Author Topic: Fr. David Hewko Says No to Neo-SSPX Masses (Read 46579 times)

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #300 on:** January 27, 2014, 11:31:06 PM »

Quote from: J.Paul

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
My answers are in red font below.

Quote from: J.Paul
Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
Quote from: J.Paul
Perfectly pronounced, The difference between the Conservative Conciliarists/FSSP, the SSPX, and the Resisitance is not one of substance, but only one of degree.

You are wrong again. The Resistance rejects Vatican II outright and sees no future for it as part of Catholic Tradition (i.e., it will be condemned by a future pope).

Do they reject it in toto or line by line?

In toto.

Quote
Do they reject all of the docuмents or like the Archbishop, just some of the docuмents?

In toto. This was the mindset of the Archbishop, especially after the Consecrations.

Quote
Do they believe it to be a work of the Church?

No.

Then they do not see it as a legitimate council of the Church, I agree with that, and the Archbishop obviously changed his mind after signing the docuмents. Good also.

But, I do recall someone here quoting one or another of the priests saying that you cannot reject the whole council but only certain erroneous parts of it. Am I in error here? I hope that it is just faulty memory at work.

Are you aware that Benedict XVI wrote that the consecrations in 1988 of the 4 SSPX Bishops were not legitimate?

.

Centroamerica · « **Reply #301 on:** January 28, 2014, 04:37:01 AM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Quote from: J.Paul
Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
My answers are in red font below.

Quote from: J.Paul
Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
Quote from: J.Paul
Perfectly pronounced, The difference between the Conservative Conciliarists/FSSP, the SSPX, and the Resisitance is not one of substance, but only one of degree.

You are wrong again. The Resistance rejects Vatican II outright and sees no future for it as part of Catholic Tradition (i.e., it will be condemned by a future pope).

Do they reject it in toto or line by line?

In toto.

Quote
Do they reject all of the docuмents or like the Archbishop, just some of the docuмents?

In toto. This was the mindset of the Archbishop, especially after the Consecrations.

Quote
Do they believe it to be a work of the Church?

No.

Then they do not see it as a legitimate council of the Church, I agree with that, and the Archbishop obviously changed his mind after signing the docuмents. Good also.

But, I do recall someone here quoting one or another of the priests saying that you cannot reject the whole council but only certain erroneous parts of it. Am I in error here? I hope that it is just faulty memory at work.

Are you aware that Benedict XVI wrote that the consecrations in 1988 of the 4 SSPX Bishops were not legitimate?

.

Why do you hate the SSPX so much Neil? Was it personal? Did they refuse to perform a marriage, or maybe she married an adherent. I don't even want to know. I just know it's obvious. You are an enemy to the SSPX and its priests and bishops.

True Faith · « **Reply #302 on:** January 28, 2014, 08:45:48 AM »

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans

Quote from: John Grace
Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
Quote from: John Grace
I put my hand up and admit I was deceived by "Summorum Pontificuм". I thought it to be great. I realise this was foolish. Personally, I now believe this docuмent like the others should be burned.

I was deceived as well and now think that SP is from hell. This SSPX crisis has really opened my eyes.

I stopped attending the Novus Ordo around 2001. This business of 'extraordinary form' and 'ordinary form' is something I didn't support.

I never kept a foot in both camps.

I suppose what deceived me was the "liberation of the Mass". I thought great, the Mass will be available.

I stopped attending the Novus Ordo in 2004. I too did not accept the "Ordinary" vs. "Extradordinary" form false distinction. I saw SP as a Traditional Rite of Mass liberator. I now see it as a tool used to ensnare so many within the SSPX.

I find it interesting that those who are very strong in the Resistance used to be NO. I was NO until 2000, then moved on to FSSP, then to SSPX and now the Resistance. We've already fought the battle with the NO moving up the line and can see its poison a mile away. We've dealt with the principles of the FSSP and can clearly see that this is exactly what has happened to the SSPX. The 'traditional cradle Catholics' may not know the dangers of the conciliar church on a personal level and perhaps aren't as cautious.

