Author Topic: Fr. Sauer has left the SSPX (Read 11209 times)

hugeman · « **Reply #10 on:** September 02, 2013, 02:29:56 AM »

Yes Marsha,

If you are aware of any sisters or nuns who are waking up,
put them in contact with Fathers Hewko, Pfeiffer, Ringrose
or Bishop Williamson. I'd be very surprised if accommodations
were not rather quickly arranged.
Also, Bishops Kelly and Santay have some sixty sisters in their
two major houses (New York and midwest)who would love more beautiful nuns; the CMRI would
probably be willing to accept sisters, as would, I presume, Bishop Morello's
Chapels. All good sisters have to do is stand up and make themselves known.

AlligatorDicax · « **Reply #11 on:** September 02, 2013, 03:40:17 AM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat (Aug 26, 2013, 1:38 pm)

The Parable of the Weeds Explained ~ Matt. caput XIII

This parable is confusing, indeed:

Quote from: Mt. 13 (Reims Testament)

36 [...] Expound to us the parable of the cockle of the field. [....]
38 [...] And the cockle, are the children of the wicked one. [....]

A cockle--a marine bivalve mollusk

--growing in agricultural fields? Whoa! Shouldn't that be counted as a miracle?

Quote from: Mt. 13 (Reims Testament)

40 Even as cockle therefore is gathered up, and burnt with fire: [....]

Sure seems like a waste to me. They're edible!  In fact, to many people on both sides of the Pond, they're considered a delicacy.  So is this parable about obedience to the dietary rules according to the Old Law, i.e.: Leviticus 11?

Don't you think the Latin might be just a wee bit helpful here, to make sure that's really what was going on? Especially for anything presenting itself as an "explanation? Aren't some parables confusing enough even when we understand all the words?

Quote from: Mt. 13 (Vulgate)

36 [...] Edissere nobis parabolam zizaniorum agri. [....]
38 [...] Zizania autem, filii sunt nequam. [....]
40 Sicut ergo colliguntur zizania, et igni comburuntur : [....]

Aha! The zizaniorum agri of the Vulgate isn't an amphibious edible shellfish, after all. Reference to the Latin noun, from eastern Greek "zizanōn", identifies it as a flat-leaved grass of the genus Lolium

: the troublesome weed known in Middle and Modern English as "darnel".

Way-elll, (expletive)! My initial choice of Collegiate English dictionaries didn't have the completely unexpected meaning of "cockle" as a toxic weed. Nor did my Latin-English dictionary have any entries for "zizan"-anything. So I found it in a Greek-English dictionary, instead. Then as I was looking for a usable image of the shellfish, I discovered that Wikipedia also had an entry for the weed, under its genus, via a disambiguation page. Sigh.

According to Wikipedia, this weed is difficult to distinguish from wheat while both are in their vegetative-growth period in the same field. At least until both begin to develop their ears, not too long before the harvest. Afterwards, I'd expect a farmer to burn the weeds, not only to destroy the seeds that hadn't already dispersed, but also to convert their biomass into low-tech fertilizer. I suppose those are really significant aspects of the parable that people who've never set foot into those fields would easily miss. Perhaps distinguishing wheat vs. darnel is a metaphor for the difficulty of distinguishing "the children of the kingdom" vs. "the children of the wicked one".

Note *: Photo, used at least resolution available (180x240) on Wikipedia, by Féron Benjamin (via Flickr.com).

Note #: Illustration, also at least resolution available (145x240), from Prof. Dr. Otto Wilhelm Thomé 1885: Flora von Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz. Gera, Germany (now in public domain).

Ethelred · « **Reply #12 on:** September 02, 2013, 09:16:44 AM »

Back on topic...

The Swiss-French Fr Firmin Udressy said in his very first sermon as new district superior of the Neo-SSPX in Germany, that Fr Frank Sauer would have left the SSPX voluntarily and that he would have publicly attacked the superiors (in particular Bp Fellay).
This however is not true. The first official act of the new district superior is untrue. It's only true to Menzingen party principles.

The brave Fr Sauer with his nearly 70 years, just travelled through Austria and so I'd the great pleasure to meet him. He's an old friend of Austria and of my house, and he also served in the Austrian SSPX district for years, before he became Africa missionary for the Vetero-SSPX. He's a friend of Bishop Williamson and follows Archbishop Lefebvre. He also met Fr Pfeiffer recently in Germany, and both priests appreciate each other.
Fr Sauer holds a classic doctoral degree in Latin and Theology and is a bright traditional Catholic theologian (there aren't many anymore, like elsewhere). So it's a big loss for the Neo-SSPX actually.
Whilst the brave father naturally opposes the Neo-SSPX' neo-liberalism and intended deal with Newrome, he never publicly criticised his superiors including Bp Fellay, in order not to scandalise the faithful, who're standing behind the Neo-SSPX leadership unfortunately. He however said countless times in public that Newrome and the Newpope must convert first and only then our problem would be solved. Since 2012 however, when he read the bad letter of Bp Fellay to the three bishops' letter (April 2012), he waited for a sign of God in order to see what to do.

