(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTRuJxV1W0jO6M51CdT2z4Zx32Vf7kMu6KcQ82patHbDmV0_vOCRQ) I do not want the Society to break up, and please God, I shall do nothing to help it do so, but I can only say I would not be surprised if it did break up. God may preserve it, but He may also allow it to go the way of all flesh, to make us realize how little we are capable of by ourselves. We need wisdom, and special help from God.
Kyrie Eleison.
In my heart I've left the SSPX...and I won't be back until:
1. the SSPX ( Bp Fellay-Max Krah owner-operator ) apologizes to Bp Williamson.
2. the SSPX welcomes back all the truth-telling expelled priests.
3. the SSPX stops wasting $$ on a new seminary which, the more they talk about it, soiunds like a new seminary for a new type ( or brand? ) of SSPX priest.
Now Archbishop Lefebvre was 65 years old when he founded the Society. But how many old men with long experience does the Society have in 1994?
:really-mad2:It seems to me the SSPX expels, exiles, silences, side-lines older priests and gives authority to the young and inexperienced. Perhaps the powers in Menzingen believe this a good way to keep control. What would happen to a commercial corporation run on this model?
Fr. John Vianney says that the devil stated to him:
"How thou makest me suffer! If there were 3 men on earth like thyself, my kingdom would be destroyed."
Imagine, if there were three bishops who communicated like Bp. Williamson.
... If the Universal Church could collapse, why not all the more a tiny Society?
And here is another consideration. Before Vatican II every Catholic Order and Society had above it the Congregations of the Roman Curia so that, “If something went wrong in a Society, not excluding a failure on the part of its leaders, something always humanly possible, then one could always appeal to Rome and Rome could intervene.” In olden days it would generally intervene for the best, whereas today it generally intervenes for the worst, so that now, “It is better not to be under Rome, but watch out, there is a price to be paid, namely that there is nobody above us, and so our General Council, our little Superior-General, are the ceiling! Danger!”
The Society is thrown back on its own resources. Now - Archbishop Lefebvre was 65 years old when he founded the Society. But how many old men with long experience does the Society have in 1994?
In brief: Why should the Society be spared the problems of the Universal Church? I do not want the Society to break up, and please God, I shall do nothing to help it do so, but I can only say I would not be surprised if it did break up. God may preserve it, but He may also allow it to go the way of all flesh, to make us realize how little we are capable of by ourselves. We need wisdom, and special help from God.
Kyrie Eleison.
Here is another short commentary from Fr Basilio Meramo touching upon the subject of this thread.
Allowance needs to be made for the facts, firstly that Fr Meramo writes in a satirical style using metaphors that invite reflection, and secondly that the French (at least as it appears to me) is a rather stilted translation from the original Portuguese.
LA DANSE MACABRE
On sait, à présent, pour quelle raison Monseigneur Fellay a dit et affirmé – sans que s’y arrêtent la plupart des clercs, y compris les trois autres évêques (qui ne s’opposent que médiocrement à lui), et des fidèles – qu’il acceptait le concile Vatican II à 95%, aussi inouï que cela puisse paraître. Si on le sait, c’est parce que Mgr Fellay le montre par son va-et-vient dialectique (ou sa danse macabre) en disant qu’on ne doit pas voir une super-hérésie dans le concile Vatican II, alors même que toute la révolution liturgique, morale et doctrinale repose sur ledit concile (cf. sa lettre aux trois évêques du 14 avril dernier).
Ainsi que le déclare en outre notre gourou éclairé par la lumière divine, celle-ci fait voir (révèle) à son âme mystique que l’on a exagéré en imputant à Vatican II les erreurs dues à l’interprétation et à l’application erronées du Concile, ce qu’ont toujours dit le cardinal moderniste Ratzinger et presque toute la mouvance mi-libérale, mi-conservatrice, mais qu’a toujours nié Monseigneur Lefebvre, car les erreurs en question sont dues non pas aux mauvaises interprétations du Concile, mais au Concile lui-même.
