Author Topic: Fr. Zendejas to provide WEEKLY Mass in Texas - Houston and San Antonio (Read 7490 times)

JPaul · « **Reply #15 on:** May 11, 2015, 11:32:54 AM »

Quote from: BrJoseph

Let's hope that the new priest makes a public statement about why he is helping the Resistance, so that his new parishioners can properly assess his stance, and whether it is safe to attend his Masses.

No, let's not. This is what we need to fight the revolution, independent priests limit themselves to service who will service a general area and commit to doing so regularly. We do not need partisan sectarian priests who over reach and spend themselves flying hither and yon in an unpredictable manner., and who are locked into the failed SSPX model and world.
Then two or three of these priests working together can make sure that the base area is reliably covered so that folks may travel long distances and be sure that the sacraments will be there at the end of the journey.

And then one or another can start to do away missions to help other starved places on a defined but semi-regular basis.

This will be the truly effective model of loose associations which can actually work, without the encuмbrances of sectarian distractions.

This is good news.

Graham · « **Reply #16 on:** May 11, 2015, 11:34:58 AM »

Quote from: Matthew

No, Fr. Zendejas is still working on his original retreat house plans.

The story GS posted is strange. Did you learn anything about happened there?

Matthew · « **Reply #17 on:** May 11, 2015, 11:45:30 AM »

All I know is that there's a rumor that Fr. Zendejas "gave up", but trust me, he hasn't.

Graham · « **Reply #18 on:** May 11, 2015, 11:50:01 AM »

Do you know who was protesting and why? The story isn't detailed and doesn't add up to me.

Matthew · « **Reply #19 on:** May 11, 2015, 11:51:52 AM »

Quote from: J.Paul

Quote from: BrJoseph
Let's hope that the new priest makes a public statement about why he is helping the Resistance, so that his new parishioners can properly assess his stance, and whether it is safe to attend his Masses.

No, let's not. This is what we need to fight the revolution, independent priests limit themselves to service who will service a general area and commit to doing so regularly. We do not need partisan sectarian priests who over reach and spend themselves flying hither and yon in an unpredictable manner., and who are locked into the failed SSPX model and world.
Then two or three of these priests working together can make sure that the base area is reliably covered so that folks may travel long distances and be sure that the sacraments will be there at the end of the journey.

And then one or another can start to do away missions to help other starved places on a defined but semi-regular basis.

This will be the truly effective model of loose associations which can actually work, without the encuмbrances of sectarian distractions.

This is good news.

I won't comment on who started this "guilty until proven innocent", "25 year spotless reputation counts for nothing now" BULLCRAP.

All I know is that this kind of "written abjuration", "signing statements", "red-light all competing chapels" CRAP is usually found in SEDEVACANTIST circles. No offense to the sedevacantists on here -- I'm actually making a point. The priest we're talking about is ON THE SURFACE allergic to sedevacantism, like a dogmatic sedeplenist. But:

He is on his own, with no authority above him.
He decides on every issue himself; he is the highest law for his "group"
He issues dispensations for his Faithful to miss weekly Sunday Mass when he's not available to say Mass for them.
He deals in signing statements, written abjurations, and boycotts other competing chapels.
He claims it's mortally sinful to attend the "competition"
He takes an extreme position (NOT the classic "SSPX" position) on Vatican II and reunion with Rome. This point is harder to nail down; maybe it would be a good topic for its own thread.

Read over those TRUE things that this priest is doing. Do they, or do they not, sound like the actions of a sedevacantist?

Matthew · « **Reply #20 on:** May 11, 2015, 11:57:44 AM »

Quote from: Graham

Do you know who was protesting and why? The story isn't detailed and doesn't add up to me.

The neighbors were protesting, because a certain "amateur exorcist" did his best to make them angry and against the idea of Fr. Zendejas setting up a retreat house there. Always nice to see the TRUE SIDE of people...

While we're on the topic, did you know that the amateur exorcist in question doesn't attend Sunday Mass, not even when he's in Boston, KY?

And he's the right-hand man who runs the operation. Terrifying.

George · « **Reply #21 on:** May 11, 2015, 12:08:29 PM »

Quote from: Graham

Quote from: Matthew
No, Fr. Zendejas is still working on his original retreat house plans.

The story GS posted is strange. Did you learn anything about happened there?

I found some similar stories

http://www.newstimes.com/search/?action=search&channel=local&inlineLink=1&searchindex=gsa&query=%22BRN+Associates%22

JPaul · « **Reply #22 on:** May 11, 2015, 12:23:46 PM »

Thank you, as we see, the self centered concerns of the sectarians hinder greatly the unity and effectiveness of priests of integrity who are trying to serve struggling souls in a straightforward simple manner.

Each good priest knows his duty under the charter and mission of the Church of Christ, and each will do his duty or will fail in some way to hold to that duty.

Chasing Bishop Fellay's coat tails and beating sedevacantists into the ground have nothing to do with this duty. They are distractions, and in fact, and allies of the conciliarist revolution.

If the bus of the SSPX is broken down, then searching about for another relic to limp along is a waste of time. It is time to get out and start walking towards your own salvation, hopefully being led by those few priests who have already hit the bricks by their own initiative.

Judging the efforts of such priests by how they will benefit, or not, this or that sect is nonsense.
Take what the Lord has given, and be glad of it.

And start walking..........................

TKGS · « **Reply #23 on:** May 11, 2015, 12:25:53 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Read over those TRUE things that this priest is doing. Do they, or do they not, sound like the actions of a sedevacantist?

No, Matthew, the list you wrote above does not "sound like the actions of a sedevacantist". They sound like the actions of a cult leader.

