Author Topic: Eleison Comments - Menzingen Defended II (no. 555)  (Read 730 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23140
  • Reputation: +20289/-248
  • Gender: Male
Eleison Comments - Menzingen Defended II (no. 555)
« on: March 05, 2018, 11:51:03 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Number DLV (555)
    March 3, 2018
    Menzingen Defended – II
    Why cannot good men see where evil lies?
    The more they fail, the more the “Resistance” tries!

    No doubt some readers of these “Comments” are not so interested in reading about what seem to them merely internal squabbles among relatively few Catholic priests. Let such readers beware of missing the importance of these “squabbles.” Religion leads the world because God exists, and how men stand to him (religion) governs how they stand to their fellow-men (politics). The Catholic Church leads religion because since Christ’s Incarnation Catholicism is the only religion founded by the one true God. And Catholic Tradition leads the Catholic Church because that Church is as essentially unchanging as Our Lord Himself. And for 42 years (1970–2012) the Society of St Pius X was in the front-line of the defence of Catholic Tradition because it was the only worldwide Catholic organisation effectively resisting the unfaithful modernisation of the Church by the Second Vatican Council. Therefore all men alive, atheists or Protestants or Conciliarists, especially priests and followers of the SSPX, are concerned by the problem of infidelity to Catholic Tradition within the SSPX. Read on, everybody!
    Another champion of Menzingen, Fr. B., has stepped into the lists to defend its policy of rejoining Conciliar Rome – let us call them the Reconciliarists – with an article in the official monthly magazine of the SSPX in the USA. Ever since Vatican II separated Catholic Authority from the Catholic Truth which it only exists to defend and maintain, all Catholics have been necessarily more or less schizophrenic – either they follow Authority and abandon Truth, or they follow Truth and abandon Authority, or they choose any one of a variety of combinations in between.
    The Founder of the SSPX, Archbishop Lefebvre, chose Truth, but kept as much respect for the holders of Catholic Authority as was compatible with faithfulness to the Truth, and as a result he suffered serious persecution and condemnation fr om all Catholics who more or less preferred Authority On the contrary, his successors at the head of his Society are wanting to take it back under Conciliar Authority, so that from 2012 the Society has been officially Reconciliarist. By this switch of the SSPX from the Founder’s Truth back to Conciliar Authority, they have filled the Society with schizophrenia, causing a movement of “Resistance” to their “Reconciliarism.”
    For most of his article, Fr B. is Catholic in his principles, but at the end he is Reconciliarist in their application. Therefore possibly to help the Society’s present Reconciliarist Superior General to be re-elected in July, he attacks the “Resistance” not for its attachment to Truth, which is its strong point, but for its detachment from Catholic Authority, both in Rome and in Menzingen. Thus, Fr B. says, towards Rome the “Resistance” is for the sake of its own “ease and convenience” in danger of ignoring the Pope and of not acknowl edging his authority, while towards Menzingen it is refusing proper respect and obedience, and by criticising every word uttered by the Superior General it is sowing suspicion and blocking the channels of grace.
    But, Reverend Father, among your Catholic principles you yourself acknowledge the primacy of the Faith. Now Vatican II was a disaster for the Faith, by trying to put modern man in the place of God. Therefore Conciliarism and Reconciliarism are both disastrous, and both the officials of Rome and the Society’s present Superior General are to be judged accordingly. And he must not be replaced by another Reconciliarist. The problem is not the “Resistance” which does not “ignore” the Pope and is certainly not seeking its own ease and convenience, because it is highly uncomfortable for Catholics to be deprived of all support from recognisable Catholic officials above. Therefore the “Resistance” is neither falling into “a schismatic attitude in its own right,� �� nor is it wrecking the channels of grace. The problem is the Council causing schism, the Council poisoning the Popes and the Council strangling the grace of Jesus Christ. The present Superior General must not be re-elected if anything of the true Society is to survive.
    Kyrie eleison.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline Meg

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3235
    • Reputation: +1588/-2553
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Eleison Comments - Menzingen Defended II (no. 555)
    « Reply #1 on: March 05, 2018, 02:29:26 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Good E.C. analysis of the situation and state of Menzingen.

    +W says that Archbishop Lefebvre chose Truth, but that he kept as much respect for the holders of Catholic authority as was compatible with faithfulness to the Truth, and as a result he suffered serious persecution and condemnation from more or less all Catholics who preferred Authority, and that now the leaders of the SSPX want to be under Conciliar Authority. And that since 2012 the Society has been officially reconciliarist.

    I think that "reconciliarist" is a good term to describe the current SSPX, because it well-describes the new focus of the SSPX. And, since the SSPX is now reconciliarist, that might explain, IMO, why they no longer officially use the terms "modernist" or "conciliar church" to describe the Crisis situation in the Church anymore.

