Author Topic: Conspicuously Absent (Read 4303 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.)

holysoulsacademy · « **Reply #5 on:** October 22, 2014, 05:26:37 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?

Perhaps because 95% of the teaching at the synod is in keeping with Catholic Teaching and only 5% is in error, just like Vatican II, no?

MonteiroM · « **Reply #6 on:** October 22, 2014, 05:47:48 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?

At least in Brazil, I am almost sure there was no comment at the chapels about this beatification...

"On October 19, 2014, at the close of the Extraordinary Synod on the family, Pope Francis will go forward with the beatification of Pope Paul VI. The Society of Saint Pius X wishes to express serious reservations concerning beatifications and canonizations of recent popes, whose rushed proceedings dispense with the wisdom of the Church’s centuries-old rules."

There is no condemnation on the official communique of the Society either. "Reservation" is too soft word for this crime.

songbird · « **Reply #7 on:** October 22, 2014, 09:48:23 PM »

Knowing the not so good health of this pope, would it not stir many people if he were to die suddenly?

TKGS · « **Reply #8 on:** October 23, 2014, 08:43:31 AM »

Quote from: Ekim

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.

I still find it interesting that the conservative Catholics claim that Vatican 2 was merely a "pastoral council" while the Conciliar sect constantly (and almost exclusively) quotes it to justify its novel doctrines.

Marlelar · « **Reply #9 on:** October 23, 2014, 05:58:44 PM »

Quote from: Green Scapular

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.

To accuse someone of telling an "untruth" to to accuse her of being a liar. Frances is not a liar, so I believe her when she says that nothing has been said at her particular chapel.

Marsha

ggreg · « **Reply #10 on:** October 23, 2014, 06:19:23 PM »

Since newchurch have canonised two dodgy popes already, why rush into any statement about a mere dodgy beatification?

I know the Y generation has come to expect Twitter speed responses, but I see no reason that the SSPX has to comply with this change in fashion. Sometimes keeping one's mouth shut is the smartest and most prudent course.

hollingsworth · « **Reply #11 on:** October 23, 2014, 06:48:03 PM »

green scapular:

Quote

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.

Tell you what, green, on Monday or Tuesday of next week give us a synopsis of what your sspx priest said about this "disastrous Synod." Highlight his reflections on "The Family." I dare to speculate that the word "disastrous" will have completely abandoned his vocabulary on Sunday. Fr. Wegner, from all I've seen and heard, is a go-alonger-to-get-alonger. I have no reason to believe that this German DS is any less a Fellay sycophant than his French predecessor. I doubt that any sspx priest in good standing, with an sspx pulpit to preach from, will dare to deviate from a carefully vetted script. I speculate further that nothing even approaching a wholesale condemnation of the Synod will be heard by the faithful. Please prove me wrong. I want to read a transcript, or watch a video recap of a sermon from any sspx priest in the U.S. or abroad which seriously attacks the proceedings of that Synod, or brings Pope Francis into any serious disrepute. I want to hear an sspx priest tell me, and tell us all, that Paul VI is the furthest thing from a real saint than one can possibly imagine.

Green Scapular · « **Reply #12 on:** October 25, 2014, 09:34:18 AM »

Quote from: Marlelar

Quote from: Green Scapular
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.

To accuse someone of telling an "untruth" to to accuse her of being a liar. Frances is not a liar, so I believe her when she says that nothing has been said at her particular chapel.

Marsha

Marsha,

The problem is that Frances did not complain just about her chapel, but wrote, "Has anyone noticed the complete absence in SSPX chapels...". She speaks about ALL the SSPX chapels.

Please read this notice put out by the SSPX before the start of the Synod:
http://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/defend-family-rosary-novena-4948

Hollingsworth,

It is not up to the SSPX priests to give a play by play on the Synod. They teach us the principles, explaining Catholic doctrine and morality regarding marriage and the family. Then when we read the newsreports we can make the correct judgment about the evil Synod ourselves. I for one am grateful not to hear bad news rehashed and ranted upon from the pulpit, as if we are too stupid to follow the news and understand that the Synod was a disaster ourselves.

ultrarigorist · « **Reply #13 on:** October 25, 2014, 10:31:08 AM »

Quote from: Green Scapular

It is not up to the SSPX priests to give a play by play on the Synod. ... I for one am grateful not to hear bad news rehashed and ranted upon from the pulpit, as if we are too stupid to follow the news and understand that the Synod was a disaster ourselves.

Yes, but don't forget that the majority of XSPX faithful don't read these fora, and if that portion ingest any news at all, it's MSM. We can all agree I think, that that prolefeed is of no value to coherent thought. I should think Hollingsworth was hoping for maybe a dozen or so words condemning this "Synod", making clear it was of evil purpose. - Not a 20 minute rant, just enough to warn their flock. In fact, Hollingsworth's last 2 sentences, person and tense-corrected, would do fine.

Green Scapular · « **Reply #14 on:** October 25, 2014, 11:12:23 AM »

Quote from: ultrarigorist

Quote from: Green Scapular

It is not up to the SSPX priests to give a play by play on the Synod. ... I for one am grateful not to hear bad news rehashed and ranted upon from the pulpit, as if we are too stupid to follow the news and understand that the Synod was a disaster ourselves.

Yes, but don't forget that the majority of XSPX faithful don't read these fora, and if that portion ingest any news at all, it's MSM. We can all agree I think, that that prolefeed is of no value to coherent thought. I should think Hollingsworth was hoping for maybe a dozen or so words condemning this "Synod", making clear it was of evil purpose. - Not a 20 minute rant, just enough to warn their flock. In fact, Hollingsworth's last 2 sentences, person and tense-corrected, would do fine.

How arrogant and ignorant to think that unless people read these "fora" they are uninformed. There are hundreds of better ways to get the news. Forums mostly just present commentary on articles posted from real news sources.

And for the record, in our SSPX chapel the Synod has been mentioned, and much more than 2 sentences. Just because we don't run to the forums and report on our priests for everyone to critique, doesn't mean our priests are silent.