There are sedevacantists who do all these things though I don't have any experience with them. I've only read about them on CathInfo. I've never actually met any of these priests.

On the other hand, I have met a couple radically anti-sedevacantist priests who do most (if not all) of these things. The local SSPX priest recently forbid anyone in his chapel to attend a series of catechism classes being presented by a resistance priest who came to town for that purpose at the invitation of a family. (The catechism classes, by the way, did not address the SSPX or the resistance at all.) He said it would be a "conflict of interests".

The sedevacantist opinion has one, and only one, meaning: The See of Peter is, at present, vacant. None of these things you list here are peculiar to sedevacantists nor are they descriptive of sedevacantists in general. I simply do not understand why people seem to have a need to bring up sedevacantism in completely unrelated topics. Regardless of what you want to believe, sedevacantism is not a boogeyman that you need to ward off with a garlic necklace, nor is it a stick with which to beat your opponents.

We understand that the SSPX (Resistance and otherwise) has an irrational fear of being labeled a sede, but discuss the disputes between the Neo-SSPX and the Resistance all you want; just leave the sedevacantists out of it.

hollingsworth · « **Reply #24 on:** May 11, 2015, 12:51:58 PM »

J. Paul:

Quote

No, let's not. This is what we need to fight the revolution, independent priests limit themselves to service who will service a general area and commit to doing so regularly. We do not need partisan sectarian priests who over reach and spend themselves flying hither and yon in an unpredictable manner., and who are locked into the failed SSPX model and world.

I agree 100%. I'm afraid the kind of priests you describe upset the the work of independent, loosely federated chapels here in the north Idaho area. We ourselves refused to go along with the "Marian Corp" headquartered in KY. That is against the model prescribed by Bp. Williamson. It won't work in the long run; and it isn't working very well now. Imagine a priest asking the faithful to wait for him to come out every six or seven weeks. What that priest does is to drive all other priests off. He stakes his claim to a certain chapel and arbitrarily sets himself up as its "pastor." On top of that, he may claim that other priests who might be available, may have certain doctrinal disabilities. Like, no way!
I wish we could get Fr. Zendejas out here on a regular basis, or someone like him, one who operates according to the loosely federated Williamson idea, not a preist who merely wants to re-establish SSPX-2

Matthew · « **Reply #25 on:** May 11, 2015, 12:55:18 PM »

Like I've said before, TKGS, I recognize that there are some good Catholics who are sedevacantist. But nevertheless, there might be a fundamental issue with authority that arises in MOST cases.

Reference my thread, "So you've decided to become a Sedevacantist". You have to choose (quickly or with much thought, it doesn't matter) the answer to about 3 dozen questions. People will answer them differently, and consider others with varying opinions to be heretics in many cases.

http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/So-You-Decided-To-Become-A-Sedevacantist

Anyhow, this whole sub-topic is derailing the thread.

Matthew · « **Reply #26 on:** May 11, 2015, 01:01:36 PM »

Quote from: hollingsworth

J. Paul:
Quote
No, let's not. This is what we need to fight the revolution, independent priests limit themselves to service who will service a general area and commit to doing so regularly. We do not need partisan sectarian priests who over reach and spend themselves flying hither and yon in an unpredictable manner., and who are locked into the failed SSPX model and world.

I agree 100%. I'm afraid the kind of priests you describe upset the the work of independent, loosely federated chapels here in the north Idaho area. We ourselves refused to go along with the "Marian Corp" headquartered in KY. That is against the model prescribed by Bp. Williamson. It won't work in the long run; and it isn't working very well now. Imagine a priest asking the faithful to wait for him to come out every six or seven weeks. What that priest does is to drive all other priests off. He stakes his claim to a certain chapel and arbitrarily sets himself up as its "pastor." On top of that, he may claim that other priests who might be available, may have certain doctrinal disabilities. Like, no way!
I wish we could get Fr. Zendejas out here on a regular basis, or someone like him, one who operates according to the loosely federated Williamson idea, not a preist who merely wants to re-establish SSPX-2

Actually, I would like to inject one idea --

It's not so much the "trying to set up SSPX 2.0" that is the problem -- it's WHO is trying to do it. Each man is given different gifts from the Lord.

Some men are given the virtues necessary to be a good missionary priest.
Other men are given the virtues of organization, planning.

I think we all know which group the head of the SSPX-MC is in.

Sienna629 · « **Reply #27 on:** May 11, 2015, 09:06:55 PM »

Quote from: Matto

I thought he was supposed to say Mass in New Jersey and Connecticut every week for a year.

As I recall, I didn't think he got a very encouraging welcome there.....

Sienna629 · « **Reply #28 on:** May 11, 2015, 09:10:17 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: Centroamerica

This is very good news! A nice victory for Texas.

Indeed --

Viva Cristo Rey!

Father is a tireless warrior for Christ the King. I am particularly impressed, though, by his level of self-control. In particular, the way he has subjected his emotions to his reason. You can tell he has emotions by his speech and his actions, but he controls most of the negative ones quite well. For example, the emotion of discouragement. Despite lots of opposition, he doesn't let himself get discouraged.

I guess you can't teach the Ignatian Exercises for years without taking a lot of it to heart!

Lucky you! We will pray for him to remain strong.

MaterDominici · « **Reply #29 on:** May 11, 2015, 09:28:45 PM »

Quote from: Graham

Do you know who was protesting and why? The story isn't detailed and doesn't add up to me.

Officially, the residents in the neighborhood are the ones opposing the purchase and their reasons concern things like traffic, water quality, safety, etc, but unofficially the SSPX doesn't want him there and have made themselves available to convince the locals that they don't want him there either.