Author Topic: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course (Read 2578 times)

Banezian · « **Reply #15 on:** February 19, 2019, 09:57:44 PM »

Quote from: ihsv on February 19, 2019, 02:15:35 PM

Banezian, you're a 19 year old kid who has a very loud mouth. That's not a good combination. You should be listening and learning from the many people on this forum who are wiser, more intelligent, and more experienced than you.

You were barely 12 years old when +Williamson and so many others were kicked out of the SSPX because they did what they always had done, warned the faithful of spiritual danger. And now you want to tell the rest of us who were in the thick of it "how things are"?

For you to come on a Resistance-friendly forum and start trashing +Williamson and other good priests (and by extension, all of the faithful who agree with them) who hold what the Society has always stood for takes a truck load of nerve.

1. Age doesn’t really have much to do with this. I’m well read in the Fathers ,St. Thomas, Newman, Garrigou-Lagrange, and even many of the best Protestant writers.( for the purpose of apologetics) I’ve been told by some very well-educated clergymen that I ought to get a PhD in theology. Unless you have graduate level training in theology or are a clergyman, bringing up my ag isn’t much of an argument. I need to submit and listen to wise priests, not laymen on the internet.
2 I have never trashed Bp. Williamson. Saying that he is wrong to do what he is doing is not “trashing” him. Bp. Williamson is a main source of mine for cultural/political commentary.
4. I’m not telling the rest of you what to think. I just have a problem with constant sneering on the SSPX for no good reason.

Banezian · « **Reply #16 on:** February 19, 2019, 10:03:11 PM »

Quote from: Incredulous on February 19, 2019, 01:28:16 PM

Banz,

In your support of the neo-SSPX, we're trying to determine if you're a real Catholic man... or a millennial mouse?

Cardinal Schonborn and P. Bouchacourt declare the same statement:The Jєωιѕн people did not commit deicide.

When, where, and in what context did Fr. Bouchacourt say that? Every SSPX priest I’ve spoken to on the topic says the opposite. Of course the Jєωs committed deicide.( and they continue to by practicing тαℓмυdic Judaism)

JmJ2cents · « **Reply #17 on:** February 19, 2019, 10:07:55 PM »

Quote from: Banezian on February 19, 2019, 09:57:44 PM

4. I’m not telling the rest of you what to think. I just have a problem with constant sneering on the SSPX for no good reason.

For no good reason he says! If he has a problem with this then why does he bother reading or commenting on a primary "Resistance" forum. By definition we are in disagreement with the neo-SSPX. Isn't there Forums that this guy could frequent more?

Banezian · « **Reply #18 on:** February 19, 2019, 10:15:22 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on February 19, 2019, 01:34:23 PM

1. Did you know that slander can be a grave sin? You shouldn't throw that term around like rice after a wedding. You're accusing the whole Resistance of grave sin? I'll clue you in (since you don't have a clue): you can't commit slander against an organization, only against a human being. The Resistance certainly believes what it says to be true, which precludes slander (which always involves falsehood).

Criticizing the position of an organization can't be any sin of the tongue. More like speaking our opinion, which is the type of free speech in agreement with the Catholic Faith.

2. The Resistance has plenty of legitimate criticisms of the new SSPX orientation. Spend some time reading. No one in the SSPX has been able to show that Bp. Zendejas, Bp. Williamson, the Dominicans, the Benedictines in Brazil, or any of the other countless priests have changed or adopted a single new doctrine, to explain their departure from the SSPX. It's clear the SSPX has changed. The neo-SSPX might pride themselves on a slow-boil, but some frogs have had thermometers and have wisely jumped from the water before they're served up for dinner. Enter the Resistance.