For example, one parishioner who was raised in the SSPX just announced, "Did you know that the NO considers Saturday night mass to be a fulfillment of the Sunday obligation?" That's been going on for 30+ years and she just found out about it.

We've seen all the abuses and don't want anything to do with the conciliar church. Now that the SSPX is surrendering to modernism, we know the direction its headed and we have to run the other way! Where perhaps the cradle traditionalists will wait to see how bad it's going to get before they take action.

Centroamerica · « **Reply #303 on:** January 28, 2014, 09:56:30 AM »

Quote from: True Faith

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
Quote from: John Grace
Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
Quote from: John Grace
I put my hand up and admit I was deceived by "Summorum Pontificuм". I thought it to be great. I realise this was foolish. Personally, I now believe this docuмent like the others should be burned.

I was deceived as well and now think that SP is from hell. This SSPX crisis has really opened my eyes.

I stopped attending the Novus Ordo around 2001. This business of 'extraordinary form' and 'ordinary form' is something I didn't support.

I never kept a foot in both camps.

I suppose what deceived me was the "liberation of the Mass". I thought great, the Mass will be available.

I stopped attending the Novus Ordo in 2004. I too did not accept the "Ordinary" vs. "Extradordinary" form false distinction. I saw SP as a Traditional Rite of Mass liberator. I now see it as a tool used to ensnare so many within the SSPX.

I find it interesting that those who are very strong in the Resistance used to be NO. I was NO until 2000, then moved on to FSSP, then to SSPX and now the Resistance. We've already fought the battle with the NO moving up the line and can see its poison a mile away. We've dealt with the principles of the FSSP and can clearly see that this is exactly what has happened to the SSPX. The 'traditional cradle Catholics' may not know the dangers of the conciliar church on a personal level and perhaps aren't as cautious.

For example, one parishioner who was raised in the SSPX just announced, "Did you know that the NO considers Saturday night mass to be a fulfillment of the Sunday obligation?" That's been going on for 30+ years and she just found out about it.

We've seen all the abuses and don't want anything to do with the conciliar church. Now that the SSPX is surrendering to modernism, we know the direction its headed and we have to run the other way! Where perhaps the cradle traditionalists will wait to see how bad it's going to get before they take action.

So people who converted from the Novus Ordo have a superior insight and wisdom? If that's not the most ridiculous stereo-type then I don't know what is. It has nothing to do with who is a Novus Ordo convert and everything to do with who is informing themselves via the internet, even when they are weeding through the gossipy women's priest slanders.

True Faith · « **Reply #304 on:** January 28, 2014, 12:30:24 PM »

I'm sorry Centroamerica, I wasn't trying to insult you, but you apparently take offence at everything. I am merely forming my opinions on my own personal experience. We are all struggling along trying to do what we think is right and this is the place where we can 'discuss' our thoughts. Is it not?

Centroamerica · « **Reply #305 on:** January 28, 2014, 04:43:27 PM »

Quote from: True Faith

I'm sorry Centroamerica, I wasn't trying to insult you, but you apparently take offence at everything. I am merely forming my opinions on my own personal experience. We are all struggling along trying to do what we think is right and this is the place where we can 'discuss' our thoughts. Is it not?

I never said I took offense. I simply thought it was meaningful to point out that you are claiming that people who have had a poor formation and catechesis are somehow superior in insight to those of us raised in tradition.

True Faith · « **Reply #306 on:** January 28, 2014, 06:52:30 PM »

Quote from: Centroamerica

Quote from: True Faith
I'm sorry Centroamerica, I wasn't trying to insult you, but you apparently take offence at everything. I am merely forming my opinions on my own personal experience. We are all struggling along trying to do what we think is right and this is the place where we can 'discuss' our thoughts. Is it not?

I never said I took offense. I simply thought it was meaningful to point out that you are claiming that people who have had a poor formation and catechesis are somehow superior in insight to those of us raised in tradition.

