Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: Zorayda on October 01, 2012, 12:43:19 AM

Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Zorayda on October 01, 2012, 12:43:19 AM
Our friend, father of 8, longtime supporter of SSPX and parishioner of Christ the King Church in Ridgefield, CT was denied Holy Communion by his pastor for having a website about the current SSPX/Rome crisis (only a few months old). This good man, a veteran firefighter, sacrifices his vacation time in order to attend Mass on Sundays & this is how he is treated by his pastor?

From http://www.sossaveoursspx.com/

           A DISCLAIMER AND ANNOUNCEMENT
           A Sad, sad, time, dear friends and faithful. A priest of the SSPX, with the blessing of his U. S District  superior, refuses  Holy Communion to  a writer who use the freedoms our fore-fathers earned through their " lives, their fortunes, their sacred honor"  to express his beliefs and opinions, and to share with other faithful Catholics timely news of the goings-on in the world of Tradition. Simply, it seems,  because the SSPX superior does not wish the faithful to be informed.Period. End of Story. What's going on with Father Chazal? None of your business. What's up with Fr. Pfeiffer? None of your business?  What's up with Fr. Basil  Meramo? Fr Damien  Fox? Fr. Patrick Girouard(Canada)?  the four German priests ? Fr.Gabriel Grosso( Argentina)? Fr.  David Hewko? Fr.Eric Jacqmin( Belgium)? Fr. Michael Koller(France)? Fr. Juan Ceriani( Argentina)?Fr. Ernesto Cardoza( Brazil)?Fr Xavier Beauvais( France)? Dom Nataglia( Italiy)? Bishop Williamson? Fr. Jean de Morgon( France)?Fr. Steven reiter?Fr. Juan Turco?(Argentina)?Fr Joven Soliman( Phillipines)? The Capuchins of France? The Monastery of Santa Cruz in Brazil? In every single case, these brave priests are trying to warn the SSPX and the Superior that his playing with Rome is a mistake. And in every case they are shut up! The answer is the same-- none of your business! That way they can pressure the priests to buckle under or be expelled. Father leRoux told me personally in Auriesville that none of the three Bishops( Williamson, deGalaretta, or deMallerais) had been given the "grace of State" when the Holy Ghost was placed upon their shoulders and they became bishops-- only Bishop Fellay was!
     So then what--? When they are expelled? Then they lie and say "they were sede-vacantists!"  Fr. Rostand recently told the people that the "nine" of 1983 were expelled because of "sedevacantism"-- a total fabrication. Your editor was there in 1983! The "nine" were complaining of changes in the missal, they were against bringing in novus ordo priests , they were against the SSPX agreeing with novus ordo marriage annulments; they were against introducing liturgical reforms of John XXIII, they were against the expulsion of priests sanctified to Christ without arranging for their care and support. They were not promoting sede-vacantism. 
      Fr  Rostand, the appointed superior of the SSPX  U S District was in Ridgefield Sunday, September 16th. He said he would take questions from the parishioners. He said the Mass. The Pastor , Fr Goldady was hearing confessions until the communion. Fr. Rostand  said he would answer the many questions the parishioners have about the dealings with Rome; he also spoke of the great virtues of charity and love.Fr Goldady left the confessional to help distribute communion-- and made it a point, in front of several hundred parishioners, to deny Holy Communion to the editor. Of course, Father Rostand later joked , during his conference that "I hear in America you have freedom of speech!"
      During the little conference, Fr Rostand talked of "some" of the steps from 2000 through 2012. He also took some questions, but was unable to answer any of them. He said Bp Fellay's comments in the CNS interview were taken out of context. But when asked if they contacted CNS and told them to correct the interview, he didn't know. This is the same Fr Rostand who had his attorney tell SOSSave OURSSPX that "you can't use the pictures of Archbishop Lefebvre!"
      He was asked  by a parishioner  if there is a good communications between higher-ups and the priests. After much waffling, he finally admitted "No". When asked directly is there is good communications between  the faithful and the SSPX  (mgmt), after much waffling, he answered no, probably not. But this is the same Father Rostand who said to your editor, when I said, "Father, anything you find inaccurate or wrong ( on this website), I'll correct" all he could say was "just take it down".
       When asked directly by one of  the faithful whether Bishop Fellay, over a week ago stated to Seminarians in Econe that he (Bp Fellay) had been deceived by Rome( something covered by many major news sources), he stated "I don't know"-- then, after much waffling, he said "he may have said something like that."
     