Ces deux années de conversations et de dialogues axées sur la recherche d’un accord montrent à présent leurs effets dans l’encéphale comprimé de Monseigneur Fellay, qui parvient aujourd’hui à voir et à comprendre ce qui était auparavant inaccessible aux neurones engourdis de sa masse cérébrale, mais qui – passée cette période de dialogue doctrinal – allume l’étincelle l’illuminant désormais, à savoir que ce que d’aucuns dénoncent comme étant les erreurs du Concile provient en réalité d’une incompréhension de celui-ci. EUREKA, s’est exclamé Archimède ! Encore heureux qu’il ait pensé à sortir de l’eau malgré l’extase où l’avait plongé sa découverte…
Et comme si cela ne suffisait pas, il avance une troisième raison qui le conforte un peu plus encore dans sa position suggérée par la grâce de Dieu : il y a des choses plus importantes que le très controversé Vatican II, cette pomme de discorde du Jardin d’Éden (à moins que ce ne soit son succédané suisse, la pomme de Guillaume Tell). En effet, l’Église a des problèmes encore plus graves à résoudre, et nous sommes avant tout les enfants de l’Église, non ceux de la Résistance au Concile.
On perçoit aujourd’hui la dialectique de constant va-et-vient (le double langage) qu’emploie Monseigneur Fellay, cette marionnette mue par des fils invisibles au bout desquels elle se livre à sa danse macabre. Et il menace ou fait décapiter quiconque ne suit pas le rythme de sa mélodieuse musique, car comme le joueur de flûte de Hamelin, il entraîne des rats dans la rivière, où ils se noient.
Ainsi le voit-on exclure des ordinations et du Chapitre Général un évêque, Monseigneur Williamson, et décider au dernier moment de ne pas ordonner des moines d’Avrillé et de Morgon tant qu’ils n’auront pas témoigné de leur loyauté envers lui. J’espère que tout cela n’est qu’un symptôme de ce qu’on appelle dans les Alpes le mal des montagnes (à bon entendeur, salut), surtout si le grand chef est un gourou alpin doté d’une mitre et d’un pouvoir et s’il est soutenu de manière occulte par la Rome apostate et antéchristique, ce qui réalise les prophéties de La Salette devant nos yeux incrédules.
Abbé Basilio Méramo
Bogotá, 5 juillet 2012
http://wordpress.catholicapedia.net/ (http://wordpress.catholicapedia.net/)
DANCE MACABRE
We know, now, for what reason Bishop Fellay said and asserted -- without stopping himself there -- to most of the clerics, including the three other bishops (who are only moderately opposed to him), and to the faithful -- that (as incredible as it may appear) he accepts 95% of the Second Vatican Council. If we know it, it is because Bishop Fellay shows it by his back-and-forth dialectic (or his dance of death) saying that we should not see a super-heresy in Vatican II, even though the entire liturgical, moral and doctrinal revolution, is based upon the said council (see his letter to the three bishops of last April 14).
As further declared by our guru, illumined by the divine light, it is shown (revealed) to his mystical soul that they have gone too far by imputing to Vatican II errors that are due to the interpretation and the misapplication of the Council, as the modernist Cardinal Ratzinger and nearly all of the half-liberal half-conservative movement have always said; but which has always been denied by Archbishop Lefebvre, because the errors in question are due not to misinterpretation of the Council, but to the Council itself.
These two years of conversations and dialogues, focused on reaching an agreement, now show their effects in the constricted brain of Bishop Fellay, who now manages to see and understand what was previously inaccessible to the benumbed neurons of his brain matter, but which -- after this period of doctrinal dialogue -- lights the spark now illuminating it, to know that what some denounce as the errors of the Council, actually comes from a misunderstanding of it. EUREKA, exclaimed Archimedes! Still happy, despite the ecstasy, that he has thought to get out of the water wherein he had plunged to make his discovery ...
And as if that were not enough, he advances a third reason which confirms him a little more in his position suggested by the grace of God: that there are things more important than the very controversial Vatican II, this bone of contention from the Garden of Eden (unless it is a Swiss substitute for William Tell's apple). Indeed, the Church has bigger problems to solve, and we are primarily children of the Church, not those of the Resistance to the Council.