Oh, I'm glad you're not offended, Centroamerica. Thank you for trying to re-phrase my feelings but I am not claiming that people raised in the NO are superior in insight, etc. Please let me clarify: I mean that "in my personal experience" and from what I can vaguely see here, those who have travelled through the ranks 'seem' to see things in black and white and possess a strong fighting spirit. Converts to tradition such as Ecclesia Militans and John Grace seem to know their faith very well from what I can tell here and put it into action.

In my SSPX parish consisting of mostly cradle traditional Catholics, many people only know their faith up to age 12 when they were confirmed and never had the need nor inclination to continue on with their catechisms and are lacking in the doctrine department. Our priest openly confirmed this. Maybe they are an extreme case, I don't know. Now with the changes in the SSPX, they ignorantly defend the silence of the priests and the SSPX in general in which they were raised, and sadly, resort to uncharitable words and actions in their defense.

In my former SSPX chapel, 95% of the people were raised in tradition and 95% of those people don't want to hear about the crisis in the Society and they continue to defend the errors diligently.

Being raised with a poor formation and catechesis does not mean that we converts to tradition are still at that level. For many adult converts came years of rigorous religious study and hands-on experience in combative fortitude. We've had to fight to get where we are today not because our parents made us but because we wanted to! We weren't handed our faith on a silver platter.

And one more example to back up my opinion is the fact that there are no cradle traditionalists in my local resistance group (yet). They've all swam up stream, too. So based on these observations, I can say that it seems that those who have worked their way up are quick to see the errors in the SSPX and have made the decision to leave the SSPX chapels now that the doctrine has officially changed.

Centroamerica · « **Reply #307 on:** February 02, 2014, 09:08:37 AM »

Quote from: True Faith

Quote from: Centroamerica
Quote from: True Faith
I'm sorry Centroamerica, I wasn't trying to insult you, but you apparently take offence at everything. I am merely forming my opinions on my own personal experience. We are all struggling along trying to do what we think is right and this is the place where we can 'discuss' our thoughts. Is it not?

I never said I took offense. I simply thought it was meaningful to point out that you are claiming that people who have had a poor formation and catechesis are somehow superior in insight to those of us raised in tradition.

Oh, I'm glad you're not offended, Centroamerica. Thank you for trying to re-phrase my feelings but I am not claiming that people raised in the NO are superior in insight, etc. Please let me clarify: I mean that "in my personal experience" and from what I can vaguely see here, those who have travelled through the ranks 'seem' to see things in black and white and possess a strong fighting spirit. Converts to tradition such as Ecclesia Militans and John Grace seem to know their faith very well from what I can tell here and put it into action.

In my SSPX parish consisting of mostly cradle traditional Catholics, many people only know their faith up to age 12 when they were confirmed and never had the need nor inclination to continue on with their catechisms and are lacking in the doctrine department. Our priest openly confirmed this. Maybe they are an extreme case, I don't know. Now with the changes in the SSPX, they ignorantly defend the silence of the priests and the SSPX in general in which they were raised, and sadly, resort to uncharitable words and actions in their defense.

In my former SSPX chapel, 95% of the people were raised in tradition and 95% of those people don't want to hear about the crisis in the Society and they continue to defend the errors diligently.

Being raised with a poor formation and catechesis does not mean that we converts to tradition are still at that level. For many adult converts came years of rigorous religious study and hands-on experience in combative fortitude. We've had to fight to get where we are today not because our parents made us but because we wanted to! We weren't handed our faith on a silver platter.

And one more example to back up my opinion is the fact that there are no cradle traditionalists in my local resistance group (yet). They've all swam up stream, too. So based on these observations, I can say that it seems that those who have worked their way up are quick to see the errors in the SSPX and have made the decision to leave the SSPX chapels now that the doctrine has officially changed.

And there you go....generalizing those of us raised in Tradition as all not knowing are faith such as the members of this forum who "raised through the ranks" of Catholicism as if Catholicism has some sort of degree of intensity, while using it as an opportunity to speak ill of "your" former SSPX chapel. You claim that there 95% of people were raised in Tradition and don't know much more than 12 year old catechism. What else can you tell us about your former chapel? Were they horrible, immoral, illiterates as well? Did they viciously support cry rooms in their chapel as if they were possibly demonically possessed?