   How in the world, could a little web page( sossaveoursspx), which is merely a compilation and amalgamation of information that is freely available to anybody in the entire world, could be upsetting to the higher ups in the SSPX, is beyond me. The pastor, when he threatened to with-hold Holy Communion, was asked by myself: "what lies or calumnies are on the SOSSAVEOURSSPX", and he said "I didn't know-- I don't have time to look at it". When I asked him , specifically, to tell me what is erroneous or incorrect (for I would immediately change it), he said he "hadn't read it"! I offered him to let me know of any errors or calumnies that he found-- he has notified me of not one!
     At the conference, almost every single question put to Father Rostand  was left unanswered. The dancing around the questions was legendary. The first retort on any of the quotes( which parishioners offered) of the Archbishop's was "when did he say that?"
   So what can a Catholic conclude? 1) Priests like Fr Goldade are scared out of their wits to oppose Fr.Rostand-- and they cannot think for themselves. It was stated during the conference many, many times--"if they ( the priests) don't like it here( in the SSPX) they can leave! This even pushes them to commit egregious  public acts of injustice.2)The SSPX leaders now think that the  Archbishop really didn't know what he believed.  One almost comes away  thinking "Gee,it's a good thing the Archbishop passed away, because these people believe he was always changing his tune". And now, we have this huge confusion.
     It is really quite simple. It appears Bishop Fellay and Father Rostand want to make the SSPX an organization that novus ordo (modernist) Catholics will want to join. They want to make of it a priestly society where Novus Ordo Bishops (Never ordained in the Catholic faith, many who don't believe the catholic faith), who are protestant and modernist in their thinking, will welcome into their diocese SSPX priests, and will send their candidates to ( hopefully), the new SSPX seminary in Virginia . To do this, they have to ditch the traditional baggage; they have to look to the modernists as if they are not that rigid in their thinking, and they even have to portray the Archbishop as flexible, and ever-changing--just like Ratzinger's notion of tradition. But at the same time, they want to keep the great traditional support base-- all the thousands of faithful who bought the churches, built the schools, supported the seminaries, sponsored the camps. And that is, in my opinion, why they allow the CNS interview  to go out which has Bp Fellay saying , basically, ' Vatican II is really okay--there's just some interpretations which are wrong', but when the traditionalists quote the very same words, the SSPX leaders cry "You mis-quote me out of context!!
         When a man is trying to woo two women at the same time, he has to keep his stories straight-- othewise one of them will get wind of something fishy. Same thing's going on here. They can't speak the truth, because either the trads will get upset, OR the Romans will get upset. And, in a few cases, there are different levels of people in each of those groups, who get upset for different reasons.