We perceive, today, the dialectic of constant back-and-forth (the double-talk) employed by Bishop Fellay, the puppet moved by invisible strands after which it surrenders itself to its dance of death. And he threatens or beheads anyone not keeping pace with his melodious music, because, like the Pied Piper of Hamelin, he drags rats into the river where they drown.
Thus we see a bishop, Monsignor Williamson, excluded from the ordinations and from the General Chapter [and later so-called expelled from the Society], and the decision at the last moment not to ordain some monks from Avrillé and from Morgon until they have demonstrated their loyalty to him. I hope that all this is only a symptom of what is called in the Alps, “mountain sickness” (a word to the wise, Hello), especially if the great chief is an Alpine guru endowed with a mitre and a power and if he is adequately supported by the occult and apostate anti-christian Rome, which makes real, before our incredulous eyes, the prophecies of La Salette.
Father Basilio Méramo
Bogotá, 5 July 2012
.
Where is the writer who can stomach all the details and assemble
them into a compendium that everyone can read?
Where is the songwriter who can take these themes and put them
into an art form that everyone can enjoy?
Where are our artists for whom we are starving?
Do we have to wait for the next generation?
If I was in Cleveland, OH, I would have an SSPX chapel, SSPV chapel and CMRI chapel within a half hour of each other.
Quote from: Neil Obstat.
Where is the writer who can stomach all the details and assemble
them into a compendium that everyone can read?
Where is the songwriter who can take these themes and put them
into an art form that everyone can enjoy?
Where are our artists for whom we are starving?
Do we have to wait for the next generation?
I do think it's important for someone to be keeping copies of original material if possible. Time passes, materials decay and memories fade. Time is actually on the novus ordites side. With each passing year, there are less and less novus ordites who remember when the Church was different and every year there are more and more youngsters (those who decide to attend) who received their catechesis from the flakes.
I don't think we really need much creativity on the Trad side, we just need to remain faithful to the Catholic Faith. Sounds easy, and it is so it's really baffling for Bishop Fellay to at least give the appearance of trying to come to an agreement of sorts with the new church. In the end, he didn't sign a deal so I'm really willing to let it go at that.
I was tongue in cheek with my sede chapel comment..
..because the [sic] St. Louis has a very devout SSPX chapel (as every SSPX chapel seems to be - so I'm wondering if people are getting a little hot under the collar) [more T-I-C, I presume?!?!] but no sede chapels. If I was in Cleveland, OH, I would have an SSPX chapel, SSPV chapel and CMRI chapel within a half hour of each other.
Neil,
Very funny. I actually went back and reread my post... I did do that [sic].
Not trying to take up for Bishop Fellay, but in the end, he didn't a sign a deal and in the end he did stand fast for the Catholic Faith. Did the actions of the faithful force him to back down? If so, I hope he learned his lesson. If his intentions were wrong, I hope he resigns. If he was merely hoping for the best, perhaps we should be a little more patient. The devout of the SSPX are a learned and tough lot and they aren't likely to just take in on the chin for the modernists.
As for the hot under the collar comment, that's just slang for people getting their "shorts in a bunch" and "bees in their bonnet"... "something to do with corn flakes"
I'm just wondering if the reasons I'm not seeing the problems in the SSPX is because the SSPX chapel in St. Louis is such a blessed and devout place. At least five families that I know of have family members who have gone the religious route. (Only drawback to the St. Louis chapel is the lack of a K-12 school). I have also visited the SSPX chapel in Cleveland, OH and the SSPX chapel in Springfield, MO and they seem on par in the devout category.
Maybe I'm wrong in being optimistic.
Mind you, now, I don't necessarily disagree with you but I think we're out of the storm. (By storm I mean the deal with new church.)
Now, Capt McQuigg, I had promised myself to go into silence, but could you please let me know if you have indeed been to the St. Louis Chapel and if you have indeed seen on the left hand side of the Altar (looking at the Altar) all the signs of Our Lord's enemies painted on the wall? YES OR NOT. Simple answer.