1. You can commit slander against an organization by broad brushing and misrepresentation. When Bp. Williamson speaks of a “watering down of doctrine in the SSPX since 2012” he’s making a claim about the Society as a whole. When you use terms like “Neo-SSPX” you are making a claim about the entire Society.
2. The Society has not changed anything significant or essential. The only thing that has changed ( in a sense) is the way the Society now approaches Rome. This is a prudential matter. Even so, a number of well-respected priests in the Society oppose a doctrinal agreement ( the primary example being Fr. Gleize) It’s not as if one is going to get kicked out of the Society for opposing an agreement. It’s 2019 not 2012. Nothing that happened in 2012 ended up having real consequences. It’s funny how the Resistance crowd always goes back to 2012. Maybe that’s because y’all are grasp8ng at straws and nothing has happened since then?

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #19 on:** February 19, 2019, 10:35:51 PM »

Quote

Nothing that happened in 2012 ended up having real consequences.

The fat lady hasn’t sung yet but she’s warming up.

ihsv · « **Reply #20 on:** February 19, 2019, 10:39:30 PM »

Quote from: Banezian on February 19, 2019, 09:57:44 PM

1. Age doesn’t really have much to do with this. I’m well read in the Fathers ,St. Thomas, Newman, Garrigou-Lagrange, and even many of the best Protestant writers.( for the purpose of apologetics) I’ve been told by some very well-educated clergymen that I ought to get a PhD in theology. Unless you have graduate level training in theology or are a clergyman, bringing up my ag isn’t much of an argument. I need to submit and listen to wise priests, not laymen on the internet.
2 I have never trashed Bp. Williamson. Saying that he is wrong to do what he is doing is not “trashing” him. Bp. Williamson is a main source of mine for cultural/political commentary.
4. I’m not telling the rest of you what to think. I just have a problem with constant sneering on the SSPX for no good reason.

1. You're a whiny kid who thinks he knows everything; full of pride and lacking life experience. Your posting history bears this out. You can't even take criticism and advice without getting all defensive. You come across as a triggered millennial who knows all the answers, and then throws a tantrum when no one pays attention to you. You expect the rest of us to listen to you, while you demand that in order for you to listen to us, we must have a "graduate level training in theology" or be "a clergyman."

1a. Your being "well-read" (so you claim) is doing you no good service. It causes you to be puffed up and overflowing with pride. You would be better off praying for and practicing the virtues of humility and docility, rather than basking in and broadcasting the notion that you're well-read, or slurping up the praise of "well-educated clergymen".

2. A number of your posts in other threads have been deleted because of what you've said about +Williamson and the Resistance

3a. (4a.) Yes you are. Constantly.

3b. (4b.) Then leave and go join the SSPX Faithful facebook group.

Banezian · « **Reply #21 on:** February 19, 2019, 10:40:38 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on February 19, 2019, 10:35:51 PM

The fat lady hasn’t sung yet but she’s warming up.

Dream on my friend. You guys have been saying that for 7 years. How do you explain Fr. Gleize being allowed to publicly oppose an agreement?

Banezian · « **Reply #22 on:** February 19, 2019, 10:44:45 PM »

Quote from: ihsv on February 19, 2019, 10:39:30 PM

1. You're a whiny kid who thinks he knows everything; full of pride and lacking life experience. Your posting history bears this out. You can't even take criticism and advice without getting all defensive. You come across as a triggered millennial who knows all the answers, and then throws a tantrum when no one pays attention to you. You expect the rest of us to listen to you, while you demand that in order for you to listen to us, we must have a "graduate level training in theology" or be "a clergyman."

1a. Your being "well-read" (so you claim) is doing you no good service. It causes you to be puffed up and overflowing with pride. You would be better off praying for and practicing the virtues of humility and docility, rather than basking in and broadcasting the notion that you're well-read, or slurping up the praise of "well-educated clergymen".

2. A number of your posts in other threads have been deleted because of what you've said about +Williamson and the Resistance

3a. (4a.) Yes you are. Constantly.

3b. (4b.) Then leave and go join the SSPX Faithful facebook group.

I do not claim to have all the answers nor do I say that people should “listen” to me. It’s all opinion here. There is a difference between criticizing someone and calling them a non-Catholic. I did not say anything bad about Bp. Williamson. I said things about the Resistance

ihsv · « **Reply #23 on:** February 19, 2019, 11:17:52 PM »

Quote from: Banezian on February 19, 2019, 10:44:45 PM

I do not claim to have all the answers nor do I say that people should “listen” to me. It’s all opinion here. There is a difference between criticizing someone and calling them a non-Catholic. I did not say anything bad about Bp. Williamson. I said things about the Resistance

I rest my case. It's self-justifying posts like this that cause most on this board to have such little respect for your opinions.

