Author Topic: A real crisis in the clergy... (Read 5352 times)

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #30 on:** October 02, 2012, 06:13:44 PM »

Quote from: Canute

I would like to hear the priests side of the story.

What is "creepy" here, Skunk, is that everyone assumes that everything "CathMomof7" says is true, even though we don't know her real identity or whether she is a credible person. Then you all pile on, calling the priest a "bully" and hollering about "abuse" and mind control.

How about controlling your OWN mind first — as in NOT MAKING RASH JUDGEMENTS — and then working on not "abusing" your tongue (or keyboard) by always assuming the worst is true?

Hmm... so here we have an SGG-supporting sedevacantist siding with a pro-sellout SSPX priest. That is odd.

Matthew · « **Reply #31 on:** October 02, 2012, 07:32:16 PM »

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

Quote from: Canute
I would like to hear the priests side of the story.

What is "creepy" here, Skunk, is that everyone assumes that everything "CathMomof7" says is true, even though we don't know her real identity or whether she is a credible person. Then you all pile on, calling the priest a "bully" and hollering about "abuse" and mind control.

How about controlling your OWN mind first — as in NOT MAKING RASH JUDGEMENTS — and then working on not "abusing" your tongue (or keyboard) by always assuming the worst is true?

Hmm... so here we have an SGG-supporting sedevacantist siding with a pro-sellout SSPX priest. That is odd.

Exactly. The only thing both have in common is...

Canute · « **Reply #32 on:** October 02, 2012, 07:50:29 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
Quote from: Canute
I would like to hear the priests side of the story.

What is "creepy" here, Skunk, is that everyone assumes that everything "CathMomof7" says is true, even though we don't know her real identity or whether she is a credible person. Then you all pile on, calling the priest a "bully" and hollering about "abuse" and mind control.

How about controlling your OWN mind first — as in NOT MAKING RASH JUDGEMENTS — and then working on not "abusing" your tongue (or keyboard) by always assuming the worst is true?

Hmm... so here we have an SGG-supporting sedevacantist siding with a pro-sellout SSPX priest. That is odd.

Exactly. The only thing both have in common is...

… a low tolerance for those who spread rash judgments, and for those who cry "abuse" and "cult" whenever they don't get their way on everything in their local chapel.

JohnGrey · « **Reply #33 on:** October 02, 2012, 08:08:53 PM »

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

Quote from: Canute
I would like to hear the priests side of the story.

What is "creepy" here, Skunk, is that everyone assumes that everything "CathMomof7" says is true, even though we don't know her real identity or whether she is a credible person. Then you all pile on, calling the priest a "bully" and hollering about "abuse" and mind control.

How about controlling your OWN mind first — as in NOT MAKING RASH JUDGEMENTS — and then working on not "abusing" your tongue (or keyboard) by always assuming the worst is true?

Hmm... so here we have an SGG-supporting sedevacantist siding with a pro-sellout SSPX priest. That is odd.

Not really. In both cases, he's supporting priests accused by members of their congregations of conduct unbecoming of a member of sacerdotal priesthood. I do not, as such, have an opinion as to either situation as I do not know either of the priests personally. What I can say is that, while I abstractly like to give priests the benefit of the doubt, I have to look at the practical reality of the current apostasy. In an environment hobbled by disunity, and where bishop and priest lack canonical authority to govern, a certain amount of frustration on both sides is inevitable. More than ever, the priests that have undertaken their vocation at a time of such perilous danger to the perseverance of faith, should marshal the many graces afforded one of God's chosen towards being loving and long-suffering, even in the face of contention from their flocks. They must understand that the conditions of present coupled with the inherent weariness of traditionalists towards those in authority (given the the hierarchy of the Church appears to have apostatized en masse), means a certain diligence that can give rise to suspicion and disquiet, especially when the priests act in an intemperate manner.