  Therefore, It becomes best to say nothing, or " I don't know ", or  "did you hear him say that" ( As Fr. Jenkins retorted when I quoted the Archbishop, or "when did he say that" as if whatever he said in the 1970's or 1980's were revised by what he said in the later years.And now, of course, if you continue to quote the Archbishop, or repeat anything someone else says about the Archbishop, "WE WANT YOU TO SHUT UP!". Failing that, there is no freedom of Speech in the Society of St Pius X's concept of the Catholic faith, so  you shall not receive Holy Communion.Yes, it is true,  open abortionists, open paediphiles, open sodomiotes, open child-abusers, can receive holy communion, can serve as priests, and can even be bishops, cardinals and popes in Bp Fellay's Church of the new Advent, the church he wants to re-join. But if you dare to give the news you shall not receive Holy Communion! Change Canon Law, Change the slabs given to Moses, the Eleventh Commandment is "Thou Shall Not print the News."
   This web site is not for those who do not want to read it--stay off is my recommendation. As I stated on  the very first page some three months ago, ( you can find this way down at the beginning of this page) SOSSaveOurSSPX will be taken down,when as as soon as the Management of the Society of St Pius X drops it's foolish plans to join Rome, restores it's priests and bishops to their rightful positions, and begins telling the faithful the whole truth of what they are doing with Rome. There's nobody on the world wide web that is being forced to access this page.To hit "enter" is totally voluntary. Those who access this page love their Catholic faith, and they love the Society of St Pius X. They respect greatly Achbishop Marcel Lefebvre, and they likewise respect deeply the bishops and priests, brothers, sisters, monks and faithful who have sacrificed for so many years, through so many trials, to keep our faith with purity. We don't want to see the faith adulterated with the falsehoods and heresies of the Rome of today. And we love and support our priests-- even when they are driven by their superiors to make mistakes. Pray for our priests! Cardinal Ratzinger has said the curtain is falling over Christian civilization.  The very people in Rome are working for that curtain to fall!  The Catholic Faith is the rock of that Christian Civilization. it is upon that rock of the FAITH, the FAITH expressed by St Peter, upon which the Christ promised He would build His Church. Christ's promise lives on today, and must live within each of us who professes that faith. It is, or it must be, the same faith that St Peter professed to Christ Himself. We can back down, and let the faith erode,and thousnds upon thousands of Catholic and christians be deceived into hell-- or we can sound the alarm, and help preserve the faith of Our Lord, the faith of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the faith of St Peter, St Pius and Marcel Lefebvre. And so we work. for the keeping of that faith-- and that's all we work for.  If any of our readers find anything calumniating, or erroneous, or false, please advice me, and I will remove it. It takes a long time to put these news articles together. I have no computer, I have no internet, I have no TV.  I am a little pebble in the ocean.  I must rely solely on free-access computers, and very, very little free time. It would be far better for the current management to get back to the principles of  Archbishop Lefebvre ,Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer and Pope Pius X, and stop dealing with these snakes in Rome, and they wouldn't have to always couch their words based on their audience. We pray for their priests , for our priests, driven to erroneous actions because of their fear of the management.  NOTE : A CALL FOR PHOTOS: Father Rostand has instructed his law firm to  claim ownership rights to all photos of Archbishop Lefebvre,, all priests of the SSPX,  and all buildings paid for by the people! They have embarked upon another foolish waste of time!. Any readers who have original photos , of all things traditional and Catholic, please send them along to me, include a short note, of course, letting us know where you took it, who/what it is, and permitting me to post it, if appropriate to the subject being discussed. Thank-you
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: MaterDominici on October 01, 2012, 12:47:34 AM
FYI - there's another thread discussing this already. I'll go find the link...

HERE: http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=20619&min=0&num=5
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Zorayda on October 01, 2012, 01:10:10 AM
I didn't see that it was posted in that thread. Since I know that parish pretty well, attending off & on since 2002, I think that I can defend the editor from the Neelyanns & MacFarlands of this world.
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on October 01, 2012, 11:10:46 AM
the tactics are vatican II.  
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on October 01, 2012, 11:17:02 AM
Conquer and divide..  this is horrible.  I get upset about the whole thing.  We are Catholics.  This I know :  John XXIII on his death bed was begging for thme to stop the council!   Paul Vi  before he dies admits that Satan was now in the sanctuary.

This is proof enough that Vatican II is evil.  Vatican Ii was created during th  e 60's.  there was plenty of peace love drugs etc...  guitar mass.  

We lost alot of priests, nuns and lay.  Our churches and schools are being closed down by these communists.

It seems that they have infiltrated sspx.

SSpx already does the Mass of John XXIII which was Latin Mass phase into vatican II.  Original 1962 missal even leaves out Leotine prayers to be said after Mass..  
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Zorayda on October 01, 2012, 01:03:09 PM
«Brothers,
as stewards of the mysteries of God, stand up and act.
That you see before your eyes the devastation
that others are perpetrating».

St. Athanasius

  :incense:

Fr. Goldade also said in a sermon two months ago that "we must be docile to Bp. Fellay."

Says who?

As far as I'm concerned, Fellay is not the Holy Ghost but NeoSSPX has already canonized him!
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Incredulous on October 01, 2012, 01:34:23 PM
Poor Father Rostand... he presents himself as a dufus, a French clown.
He's lost all credibility and serves his position, only to be resisted.