I mean this in all sincerity, Banezian: When you post an opinion, and you find that most on this forum disagree with you, you would do well to seriously consider why they disagree, what they say, and examine it objectively and calmly rather than simply digging in your heels as is your habit. Your problem is that you pick up a notion from this or that book, but you lack the well-roundedness, the balance, the prudence, and the wisdom to discern whether what you read is correct or whether you understand it properly. Just because this or that writer, whether it be Newman or Garrigou-Lagrange, says X or Y, doesn't make X or Y right.

You have youth on your side. But you also have a great deal of pride and an unhealthy sense of self-reliance. You need to temper your pride and arrogance, replacing them with humility and docility.

No one ever got to heaven because he read a bunch of books.

If you can't take and accept this honest piece of advice in the spirit in which it was meant, then there isn't much that can be done for you here. I fear, instead, your continued presence will only serve to stiffen your neck.

Nadir · « **Reply #24 on:** February 20, 2019, 02:29:55 AM »

Quote from: X on February 19, 2019, 05:48:28 AM

http://tradcatresist.blogspot.com/2019/02/the-following-comments-source-that.html?m=1

Ps: These nuns are headed by arch-accordist Fr. Simoulin’s sister, and are the same ones who made their pilgrimage to Rome a year or two ago symbolizing their capitulation (as the SSPX did in 2000).

Original here:
http://resistance.vraiforum.com/t842-Cours-sur-la-resistance.htm

Nadir · « **Reply #25 on:** February 20, 2019, 02:35:58 AM »

Traditional Catholic Musings
Tuesday, 19 February 2019
Revisionist history and the desire of acceptance.

This Google translation of the following (source) that...

Quote

A new subject has just been invented by the Dominican sisters of Fanjeaux as part of catechism classes: " Course on resistance ". We do not do courses on the rallies (compromisers), but on "the resistance".You thought you had seen everything at the sisters, with history classes aligned with the official courses, French lessons with rotten or immoral authors, progressive catechism classes, a hateful orientation of the girls to universities (we know the disaster for the most part) etc ... so you will have today the right to a course on "resistance"..

Quote

We wait with haste, but without illusions, to discover the content of this new material. It's a safe bet that Sr Simoulin had to be in the game to build such a course. It should not have been easy to classify Archbishop Lefebvre in 1988: were the saints an act of resistance or rallying? Is there a conciliar church? Can we resist François when he offers us poisoned gifts?Did the abbot of La Rocque resist? And the seven Deans?
The Dominicans prepare the girls to become good supporters like Pontcallec. So here we are warned about what is now Fanjeaux. We knew it, but at this point ...
Such teaching, not to mention the galloping worldliness in these schools, will surely help good families make good choices .... and benefactors redirect their donations to more serious schools.

[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}][size={defaultattr}]

...puts this recent email into perspective..

[/size][/font][/size]

Quote

Dear Staff, dear Parents,

On Friday 8th March, we will be honoured to receive the visit of our diocesan bishop, the Very Reverend Philip Egan, Bishop of Portsmouth.

The visit will take place in the morning. The bishop has expressed his hope that he will be able to pray the rosary together with staff and pupils, something we are more than happy to accommodate.

In order to show our appreciation of Bishop Egan's interest in our work, I would like to organise a spiritual bouquet for him. Each pupil will be given a copy of the attached, to fill out as best they can. Please assist them in this endeavour. It is a wonderful reminder to them of our duty to pray for priests and pastors beyond our usual surroundings. Please also contribute yourselves. Forms can be returned via the classroom, the office or the grey box in the vestibule. We will present Bishop Egan with the spiritual bouquet when he comes.