Quote from: Kelley(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTRuJxV1W0jO6M51CdT2z4Zx32Vf7kMu6KcQ82patHbDmV0_vOCRQ) I do not want the Society to break up, and please God, I shall do nothing to help it do so, but I can only say I would not be surprised if it did break up. God may preserve it, but He may also allow it to go the way of all flesh, to make us realize how little we are capable of by ourselves. We need wisdom, and special help from God.
Kyrie Eleison.
A more noble man exists not. God bless you Bishop Williamson!
Quote from: Elsa ZardiniNow, Capt McQuigg, I had promised myself to go into silence, but could you please let me know if you have indeed been to the St. Louis Chapel and if you have indeed seen on the left hand side of the Altar (looking at the Altar) all the signs of Our Lord's enemies painted on the wall? YES OR NOT. Simple answer.
I sent you a pm.
Neil,
Very funny. I actually went back and reread my post... I did do that [sic].
Not trying to take up for Bishop Fellay, but in the end, he didn't a sign a deal and in the end he did stand fast for the Catholic Faith. Did the actions of the faithful force him to back down? If so, I hope he learned his lesson. If his intentions were wrong, I hope he resigns. If he was merely hoping for the best, perhaps we should be a little more patient. The devout of the SSPX are a learned and tough lot and they aren't likely to just take in on the chin for the modernists.
As for the hot under the collar comment, that's just slang for people getting their "shorts in a bunch" and "bees in their bonnet"... "something to do with corn flakes"
I'm just wondering if the reasons I'm not seeing the problems in the SSPX is because the SSPX chapel in St. Louis is such a blessed and devout place. At least five families that I know of have family members who have gone the religious route. (Only drawback to the St. Louis chapel is the lack of a K-12 school). I have also visited the SSPX chapel in Cleveland, OH and the SSPX chapel in Springfield, MO and they seem on par in the devout category.
Maybe I'm wrong in being optimistic.
Mind you, now, I don't necessarily disagree with you but I think we're out of the storm. (By storm I mean the deal with new church.)
Quote from: Capt McQuiggNeil,
Very funny. I actually went back and reread my post... I did do that [sic].
Not trying to take up for Bishop Fellay, but in the end, he didn't a sign a deal and in the end he did stand fast for the Catholic Faith. Did the actions of the faithful force him to back down? If so, I hope he learned his lesson. If his intentions were wrong, I hope he resigns. If he was merely hoping for the best, perhaps we should be a little more patient. The devout of the SSPX are a learned and tough lot and they aren't likely to just take in on the chin for the modernists.
As for the hot under the collar comment, that's just slang for people getting their "shorts in a bunch" and "bees in their bonnet"... "something to do with corn flakes"
I'm just wondering if the reasons I'm not seeing the problems in the SSPX is because the SSPX chapel in St. Louis is such a blessed and devout place. At least five families that I know of have family members who have gone the religious route. (Only drawback to the St. Louis chapel is the lack of a K-12 school). I have also visited the SSPX chapel in Cleveland, OH and the SSPX chapel in Springfield, MO and they seem on par in the devout category.
Maybe I'm wrong in being optimistic.
Mind you, now, I don't necessarily disagree with you but I think we're out of the storm. (By storm I mean the deal with new church.)
But the problem now is with this ‘new direction’ of the SSPX.
Fr. Pfeiffer talks about it in an interview with Fr. Hewko on the Doctrinal Declaration, July 13, 2013. “Since last year myself and many other priests are involved in this resistance against the ‘new direction’ of the SSPX.” He talks about how in recent years there has been a shift or change in the path the Society was on, “leading to liberalism within the SSPX and making us no longer stand up clearly against the errors of the Council.”
Look at the branding sermon of Fr. Wegner where the branding company said “The Society is wrong. The strategy of the Society is wrong.”