This comment explains our recent awarenesss of the Novus Ordo infiltration of the SSPX.  It exposes Menzingen's "duality", an obvious cover for their sell-out plans:

      When a man is trying to woo two women at the same time, he has to keep his stories straight-- othewise one of them will get wind of something fishy. Same thing's going on here. They can't speak the truth, because either the trads will get upset, OR the Romans will get upset. And, in a few cases, there are different levels of people in each of those groups, who get upset for different reasons.


Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Incredulous on October 01, 2012, 01:43:19 PM
Quote from: Zorayda
«Brothers,
as stewards of the mysteries of God, stand up and act.
That you see before your eyes the devastation
that others are perpetrating».

St. Athanasius

  :incense:

Fr. Goldade also said in a sermon two months ago that "we must be docile to Bp. Fellay."

Says who?

As far as I'm concerned, Fellay is not the Holy Ghost but NeoSSPX has already canonized him!




Bp. Fellay can't serve two masters.
Its very obvious that the "Holy Ghost" left him after he allied himself with newChurch's judeo-freemasons.
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: JuanDiego on October 01, 2012, 02:14:43 PM
I recently watched a true story video about a man who escaped from Cuba during the height of Castro’s crackdown.  Afterwards, I found myself comparing this to the SSPX actions that I’m reading about on a daily basis: secrecy, control, and intimidation tactics.  It appears that denying the sacraments is escalating – first the Dominicans and Capuchins and now individuals, because they don’t agree with +Fellay.  I again ask: where does he get the right to deny sacraments to the faithful? Can any priest just decide to refuse Holy Communion and not give absolution to someone he doesn’t personally like? This is what +Fellay through Father Couture did to Father Pfeiffer and Father Chazal in Asia.  What about the lady in Mexico that was put out of her parish for having Father Cardonza over night, is she still out of her parish?  This is getting more and more crazy!  :sad:
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Belloc on October 01, 2012, 02:18:10 PM
My understanding, can dney only if someone is in mortal sin and priest knows it-ie, pro-abort politician, active homo,etc....
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Matthew on October 01, 2012, 02:31:37 PM
Quote from: Belloc
My understanding, can dney only if someone is in mortal sin and priest knows it-ie, pro-abort politician, active homo,etc....


It may not be pleasant to think about, but if the priest knows a man is an active homo, but it isn't publicly known, he CAN'T deny him communion.

Only a notorious public sinner can be denied Holy Communion.
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: JuanDiego on October 01, 2012, 02:41:51 PM
On that basis then, were the Dominicans and Capuchins “notorious public sinners”?  What about Fathers Chazal and Pfeiffer – public sinners??  Also, what about the lady in Mexico and the firefighter with the website – all notorious public sinners???  Who gets to decide that?
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: John Grace on October 01, 2012, 03:48:35 PM
Quote from: JuanDiego
On that basis then, were the Dominicans and Capuchins “notorious public sinners”?  What about Fathers Chazal and Pfeiffer – public sinners??  Also, what about the lady in Mexico and the firefighter with the website – all notorious public sinners???  Who gets to decide that?


Well stated. It certainly doesn't do Bishop Fellay and his gang any favours.
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on October 01, 2012, 08:41:44 PM
That reminds me of that novus ordo incident in Washington DC whn the priest denied communion to lesbian budist gay rights activist..she then went inot another line and received communion from woman eucharistic minister.  

Priest was removed from diocese..


Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 02, 2012, 10:51:43 AM
Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey
That reminds me of that novus ordo incident in Washington DC [when] the priest denied communion to lesbian [Buddhist] gay rights activist..she then went [into] another line and received communion from [a] woman Eucharistic minister.  

Priest was removed from diocese..





Well there's our answer, then - just go to the diocese parish for Confession!

They won't refuse anyone! Or the priest will be "removed."





Oh, wait - that only works for pagans, perverts and apostates.  Trads are off
limits for their "mercy."





