Author Topic: Conspicuously Absent (Read 5136 times)

Frances · « **on:** October 22, 2014, 02:28:22 PM »

:dancing-banana:
Has anyone noticed the complete absence in SSPX chapels of comment upon the "beatification" of Paul VI and the Synod on the Family?

Ekim · « **Reply #1 on:** October 22, 2014, 02:43:59 PM »

Priest at our chapel just said the synod was to take VII to the next level. VII wasn't bad enough, now they are trying to make it worse. No mention of PVI though.

ultrarigorist · « **Reply #2 on:** October 22, 2014, 03:10:03 PM »

Quote from: Frances

:dancing-banana:
Has anyone noticed the complete absence in SSPX chapels of comment upon the "beatification" of Paul VI and the Synod on the Family?

Of course. The purpose of that "synod" was gαy agenda & "beatifying" one dear to their hearts. The remarriage issue was nothing but a distraction.

Green Scapular · « **Reply #3 on:** October 22, 2014, 03:14:28 PM »

Quote from: Frances

:dancing-banana:
Has anyone noticed the complete absence in SSPX chapels of comment upon the "beatification" of Paul VI and the Synod on the Family?

During the month of October Fr. Wegner has requested that all SSPX priests in the USA District gives their Sunday sermons on "The Family" in order to restate the clear Church teachings in opposition to the disastrous Synod that has caused great confusion and scandal.

The news outlets of the SSPX have not been silent either about the Synod or about the beatification.

I cannot believe you would be unaware of all this, so you must simply think that what they're doing is not enough. To say there is a "complete absence" is an untruth.

1st Mansion Tenant · « **Reply #4 on:** October 22, 2014, 03:27:54 PM »

"I cannot believe you would be unaware of all this, so you must simply think that what they're doing is not enough. To say there is a "complete absence" is an untruth."

I personally don't think it's enough. They should be shouting it from the rooftops, and using strong, unambiguous words in doing so. As SG +F should be (imo) holding conferences and interviews with any who will listen about this evil Synod and it's implications, and of Pope Francis teetering on the edge heresy. (I say teetering since I don't think it has been determined to be Formal Heresy yet, but I may be mistaken in that. If so, +F has even more responsibility to speak out.) But that might not get him invited to any more nice lunches in Rome.

(But I do think it was good for the priests to administer the series of sermons on marriage. I was pleasantly surprised when I heard it had been ordered in response to the Synod.)