Elizabeth · « **Reply #34 on:** October 02, 2012, 09:31:53 PM »

Quote from: CathMomof7

There is no way you could possibly imagine the outcome of that little petition. So as not to cause rumors to be spread or to be guilty of detraction, I will only say publicly that this priest became hostile and violent. Some of these events I personally witnessed, others I was shocked to learn.

So I am going to repeat this again. This is creepy and cultish.

To tell a entire chapel that they cannot use the internet to find information is wrong. To tell people they shouldn't worry about whatever crisis is in the Society is wrong. To tell us that we must obey without question is wrong. To force people out of chapels because they passed a petition around is wrong. To deny people Holy Communion because they question what is happening with their priests and within the Society is more than wrong. And to stand up and tell us we are uncharitable or not "real" Catholics is an outright lie.

But to KNOW that a priest, who seems to be incredibly busy with running so many things, has time to troll around forums to see who is talking about him or is concerned about how he manages the affairs of his chapel is absolute insanity.

I don't know if this happens at all chapels but it is happening at mine. IF you are thinking of coming here---DON'T! Find another place to go to Mass. This place is embroiled in chaos! Our Lord has allowed them to be exposed!

Let those who can see, see and those who can hear, hear.

Farewell and Persevere!

Holy Guardian Angels, Protect Us!

Hey CathMom, I edited your post down to the cult behavior our family experienced from another trad society. Thank God this doesn't happen at all traditional Catholic chaples, but it most certainly does happen.

In my case, they eventually had a meeting about what I was writing here at Cathinfo at their camp.

As an ex member of the cult, I was specifically forbidden to be the sponsor for my friend's Confirmation.

Some of the trad chapels are just cults, period. (most likely any number of the Prot sects are, too)

Gag order enforced when a group of staff suddenly left = check

Hostile and when respectfully questioned about certain matters = check plus off the charts

Send over spies for info gathering= check

Have their people scouring the forums, PM-ing and doing damage control = double check

Then try explaining it to friends and family -- they become convinced you've finally lost your marbles, because it sounds so much like you're in a cult!

May God bless you, CathMom.

poche · « **Reply #35 on:** October 03, 2012, 05:56:13 AM »

There is a big difference that a professed religous owes to his religous superior and the obedience that is owed to the pastor of the church. Prudence is the best rule to follow in these circuмstances. Even a professed religous is required to disobey if the order given is contrary to the law of God. (ie an order to steal )

Canute · « **Reply #36 on:** October 03, 2012, 08:00:19 AM »

Quote from: JohnGrey

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

Hmm... so here we have an SGG-supporting sedevacantist siding with a pro-sellout SSPX priest. That is odd.

Not really. In both cases, he's supporting priests accused by members of their congregations of conduct unbecoming of a member of sacerdotal priesthood. I do not, as such, have an opinion as to either situation as I do not know either of the priests personally. What I can say is that, while I abstractly like to give priests the benefit of the doubt, I have to look at the practical reality of the current apostasy. In an environment hobbled by disunity, and where bishop and priest lack canonical authority to govern, a certain amount of frustration on both sides is inevitable. More than ever, the priests that have undertaken their vocation at a time of such perilous danger to the perseverance of faith, should marshal the many graces afforded one of God's chosen towards being loving and long-suffering, even in the face of contention from their flocks. They must understand that the conditions of present coupled with the inherent weariness of traditionalists towards those in authority (given the the hierarchy of the Church appears to have apostatized en masse), means a certain diligence that can give rise to suspicion and disquiet, especially when the priests act in an intemperate manner.

A very balanced response which puts a practical disagreement like CathMomof7 described into perspective. On one hand, maybe a petition wasn't a very prudent way to ask for what you wanted, but on the other hand, maybe the priest DID overreact. But it was just a practical disagreement, not an argument over the faith and certainly not a cause for war.

JohnGrey · « **Reply #37 on:** October 03, 2012, 11:22:24 AM »

Quote from: Canute

Quote from: JohnGrey
Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

Hmm... so here we have an SGG-supporting sedevacantist siding with a pro-sellout SSPX priest. That is odd.