Years ago, I went to a diocese "Reconciliation" room, and told the priest I
had gone to a "Traditional Mass in the old rite."  He blustered and said I had
committed a "mortal sin."  This was before Summorum Pontificum.  Then I
explained it was an Eastern Orthodox Divine Liturgy.  Suddenly he changed his
tune, and got all calm and tolerant.  It was not even a venial sin to assist at an
Orthodox Divine Liturgy!  (He was reluctant to accept the word, "venial" as a
modifier for sin, but when I repeated the word, he capitulated, as if he would
be "nice" to this guy who's obviously stuck in the 50's or something like that.)  

That told me  everything I needed to know.  I haven't been back to a diocese
priest since then.










Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Belloc on October 02, 2012, 10:53:37 AM
Quote from: Matthew
Quote from: Belloc
My understanding, can dney only if someone is in mortal sin and priest knows it-ie, pro-abort politician, active homo,etc....


It may not be pleasant to think about, but if the priest knows a man is an active homo, but it isn't publicly known, he CAN'T deny him communion.

Only a notorious public sinner can be denied Holy Communion.


is the assumption toward the receipant that he is not actively sinning? he might be a chaste homo or confessed some point unk to the priest?
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: magdalena on October 02, 2012, 09:00:36 PM
Quote from: John Grace
Quote from: JuanDiego
On that basis then, were the Dominicans and Capuchins “notorious public sinners”?  What about Fathers Chazal and Pfeiffer – public sinners??  Also, what about the lady in Mexico and the firefighter with the website – all notorious public sinners???  Who gets to decide that?


Well stated. It certainly doesn't do Bishop Fellay and his gang any favours.


I'll second that.  Thank you, JuanDiego.    
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: sspxbvm on October 02, 2012, 09:08:02 PM
To deny somebody the sacraments because they are in good conscience defending the Faith they believe to be in jeopardy sounds like a sacraligious act and hence a mortal sin. We'll let God judge that one but the appearances are certainly not good.
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: poche on October 03, 2012, 05:43:41 AM
This is something we have to pray about. :pray: :pray: :pray:
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: ultrarigorist on October 03, 2012, 07:18:19 AM
Quote from: poche
This is something we have to pray about. :pray: :pray: :pray:

Once again poche, please make your prayer requests in the "The Sacred: Catholic Liturgy, Chant, Prayers" category, and stop trying to derail threads here.
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Robin on October 07, 2012, 11:53:20 PM
I seriously fear that the SSPX will be either splitting again or self destructing. Something is seriously wrong. This is heart breaking as so many good, faithful, SSPX Catholics are being punished by pastors. As were some of our faithful holy priests and bishops.  
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Matthew on October 08, 2012, 12:05:54 AM
Quote from: Belloc
Quote from: Matthew
Quote from: Belloc
My understanding, can dney only if someone is in mortal sin and priest knows it-ie, pro-abort politician, active homo,etc....


It may not be pleasant to think about, but if the priest knows a man is an active homo, but it isn't publicly known, he CAN'T deny him communion.

Only a notorious public sinner can be denied Holy Communion.


is the assumption toward the receipant that he is not actively sinning? he might be a chaste homo or confessed some point unk to the priest?


If a priest learned in confession that a man was an ACTIVE homo, and he had to deny him absolution, but later saw him at the communion rail, he could not withhold Communion from him.

For that matter, if a priest saw a man enter a known homosexual bar, then present himself for communion the next day, he couldn't withhold the Sacrament either.

Long story short: the priest can often be compelled to turn Our Lord over to the torturers, to suffer the mocking and scourging, as it were, a second time. The man who thus receives sacrilegiously will be held to account for this.  And it's not the priest's job to JUDGE at the communion rail.

At the communion rail, it's time for mercy and extreme benefit of the doubt, even when there is no doubt in some cases. The burden of worthiness rests upon the recipient, as St. Paul teaches (I can get you an exact quote if you need it). "He who eats the Body of the Lord unworthily..." etc.
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Matthew on October 08, 2012, 12:10:25 AM
In other words, a mortal sin being "public knowledge" is not sufficient. The person has to be a NOTORIOUS mortal sinner -- in other words, the entire chapel should know very well whey the man or woman is being refused Communion, at the time it happens.

Senator Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, etc.

If Prince or The Great Whore (an 80's vulgar pop star that hails from Italy) were denied communion, no one would be shocked.

