not really dogmatic at all, such as posting on an internet forum board, posting your opinions, such as you would have to a pen pal, or something of the like. Reading one, and taking things with a grain of salt, I don't see a fault in [that], but he does, and I disagree. Father was humble enough to say that he was not above being wrong, and that we -should- question what he says, and look up things for ourselves. He never forbade us to read books, in fact, when I gave him a book written by an anti-catholic about something regarding the 1958 debacle, he read it cover to cover, and admitted that what he said might be true, but there was no proof, and for that, I was thankful. Trust is something EARNED, not something freely given.
I take it you're referring to the papal conclave from which John XXIII
emerged, correct?
But your priest was a real man. He gave you the example you could grow
with, to learn the standard by which all others in the future would be
measured, and even though he is no longer here, what he taught you
lives on, and because of his wisdom and manliness, you are able to
discern now the cowardliness of those who demand of you to respect
their "prudence" and "grace of state" such that you overlook the lies
and half-truths they would lead you to believe.
We were BETRAYED by the conciliar Church. And we are expected to simply trust an organization that is now in dialogue with the betrayers? Perhaps nothing will come of this supposed "dead agreement," but since [some] sources inside the Society are claiming the deal is dead, and [while others are claiming it is] not dead (Example: facilitated talks with Rome because of + Williamson's expulsion), at the same time, how do you suppose we are supposed to [expect we should] react to this contradiction?
Sorry, but "...suppose we are supposed..." threw a monkey wrench into my
rickety thinker.
I'm already hearing of change taking place at our late Mass, that Father would never have allowed. This is disturbing to me, and the trust for the Society is [has] already fallen some, at least from [for] me.
We don't say that "trust has fallen from me."
Now, the fact that people are talking about me at my Church, saying, "What is HER problem with the Society?" have [evokes] two problems.
1) They are too cowardly to come talk to me to my face about these issues, and
2) They'd better make sure that none of their statements translates into some detractionary language towards me, because that would be a sin.
You asked for it you got it, Toyota: I have these issues, so here I am!
And no, I do not like Toyotas. But they do make a good slogan! HAHAHA
To this, I suggest two possible and highly advisable alternatives:
1) Call me on the phone, and/or
2) Speak with me personally about it.
3) Post a reply to
parentsfortruth said: on CathInfo!
Yes, I am critical of some of the decisions that the society has chosen to make. I personally like this superior, and I ascertained that he truly believes what he says, and that he is a very nice man. But to say that since I disagree, that I have some bad will towards the Society, or any of its priests, is simply untrue. To say that I would rather have no sacraments at our church since Father died, is an outright lie. I feel it's wrong to kowtow to a priest just because he's a priest. If we all did that, then "priests" like "Father" Andrew Greeley, would be above reproach, simply because they received the sacrament of holy orders.
Father would have wanted us to remain strong, and keep fighting, and not be afraid to question things, just as he told us to do when he was alive.
"When they tell you to shut up, cry to the moon!" --Father Hector Bolduc, RIP
Quom iubemus vos obsero os: clamare lunae!I would like to thank you, parentsfortruth, for having the courage and
fortitude to make this marvelous post. You have done a very good deed.
Your perception and acute observation have provided for many others a
meet understanding of the realities taking place at this troublesome time
in history, as we all stand back and watch the fall of the Great Society,
something none of us would ever have expected could happen! It is
truly Vatican IIB, for we could not have anticipated the first wave of this
deplorable tsunami, this FOUL STREAM OUT OF THE MOUTH OF THE
DRAGON, let the reader understand. Or, better yet, read the Apocalypse.
God bless you and yours, PFT, may the Lord be with you in all you do.
Topic: A lively discussion with a superior in the Society (Read 5299 times)