Rev. Fr. John Brucciani
Headmaster

Quote

St. Michael's School

[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}][size={defaultattr}]
--

As I have said before, the SSPX now feel more in common with conciliar clerics than with their former confrères, who simply believe what they themselves did only a few years ago. If one doubts this, would Fr Brucciani request a spiritual bouquet for a passing visit by Bishop Williamson? If not, why not? If it is simply about honouring the Bishop's office as opposed to his views then why such a potential contradiction?

[/size]
Traditional Catholic at 00:52
Share
No comments:

Post a Comment[/font][/size]

Mr G · « **Reply #26 on:** February 20, 2019, 07:13:31 AM »

Quote from: Banezian on February 19, 2019, 10:03:11 PM

When, where, and in what context did Fr. Bouchacourt say that? Every SSPX priest I’ve spoken to on the topic says the opposite. Of course the Jєωs committed deicide.( and they continue to by practicing тαℓмυdic Judaism)

Tell that to Fr. de Jorna? Here is what he has to say in the December/2018 SSPX French District newsletter
https://forum.tradidi.com/t/sspx-bows-down-to-Jєωs-again/315 (see pdf for the actual newsletter):
"The Jєωs of today have obviously not personally asked for the death of Jesus, so they can not be held personally responsible. Moreover, since the political entity that represented Judaism at the time was completely destroyed, they can not be included in the "political" responsibility of the Jєωs who lived at the time: neither can the current Italians can be encompassed in the "political" responsibility of the Roman Empire.

However, as current Judaism claims the heritage of ancient Judaism, of the history of the people of Israel through time and space, this modern Judaism naturally assumes glories and shame, on a plane cultural. He is thus saddened by the ruin of Jerusalem in the year 70, as much as he glorifies himself from the battle of Masada, but only on a cultural level, without really being a part of it: like us, French, we assume in our history the victory of Rocroi or the defeat of Pavia, without obviously feeling responsible.

It is only in view of this cultural heritage (in some respects largely mythical, by the way) that current Judaism can, to a small extent, be held in solidarity with what some Jєωs did to Jesus there is more than two thousand years."

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #27 on:** February 20, 2019, 07:23:38 AM »

Quote

Dream on my friend. You guys have been saying that for 7 years. How do you explain Fr. Gleize being allowed to publicly oppose an agreement?

You’re like the novus ordo Catholics between the years 1963-1969, the “warm up” phase before the full blown novus ordo mass was introduced. You’re fixated on “the deal” as the litmus test for orthodoxy, meanwhile +Fellay is slowly changing everything else, in preparation for the deal.

In 2012, could the sspx have imagined the following? Yet these are taking place in many new-sspx chapels:

1. Sspx accepts/requires new-Rome’s blessing for confessions
2. Allows novus ordo priests to officiate at marriages.
3. Regularly mixes with heretical new-bishops and diocesan officials both at schools and elsewhere.
4. Increase of dialogue masses, as is used in the new liturgy.
5. Increase of social/religious activities with new-church “conservative” groups/schools/orgs.
6. Use of new liturgical calendar.

These are NOT small actions and the sspx NEVER did such things in its whole history. These are propaganda moves, to communistically condition the people to become comfy with the idea of mixing with the diocese. These are the types of things that went on in the years leading up to V2. This is how you slowly change an organization from within. Breaking down the barriers between your group and the outside, one step at a time...

Ladislaus · « **Reply #28 on:** February 20, 2019, 07:32:27 AM »

Your "learning" has only caused you harm ... as you continue to promote modern pseudo-science and are hostile to the Church's EENS dogma. You're a modernist.

Author Topic: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course (Read 2578 times)

Banezian

Re: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course

Banezian

Re: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course

JmJ2cents

Re: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course

Banezian

Re: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course

Pax Vobis

Re: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course

ihsv

Re: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course

Banezian

Re: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course

Banezian

Re: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course

ihsv

Re: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course

Nadir

Re: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course

Nadir

Re: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course

Mr G

Re: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course

Pax Vobis

Re: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course

Ladislaus

Re: Fallen Dominican Nuns Teaching Anti-Resistance Course