Even if a priest knows first-hand that a man is in mortal sin, it is not his job to judge each person at the communion rail.
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 08, 2012, 07:28:55 AM




Imagine in some chapels in areas like San Francisco or West Hollywood (there
may be none but I'm saying imagine if there were) where the lineup at the
Communion rail might look like a Rogues' Gallery of miscreants.  

Or what about a priest going to a prison to say CTLM for the inmates and at
Communion time they all kneel down at the rail, looking like an ID lineup or
mug shots without the ID numbers?

How would you like to be the priest, saying, "Domine, non sum dignus...?"








Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: JPaul on October 08, 2012, 08:08:21 AM
Quote from: Matthew
In other words, a mortal sin being "public knowledge" is not sufficient. The person has to be a NOTORIOUS mortal sinner -- in other words, the entire chapel should know very well whey the man or woman is being refused Communion, at the time it happens.

Senator Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, etc.

If Prince or The Great Whore (an 80's vulgar pop star that hails from Italy) were denied communion, no one would be shocked.

Even if a priest knows first-hand that a man is in mortal sin, it is not his job to judge each person at the communion rail.


It is evident that the salvation of souls is no longer the imperative in Menzingen.
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Sienna629 on October 08, 2012, 10:23:15 AM
Quote from: poche
This is something we have to pray about. :pray: :pray: :pray:



Who is this guy????  Is that all he can say????  How annoying!!!
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Matthew on October 08, 2012, 10:45:38 AM
Quote from: Neil Obstat




Imagine in some chapels in areas like San Francisco or West Hollywood (there
may be none but I'm saying imagine if there were) where the lineup at the
Communion rail might look like a Rogues' Gallery of miscreants.  

Or what about a priest going to a prison to say CTLM for the inmates and at
Communion time they all kneel down at the rail, looking like an ID lineup or
mug shots without the ID numbers?

How would you like to be the priest, saying, "Domine, non sum dignus...?"


The priest is instructed to give a short sermon in such cases, about being in the state of grace for Communion, etc. He should basically announce that only practicing Catholics in the state of grace should receive. He might also mention hell fire, especially considering his rather "down to earth" audience.

I forgot to mention that if a priest is in unusual circumstances (a  funeral, prison, etc.) and neglects to mention this, then HE is responsible for all the sacrileges committed at the communion rail.

But, once again, all the priest can do is use his authority to forbid mortal sinners and non-Catholics to receive. If they put themselves forward after all, there's nothing the priest can do about it.

Oh, and sometimes Communion is not distributed at Mass. That is another "safe" path in such circumstances.
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: nadieimportante on October 08, 2012, 11:14:07 AM
Quote from: MaterDominici
FYI - there's another thread discussing this already. I'll go find the link...

HERE: http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=20619&min=0&num=5


Everyone is assuming that it is Bishop Fellay's doing, that people are being denied communion, however, having met and talked with Bishop Fellay a few times, I find it hard to believe that it is he who is directing this whole totalitarian crackdown. I saw him as a gentle giant, a kind of large child, incapable of harming anyone. I think it is more likely that he is being manipulated by others. That would make more sense to me, having known him before. His personality was such, that I could see how he could be manipulated by others.

I wonder what the other bishops have to say about my analysis, for they know Bishop Fellay the best.
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Matthew on October 08, 2012, 11:18:25 AM
Quote from: nadieimportante
Quote from: MaterDominici
FYI - there's another thread discussing this already. I'll go find the link...

HERE: http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=20619&min=0&num=5


Everyone is assuming that it is Bisghop Fellay's doing, that people are being denied communion, however, having met and talked with Bishop Fellay a few times, I find it hard to believe that it is he who is directing this totalitarian crackdown. I saw him as a gentle giant, a kind of large child, incapable of harming anyone. I think it is more likely that he is being manipulated by others. That would make more sense to me, having known him before. His personality was such, that he could easily be manipulated by others.


Even if you are correct, it changes nothing. Even if Bishop Fellay isn't personally at fault, if he is rubber-stamping such outrages to be committed with his authority or in his name, he might as well be guilty of perpetrating them himself. Remember, if someone with his level of power doesn't oppose an injustice, it's about the same "sin" as if he thought up the injustice himself.