    +W mentions something quite important. He says that Fr. B attacks the Resistance, not for its attachment to Truth, which is its strong point, but for its detachment from Catholic Authority, both in Rome and Menzingen. So, for Fr. B, it seems to be about authority. And he also accuses Resistance of wanting ease and comfort, but as +W says, it is highly uncomfortable for Catholics to be deprived of support from the recognizable Catholic officials above.

    IMO, it was uncomfortable for +ABL too. But +ABL cared more about and was primarily attached to God and His Truth, which held primacy over allegiance Modernist Roman Authority.

    +W says too that if anything of the Society is to survive, then the present Superior General must not be re-elected. So true!

    "This forum is a space for discussion to defend the Catholic Faith following Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre. It is therefore not for rallying to the conciliar church nor for sedevacantism"
    - From the French Resistance forum (Francophone forum, in France)


    Offline Wessex

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1311
    • Reputation: +1951/-361
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Menzingen Defended II (no. 555)
    « Reply #2 on: March 06, 2018, 05:29:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bp. Fellay could well eclipse the memory of ABL by being the one that brought the Society back into the mainstream. I am thinking what happened with Campos and the need to disparage Bp. de Castro Mayer there when it changed direction. The test for the Society among the few that decide things is how tired it is of 'the fight' and the extent to which it now longs to achieve full communion with the Roman entity. What works against this feeling is the fact that the Society has been independent for going on half a century and may be reluctant to give up its distinctive practices.

    If these Society spokesmen are fearful of "ignoring the pope and of not acknowling his authority" they should enter the mainstream toute suite and beg forgiveness. What are they waiting for? And Bp. Williamson believes we should feel discomfort detaching ourselves from both Menzingen and Rome. On the contrary; the discomfort would be felt in giving any regard to a greedy Swiss corporation and those delinquents ensconced in Rome! The former can be dismissed out of hand, even if the bishop is reluctant to do so, and the latter should by now have lost any authority to influence Catholics.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5013
    • Reputation: +2900/-1327
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Menzingen Defended II (no. 555)
    « Reply #3 on: March 06, 2018, 09:31:11 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    What are they waiting for?
    The neo-sspx is waiting for (hopefully) 95% of the laity to follow them.  A deal with newrome is useless to the Modernists if it causes a large % of the laity to reject the deal and remain traditional.  The modernists want to crush traditionalism, because they worship satan, and they are fine with waiting and playing the 'long con'.  Thus, the neo-sspx continues its slow, steady march to newrome/heresy and introduces changes bit by bit, to see how "the masses" react.  (Using the Modernist's playbook from V2 and the liberal playbook with socialism).  All this is pychological and all meant to condtion the laity to "be comfortable" with their "friends" from newrome.  First, new-rome granted 'permission' to have confessions.  Now marriages will be "blessed" by quasi-priests and "approved" by the local heretical bishop.  What's next?  Who knows, but there will continue to be next steps.  Once the revolutionists start, the only constant is change.  

    Offline Smedley Butler

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1337
    • Reputation: +536/-1513
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Menzingen Defended II (no. 555)
    « Reply #4 on: March 06, 2018, 10:17:20 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Priestly "internal squabbles" are basically an embarrassing bar fight at this point.

    They need to just take it out to the parking lot and let us know who is the winner.


    Offline Meg

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3235
    • Reputation: +1588/-2553
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Eleison Comments - Menzingen Defended II (no. 555)
    « Reply #5 on: March 06, 2018, 10:24:01 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Priestly "internal squabbles" are basically an embarrassing bar fight at this point.

    They need to just take it out to the parking lot and let us know who is the winner.

    To whom are you referring? Why would you think that the situation is just an internal squabble?
    "This forum is a space for discussion to defend the Catholic Faith following Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre. It is therefore not for rallying to the conciliar church nor for sedevacantism"
    - From the French Resistance forum (Francophone forum, in France)

    Offline PG

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1734
    • Reputation: +455/-472
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Menzingen Defended II (no. 555)
    « Reply #6 on: March 06, 2018, 05:31:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Priestly "internal squabbles" are basically an embarrassing bar fight at this point.

    They need to just take it out to the parking lot and let us know who is the winner.
    Well, a lot of $$$ is on the line in the form of properties and materials.  They remain internal for the sake of these things.  We are so drawn by what equates to smells and bells, but these are the things that are doing us in in the end.  Because, we are better off in the parking lot. 
    "A secure mind is like a continual feast" - Proverbs xv: 15

    Offline aryzia

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 382
    • Reputation: +119/-166
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Eleison Comments - Menzingen Defended II (no. 555)
    « Reply #7 on: March 06, 2018, 06:02:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, a lot of $$$ is on the line in the form of properties and materials.  They remain internal for the sake of these things.  We are so drawn by what equates to smells and bells, but these are the things that are doing us in in the end.  Because, we are better off in the parking lot.
    That's the problem. It political anymore. Who's right, who's wrong. Money, power, comfort, control. Not all, but many priests and bishops are guilty. The laity are merely collateral. 


     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16