In July 2013 this sign "appeared". Because then the German Neo-SSPX district superior Fr Schmidberger, called-in the brave father and issued an ultimatum: either the brave father signs an assurance docuмent confirming in written form his loyalty to the general superior

. Or, otherwise, the brave father obtains his first written expel warning (admonition). Fr Schmidberger added that this call-in would be an official warning.

The point is, that this demanding of a written loyalty docuмent towards Menzingen was and is unacceptable. Why should a Catholic priest sign such a silly docuмent? He would sign the anti-modernism oath any time, or any similar loyalty docuмent concerning the Catholic doctrine and Church.

So, when Fr Sauer finally obtained his 1st admonition, he didn't wait for the 2nd and 3rd one but felt obliged to just silently leave the Neo-SSPX because he could no longer see any future in it.

As of now he's joining Fr Zaby and both will be the spirituals of the Carmel in Brilon, where Fr Sauer served 12 years or so in the past. The two priests are rotating every few weeks, so that one priest stays at the Carmel and the other priest can undertake pastoral ministries in other parts of the country, also to help their third brother in arms, Fr Weinzierl.
Apparently the good priests found a new place for the Carmel and a nearby priest house, next to the famous place of pilgrimage Altötting in Southern Germany. With a little bit more money, they could soon move the Carmel to its new home. Then not only the Carmel would be in South Germany, but also Fr Sauer and his befriended priests: a true centre of the resistance movement. And also very close to the border of the dukedom of Austria.

This was very similar to the loyalty docuмent demanded from the German Fr Hermann Weinzierl in late 2012, who then also had to leave the SSPX because he could not sign such a docuмent.

The English and the German Lion in 2007 :

Ecclesia Militans · « **Reply #13 on:** September 02, 2013, 09:55:50 AM »

Quote from: Ethelred

Whilst the brave father naturally opposes the Neo-SSPX' neo-liberalism and intended deal with Newrome, he never publicly criticised his superiors including Bp Fellay, in order not to scandalise the faithful,...

But would it not be better to scandalize the faithful for the sake of the Faith?

Sienna629 · « **Reply #14 on:** September 02, 2013, 03:50:37 PM »

Quote from: Ethelred

Back on topic...

The Swiss-French Fr Firmin Udressy said in his very first sermon as new district superior of the Neo-SSPX in Germany, that Fr Frank Sauer would have left the SSPX voluntarily and that he would have publicly attacked the superiors (in particular Bp Fellay).
This however is not true. The first official act of the new district superior is untrue. It's only true to Menzingen party principles.

The brave Fr Sauer with his nearly 70 years, just travelled through Austria and so I'd the great pleasure to meet him. He's an old friend of Austria and of my house, and he also served in the Austrian SSPX district for years, before he became Africa missionary for the Vetero-SSPX. He's a friend of Bishop Williamson and follows Archbishop Lefebvre. He also met Fr Pfeiffer recently in Germany, and both priests appreciate each other.
Fr Sauer holds a classic doctoral degree in Latin and Theology and is a bright traditional Catholic theologian (there aren't many anymore, like elsewhere). So it's a big loss for the Neo-SSPX actually.
Whilst the brave father naturally opposes the Neo-SSPX' neo-liberalism and intended deal with Newrome, he never publicly criticised his superiors including Bp Fellay, in order not to scandalise the faithful, who're standing behind the Neo-SSPX leadership unfortunately. He however said countless times in public that Newrome and the Newpope must convert first and only then our problem would be solved. Since 2012 however, when he read the bad letter of Bp Fellay to the three bishops' letter (April 2012), he waited for a sign of God in order to see what to do.

In July 2013 this sign "appeared". Because then the German Neo-SSPX district superior Fr Schmidberger, called-in the brave father and issued an ultimatum: either the brave father signs an assurance docuмent confirming in written form his loyalty to the general superior
. Or, otherwise, the brave father obtains his first written expel warning (admonition). Fr Schmidberger added that this call-in would be an official warning.

The point is, that this demanding of a written loyalty docuмent towards Menzingen was and is unacceptable. Why should a Catholic priest sign such a silly docuмent? He would sign the anti-modernism oath any time, or any similar loyalty docuмent concerning the Catholic doctrine and Church.

So, when Fr Sauer finally obtained his 1st admonition, he didn't wait for the 2nd and 3rd one but felt obliged to just silently leave the Neo-SSPX because he could no longer see any future in it.

As of now he's joining Fr Zaby and both will be the spirituals of the Carmel in Brilon, where Fr Sauer served 12 years or so in the past. The two priests are rotating every few weeks, so that one priest stays at the Carmel and the other priest can undertake pastoral ministries in other parts of the country, also to help their third brother in arms, Fr Weinzierl.
Apparently the good priests found a new place for the Carmel and a nearby priest house, next to the famous place of pilgrimage Altötting in Southern Germany. With a little bit more money, they could soon move the Carmel to its new home. Then not only the Carmel would be in South Germany, but also Fr Sauer and his befriended priests: a true centre of the resistance movement. And also very close to the border of the dukedom of Austria.

This was very similar to the loyalty docuмent demanded from the German Fr Hermann Weinzierl in late 2012, who then also had to leave the SSPX because he could not sign such a docuмent.

The English and the German Lion in 2007 :

God Bless Fr. Sauer, Fr. Zaby, and Fr. Weinzierl..........will add them to our prayer list.

Thanks for sharing!