A simple layman doesn't have much power, at home, work, or otherwise. The Superior General of a large religious organization? He has much more control and influence. Such a one must be careful to not sin by tacit consent or omission.
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: nadieimportante on October 08, 2012, 11:22:18 AM
Quote from: Matthew
Quote from: nadieimportante
Quote from: MaterDominici
FYI - there's another thread discussing this already. I'll go find the link...

HERE: http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=20619&min=0&num=5


Everyone is assuming that it is Bisghop Fellay's doing, that people are being denied communion, however, having met and talked with Bishop Fellay a few times, I find it hard to believe that it is he who is directing this totalitarian crackdown. I saw him as a gentle giant, a kind of large child, incapable of harming anyone. I think it is more likely that he is being manipulated by others. That would make more sense to me, having known him before. His personality was such, that he could easily be manipulated by others.


Even if you are correct, it changes nothing. Even if Bishop Fellay isn't personally at fault, if he is rubber-stamping such outrages to be committed with his authority or in his name, he might as well be guilty of perpetrating them himself. Remember, if someone with his level of power doesn't oppose an injustice, it's about the same "sin" as if he thought up the injustice himself.

A simple layman doesn't have much power, at home, work, or otherwise. The Superior General of a large religious organization? He has much more control and influence. Such a one must be careful to not sin by tacit consent or omission.


True, Matthew.

However, my question then is, who is it then, who is "whispering" in Bishop Fellay's ears? Someone in the SSPX or outside? That would make a good thread all by itself, No?
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Columba on October 08, 2012, 03:25:12 PM
Quote from: nadieimportante
who is it then, who is "whispering" in Bishop Fellay's ears? Someone in the SSPX or outside? That would make a good thread all by itself, No?

(http://img.geocaching.com/cache/ae62647b-a2af-4be0-8c21-c4cc3dbd6a6f.jpg)
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Zorayda on October 08, 2012, 04:16:14 PM
Of course Bp. Fellay is responsible! The whole NeoSSPX revolves around him. I'v seen priests jumping through hoops just to impress him. I don't believe that they are forming new priests to think for themselves. It's a whole sham operation!
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Matthew on October 08, 2012, 04:34:10 PM
Quote from: Columba
Quote from: nadieimportante
who is it then, who is "whispering" in Bishop Fellay's ears? Someone in the SSPX or outside? That would make a good thread all by itself, No?

(http://img.geocaching.com/cache/ae62647b-a2af-4be0-8c21-c4cc3dbd6a6f.jpg)


If this were the case, we're sorely in need of Gandalf the White! hahaha
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Columba on October 08, 2012, 04:47:51 PM
Quote from: Matthew
Quote from: Columba
Quote from: nadieimportante
who is it then, who is "whispering" in Bishop Fellay's ears? Someone in the SSPX or outside? That would make a good thread all by itself, No?

(http://img.geocaching.com/cache/ae62647b-a2af-4be0-8c21-c4cc3dbd6a6f.jpg)


If this were the case, we're sorely in need of Gandalf the White! hahaha

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wYDDEQJ4L8Y/Ty2sn1UGFFI/AAAAAAAAALE/F6of971h9IM/s1600/gandalfexorcist.jpg)
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Incredulous on October 08, 2012, 05:10:07 PM


This movie image is the "Bill of Goods" Menzingen was trying to sell us.
Bp. Fellay was to be the "Gandolph" who would enter newRome and with his staff and magically convert Benedict XVI.

In reality, Msgr. Fellay was afraid to bring his staff (the Catholic Faith) to newRome.

He decided he would sweet-talk the "possessed" Pope into converting, after submitting to his rule.
In execution, this is known as the Swiss "cheese-head" approach.
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: magdalena on October 08, 2012, 07:19:36 PM
Quote from: Sienna629
Quote from: poche
This is something we have to pray about. :pray: :pray: :pray:



Who is this guy????  Is that all he can say????  How annoying!!!


Yep!   :cheers:     As my niece would say back when she was five years old:  Don't let it bother you.  
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 08, 2012, 10:37:49 PM
Quote from: magdalena
Quote from: Sienna629
Quote from: poche
This is something we have to pray about. :pray: :pray: :pray:



Who is this guy????  Is that all he can say????  How annoying!!!


Yep!   :cheers:     As my niece would say back when she was five years old:  Don't let it bother you.  




HAHAHAHAHAHAHA


This very thing happened to me!!

I was working for a contractor who had this gung-ho charismatic take on everything.

It was getting under my skin, so I gently tried to offer him FACTS of things that
are going on now (then: 20 years ago!), and thought that he must not know
about this stuff, you know, Assisi I, and things around that time, late 80's early
90's.  It was not very rewarding.  He kept responding by saying that "we should
pray about this," or "we should pray for all concerned."  

In fact, it was "annoying."  

When he had something to say, it was a rebuttal, like "I'm in a group that is
making it part of their daily routine to read one page of THE Catchism (CCC)
every day."  It was too 'difficult' to read a lot at a time, you see.  He thought of
it as his Catholic 'duty' to 'keep up with the Church.'  

But he did not have any contributions regarding local news.  And I know that he
knew things, because he was one of the guys who was making contracts with
Cardfile Balony to tear out confessionals and remodel sanctuaries all over the Los
Angeles Archdiocese.   You know, all the details needed to install a full-imersion
baptismal font in the area that used to be reserved for clerics of minor orders,
and the 'special skills' involved in moving the tabernacle to a broom closet or
an exiled "Eucharist chapel."  He knew things, all right, but apparently his
paycheck was too tied up in his keeping his mouth shut about it.  Critical thinking
wasn't his first strong point.  

I started to complain at home to my family, because I needed to talk to someone
about it.   My daughter told me something then, when she was about 5 years old
too, like don't let it bother you.  

That's great.  Wisdom from a child.       ....        
Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 08, 2012, 10:54:36 PM
Quote from: Columba
Quote from: Matthew
Quote from: Columba
Quote from: nadieimportante
who is it then, who is "whispering" in Bishop Fellay's ears? Someone in the SSPX or outside? That would make a good thread all by itself, No?

(http://img.geocaching.com/cache/ae62647b-a2af-4be0-8c21-c4cc3dbd6a6f.jpg)


If this were the case, we're sorely in need of Gandalf the White! hahaha

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wYDDEQJ4L8Y/Ty2sn1UGFFI/AAAAAAAAALE/F6of971h9IM/s1600/gandalfexorcist.jpg)




Quote from: Incredulous


This movie image is the "Bill of Goods" Menzingen was trying to sell us.
Bp. Fellay was to be the "Gandolph" who would enter newRome and with his staff and magically convert Benedict XVI.

In reality, Msgr. Fellay was afraid to bring his staff (the Catholic Faith) to newRome.

He decided he would sweet-talk the "possessed" Pope into converting, after submitting to his rule.
In execution, this is known as the Swiss "cheese-head" approach.



Correction:

A "Swiss Cheese-head"  --------- is one who doesn't need another hole in his head!



Perhaps some day, we will all live to see a true bishop "bring his staff" to
newRome, and maybe there will be some cameras rolling when he comes
walking in, wearing his vestments and miter, and thumping his crosier as he
walks.  Bishop Williamson knows how to use a crosier.  


Title: Denial of Sacraments!
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on October 09, 2012, 12:42:57 AM
Quote from: Belloc
My understanding, can dney only if someone is in mortal sin and priest knows it-ie, pro-abort politician, active homo,etc....


*LOL*  these sins are condoned by vatican II heirarchy.   4 years ago, vatican II priest gives $300 dollars to obama's campaign, he is later  promoted.
Vatican II even punished one of their own priests from Washington, DC   for denying a lesbian budist communion. Exiled to Russia.

Remember when Bishop Lefebvre was first communicated, at the same time the liberals within the Church was protecting and covering up pedophile priests.  Love and forgiveness for the perverts and hate and persecution for the good and holy.

What a terrible sin to take away the true Mass  and Sacraments then deny holy people holy Communion...while closing down catholic schools churches and even nursing homes to further destroy the Roman Catholic faith.

There are 9 ways to be an accomplice to sin....