Not really. In both cases, he's supporting priests accused by members of their congregations of conduct unbecoming of a member of sacerdotal priesthood. I do not, as such, have an opinion as to either situation as I do not know either of the priests personally. What I can say is that, while I abstractly like to give priests the benefit of the doubt, I have to look at the practical reality of the current apostasy. In an environment hobbled by disunity, and where bishop and priest lack canonical authority to govern, a certain amount of frustration on both sides is inevitable. More than ever, the priests that have undertaken their vocation at a time of such perilous danger to the perseverance of faith, should marshal the many graces afforded one of God's chosen towards being loving and long-suffering, even in the face of contention from their flocks. They must understand that the conditions of present coupled with the inherent weariness of traditionalists towards those in authority (given the the hierarchy of the Church appears to have apostatized en masse), means a certain diligence that can give rise to suspicion and disquiet, especially when the priests act in an intemperate manner.

A very balanced response which puts a practical disagreement like CathMomof7 described into perspective. On one hand, maybe a petition wasn't a very prudent way to ask for what you wanted, but on the other hand, maybe the priest DID overreact. But it was just a practical disagreement, not an argument over the faith and certainly not a cause for war.

And if it were just a matter of disagreement over the Mass time, and the prudence of organizing support for an earlier Mass, I would be inclined to suggest that a greater cultivation of Christian charity on both parts might both end the matter completely and prevent such occasions in the future. But that's not all we're really discussing. We also have the accusation (again, not an impugnation of CMof7's honesty, just an admittance of lack of personal knowledge) that the priest in question is vociferously attacking the just and lawful resistance of the SSPX laity under his care against the mendacious and diabolical attempts of Bernard Fellay and his cronies in selling out the late Archbishop's life's work to the conciliar heretics. There's also the unfortunate phenomenon, much and rightly publicized, of sacramental terrorism on the part of pro-capitulation priests against those that are openly against the sellout, in gross and damnable violation of their duties to offer the sacraments of the Church, without prejudice, to any Catholic seeking them properly disposed and in good faith. These things, more than the fracas over the Mass time, seem to be the source of CMof7's sorrowful fear and doubt; the priest's ire over the petition is, as portrayed, merely one more facet of the psychological warfare by which the Menzingen traitors are seeking to muzzle the Athanasian voice of those faithful in the SSPX that, though I disagree with them on a number of doctrinal points, are my brothers and sisters in seeking the Church and her graces without compromise.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #38 on:** October 03, 2012, 08:53:35 PM »

Quote from: poche

There is a big difference that a professed religous owes to his religous superior and the obedience that is owed to the pastor of the church.

FWIW, none of those in question are pastors, canonically speaking.

Quote from: Izzybelle

Then try explaining it to friends and family -- they become convinced you've finally lost your marbles, because it sounds so much like you're in a cult!

I thought that, after all was said and done, you concluded that y'all just didn't fit in at IC? All joking aside, I pray you and yours are well, my lady, in body, mind, and soul. I am sorry I got out of sorts with you, however briefly, and said unkind things I should not have. Please forgive me and know that I love you dearly. I shall always be grateful for your numberless kindnesses in my regard. God bless and keep you, today and always.

PartyIsOver221 · « **Reply #39 on:** October 03, 2012, 09:22:41 PM »

May I ask which chapel this is? And how does it relate to the Vienna, VA priests? If this is not suitable for public talk, please send me a PM. My priest at my chapel (which sounds like in your area CathMom) is definitely an anti-cultist and is a traditional Catholic priest against the regularization nonsense with Rome.

Youre in my prayers , Cathmomo7.

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #40 on:** October 03, 2012, 09:52:29 PM »

I'm going to copy this and give it to the people making the decisions at our Church. THANK YOU FOR SPEAKING OUT!