In the Angelus magazine, January 2012, Fr. Wegner says, “A third characteristic of the new style is its positivity. Bare of any aggressive and imposing element, it commit us to a positive way of writing … The Angelus wants to be attractive by promoting the splendors of Tradition, the beauty of the Faith.”
Fr. Girouard said to Fr. Wegner, “Look at the DICI (SSPX Europe) website; look at the Angelus magazine; look at the website of the SSPX in the United States; look at the website of Father Couture in Asia; look everywhere and you don’t see any spirit of fight anymore against Vatican II and the New Mass! It seems to me that the Society has become a blunt sword in the hands of the Lord! There is no cutting edge anymore, it is useless.” And Fr. Wegner “said that this was a good thing, this change was a good thing!”
Look on the SSPX website and our founder’s (Archbishop Lefebvre) motto: “’I have believed in love,’ that is, in the love of Christ.”
Our chapel is devout and fervent too and a lot of vocations have come from it. We have good sermons on prayer, charity, etc., too. But the danger comes in what they are neglecting to do and say. They are not strongly attacking the errors of the Council and liberalism. They’re putting everyone to sleep with this absence of attacking error and this focus on the beautiful aspects of the Faith, while everyone slides into liberalism.
The people are becoming ‘soft’ and are not fighters anymore, and Fr. Chazal says in his conference, “Why SSPX Marian Corps?” June 8, 2013, that Archbishop Lefebvre intended the Society to be “a little army of fighters.”
.
A particular Accordista sympathizer I know was prone to defend
the Jєωιѕн practice of Hanukkah, so I asked how they keep the
story of this festival going all these centuries, when it's rooted in
the books of Machabees, which are books that the Jєωιѕн
tradition does not recognize as Scripture? She attempted to say
that it's merely a cultural tradition that they pass on. I asked,
well, if the cultural tradition is worth passing on, why isn't the
book that contains it worth passing on - why do they leave the
religious aspect to the Catholic Church? Isn't that like saying
that the Church is the spiritual authority and the Jєωs are just
play-acting for fun? All she could say is, "it's a cultural thing."
I said, The very thing they commemorate is a miracle, when the
oil didn't run out for 8 days, which would be impossible by any
natural means, and yet they want to deny there's anything
spiritual about the festival they commemorate?
"It's just a cultural thing."
She was a broken record. One answer.
I had a thought regarding these very young priests. They have not been tested....The Society flatters them with positions of forming and teaching young seminarians. This is big responsibility for one so young and it could tend to flatter them and appeal to a sense of pride which would not be a good thing. Then everyone else can see much confidence BF has in them.....They, after all were chosen...
This is something the NO used and still uses to flatter people, making them think they are indispensable and valuable. Making eucharistic ministers, lectors, and members of committees...Everyone recognizes them and they are important....
Just a thought!
Inprincipio, you've hit the nail on the head. The SSPX has been in the business of promoting young and untried priests beyond their abilities for quite some time. A young priest (about 30 yrs old) who was ordained four years ago is the USA District Burser. This young priest came to his former parish, under orders from the USA DS, and delivered a fiery sermon in which he haughtily rebuked the Resistors and ordered them to leave the SSPX. He made quite a spectacle of himself that day. Needless to say, we "over 50-somethings" were not rebuked; we were outraged! During the time he was our Pastor, many were impressed with his piety and intelligence. The only thing he accomplished with his nasty sermon was to be permanently lowered into the "pious fraud" category. How unfortunate for him and for us.
These young priests are so flattered by their superiors that they willingly succuмb to behavior that would horrify an older, wiser priest. No wonder the XSPX loves to promote the young and naive.
I had a thought regarding these very young priests. They have not been tested....The Society flatters them with positions of forming and teaching young seminarians. This is big responsibility for one so young and it could tend to flatter them and appeal to a sense of pride which would not be a good thing. Then everyone else can see much confidence BF has in them.....They, after all were chosen...
This is something the NO used and still uses to flatter people, making them think they are indispensable and valuable. Making eucharistic ministers, lectors, and members of committees...Everyone recognizes them and they are important....
Just a thought!