Before you answer those questions please allow me to state that I am not being serious. The last time I wrote like that you responded as if you didn't know I was not serious.....and still have the audacity to claim an intellectual and spiritual superiority to those raised in Tradition (and somehow gain 3 likes in the process). You are not alone on this forum that's for sure.

John Grace · « **Reply #308 on:** February 02, 2014, 09:43:39 AM »

Quote

those raised in Tradition

A good example is the recent matter concerning Fr Mac Donald SSPX and Youth Defence.

Dr Eoghan De Faoite was raised in Tradition yet was called a liberal. He visited me when I was recovering from surgery. I appreciate his visit nor have I forgotten it. It's several years since I have met him.

Having said that I couldn't agree with Dr De Faoite or the new Youth Defence. Many in YD were raised in Tradition. The new generation are not.

Many in YD tend to dip in and out of the Indult/SSPX. It causes some confusion.

Moral theology is very clear regarding abortion.

I don't lobby politicians or vote 'pro-life' but would still help Youth Defence with a picket or other events. Their grassroots do their own thing after the event. YD are happy with that.

Prayerful · « **Reply #309 on:** May 17, 2015, 06:53:48 PM »

Keeping to what Fr Hewko makes Mass something three times yearly for me, unless one travels involving a use of time I don't ever have. There is a Resistance priest or two who do a circuit of some chapels, but finding details is a challenge and a half. Do they have secret handshakes or something of the sort? The 1962 Mass isn't ideal, I'd prefer one of the earlier revisions be it that of Pius X or Pius XII, I think, but it will do.

(What got me the critic score? There must be some deluded love of the persecutor of Greek rite Catholics Putin or the self hating Jew, Br Nathaniel)

Pilar · « **Reply #310 on:** May 18, 2015, 02:35:12 AM »

Quote from: Prayerful

Keeping to what Fr Hewko makes Mass something three times yearly for me, unless one travels involving a use of time I don't ever have. There is a Resistance priest or two who do a circuit of some chapels, but finding details is a challenge and a half. Do they have secret handshakes or something of the sort? The 1962 Mass isn't ideal, I'd prefer one of the earlier revisions be it that of Pius X or Pius XII, I think, but it will do.

(What got me the critic score? There must be some deluded love of the persecutor of Greek rite Catholics Putin or the self hating Jew, Br Nathaniel)

Red-lighting is nuts! If the devil had tried to think of something he could do to separate good Traditional Catholics from their weekly, or for the really fortunate, daily Masses, not to mention Confessions, he couldn't have done it better.

hollingsworth · « **Reply #311 on:** May 19, 2015, 11:46:50 AM »

Pilar:

Quote

If the devil had tried to think of something he could do to separate good Traditional Catholics from their weekly, or for the really fortunate, daily Masses, not to mention Confessions, he couldn't have done it better.

The devil did do something very effectively, IMO. He got Bp. Fellay & Co. to betray ABL's original mandate. :shocked:

snowball · « **Reply #312 on:** May 19, 2015, 02:37:57 PM »

Quote from: hollingsworth

Pilar:
Quote
If the devil had tried to think of something he could do to separate good Traditional Catholics from their weekly, or for the really fortunate, daily Masses, not to mention Confessions, he couldn't have done it better.

The devil did do something very effectively, IMO. He got Bp. Fellay & Co. to betray ABL's original mandate. :shocked:

Precisely ? Not yet.

stgobnait · « **Reply #313 on:** May 19, 2015, 03:17:21 PM »

Not yet? When then? What or Who has brought us to this sorry pass.

hollingsworth · « **Reply #314 on:** May 19, 2015, 03:23:50 PM »

Quote

Not yet? When then? What or Who has brought us to this sorry pass.

We must understand that Fellay is merely a 'material" betrayer of ABL's Society. He is not yet a 'formal' betrayer. :roll-laugh1: