Author Topic: Guidelines for Resistance Membership (Read 2516 times)

Zeitun · « **on:** June 10, 2013, 12:35:48 PM »

In the spirit of the sanitzing of the Resistance that clearly needs to be done, let's work up a list of membership guidelines so we can determine who is in and who is out.

Reading the various posts of the past weeks on this issue clearly some criteria have already been revealed:

1) Must be a good desktop publisher
2) Must have excellent grammar
3) Must spiritually conform to what the group says
4) Must not have any public sins going back 20 years
5) Must be white
6) Must not post on forums unless a minimum 3 years of seminary was completed or has taken 15 college credits of Philosophy or owns several books by Belloc
7) Must be a Ron Paul supporter

Anyone else care to add to the list of requirements?

Telesphorus · « **Reply #1 on:** June 10, 2013, 12:51:48 PM »

Quote from: Zeitun

In the spirit of the sanitzing of the Resistance that clearly needs to be done, let's work up a list of membership guidelines so we can determine who is in and who is out.

Reading the various posts of the past weeks on this issue clearly some criteria have already been revealed:

1) Must be a good desktop publisher
2) Must have excellent grammar
3) Must spiritually conform to what the group says
4) Must not have any public sins going back 20 years
5) Must be white
6) Must not post on forums unless a minimum 3 years of seminary was completed or has taken 15 college credits of Philosophy or owns several books by Belloc
7) Must be a Ron Paul supporter

Anyone else care to add to the list of requirements?

Who has told you these things?

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #2 on:** June 10, 2013, 12:54:55 PM »

This is a joke, right?

Zeitun · « **Reply #3 on:** June 10, 2013, 01:43:29 PM »

Why not? It's clear that people want to cleanse the Resistance of undesirables. Why wait? Let's start now. We will be seeing Fr. Pfeiffer this month and we can present the list to him in person. And also demand the dismissal of Pablo. We will do it to his face, why bother with a stamp?

Gerard · « **Reply #4 on:** June 10, 2013, 01:44:41 PM »

This is obviously either tongue in cheek or it is a mischievous attempt by a Fellay idolater to construct a stereotype of the Resistance as some kind of racist right wing group. This avoids the need by those in favour of a sellout to engage in serious debate and by means of smears and prejudice the Resistance can be dismissed and vilified. In this way faithful concerned about the direction the SSPX is going will be discouraged from looking any further into the real position of the Resistance and the fact that it is theologically based and is actually more democratic and less authoritarian and more open and diverse than the autocratic and cult like SSPX under Fellay. I attended the Resistance meeting in London last weekend and I noted that a range of people from all backgrounds and ethnicities were there but we were all united in our desire to resist the sellout and continue practising the Faith without compromise. In my case, while being a Traditionalist I am personally on the centre left in British politics so it is a million miles from Ron Paul's position in the US.

Incredulous · « **Reply #5 on:** June 10, 2013, 01:47:46 PM »

Zeitun may be angry, but the topic is interesting.

To put the question in context, "What is an SSPX-Resistance member?"

I just got an email from a friend who thought that neoSSPX "branding" was fine, that Bp. Fellay was a victim and that his detractors are sedes or schismatics.

Being a pre neoSSPX trad, it's hard for me to understand this?

It seems the "SSPX resistance" has many flavors:

1. SSPX-SO (Is Bp. Williamson officially a member?)
2. Trad independents
3. Fr. Feeney trads.
4. SSPV trads
5. Home aloners

Please add more to the list if you have them.

Now, how to unify the SSPX-Resistance trads?

1. Surely Pope Francis is doing his part.
2. Msgr. Fellay is trying hard to unify us too.

Let's set aside a little prayer to Our Lady of Good Success that real Catholic tradition become unified.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #6 on:** June 10, 2013, 01:47:50 PM »

Quote from: Zeitun

Why not? It's clear that people want to cleanse the Resistance of undesirables. Why wait? Let's start now. We will be seeing Fr. Pfeiffer this month and we can present the list to him in person. And also demand the dismissal of Pablo. We will do it to his face, why bother with a stamp?

There are different schools of thought on Pablo. I think the whole thing has been blown way out of proportion. It's good to see Father Pfeiffer has loyalty and gratitude to his friends.

Now let's hope Pablo can keep from drawing undue attention to himself.

SeanGovan · « **Reply #7 on:** June 10, 2013, 01:51:55 PM »

Quote from: Gerard

This is obviously either tongue in cheek or it is a mischievous attempt by a Fellay idolater to construct a stereotype of the Resistance as some kind of racist right wing group. This avoids the need by those in favour of a sellout to engage in serious debate and by means of smears and prejudice the Resistance can be dismissed and vilified. In this way faithful concerned about the direction the SSPX is going will be discouraged from looking any further into the real position of the Resistance and the fact that it is theologically based and is actually more democratic and less authoritarian and more open and diverse than the autocratic and cult like SSPX under Fellay. I attended the Resistance meeting in London last weekend and I noted that a range of people from all backgrounds and ethnicities were there but we were all united in our desire to resist the sellout and continue practising the Faith without compromise. In my case, while being a Traditionalist I am personally on the centre left in British politics so it is a million miles from Ron Paul's position in the US.

The Resistance is not about people. It is about principles. Some members of the Resistance wish exclude people for eccentricity, which has nothing to do with either Faith or morals.

John Grace · « **Reply #8 on:** June 10, 2013, 01:56:46 PM »

Incredulous

Quote

I just got an email from a friend who thought that neoSSPX "branding" was fine, that Bp. Fellay was a victim and that his detractors are sedes or schismatics.

I'm not surprised. The Irish got a recent dose of Fr Pfluger though worryingly no tough questions were asked of this betrayer of the Archbishop.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #9 on:** June 10, 2013, 01:56:58 PM »

Quote

I just got an email from a friend who thought that neoSSPX "branding" was fine

That's just ludicrous. What's apparent to me is that many trads have a broken moral sensibility, and I think the cultish atmosphere of the SSPX has caused that. In particular the value of honesty and fidelity seems to be lost on them.

Quote

that Bp. Fellay was a victim and that his detractors are sedes or schismatics.

There's no argument there, just cult thinking:

"sede is BAD, schismatic" (no matter that the Archbishop said the position was possible)
"being condemned by the SSPX makes one schismatic, but the conciliar church IS the Church" (no matter that Bishop Fellay has juridical no authority over Catholics, again, no regard or understanding of what Archbishop Lefebvre said)

It doesn't matter to them that the resistance priests aren't sedes, they don't understand the SSPX is no the Church, their sense of truth and Catholic identity has been reduced to their identity as part of the SSPX. Sometimes one suspects these +Fellay supporters are becoming as cynical as the priests behind this. Otherwise they must be very dull people.

John Grace · « **Reply #10 on:** June 10, 2013, 02:01:46 PM »

Quote

I think the cultish atmosphere of the SSPX has caused that. In particular the value of honesty and fidelity seems to be lost on them.

It's amazing now there are so many shedding tears at direction of the SSPX yet did nothing for years. The voices in the wilderness did warn but were mocked.

John Grace · « **Reply #11 on:** June 10, 2013, 02:12:24 PM »

Quote from: John Grace

Incredulous

Quote
I just got an email from a friend who thought that neoSSPX "branding" was fine, that Bp. Fellay was a victim and that his detractors are sedes or schismatics.

I'm not surprised. The Irish got a recent dose of Fr Pfluger though worryingly no tough questions were asked of this betrayer of the Archbishop.

I do mean it has worried Fr Pfluger. He is left wondering where he stands.

Zeitun · « **Reply #12 on:** June 10, 2013, 02:27:35 PM »

Quote from: Incredulous

Zeitun may be angry, but the topic is interesting.

Not angry. Just defending my fellow Catholics and hoping I'm not the next one to be turned on by the purists.

Marlelar · « **Reply #13 on:** June 10, 2013, 03:50:21 PM »

Although there are many opinionated people here, their opinion carries no more weight than yours does, just ignore them. No one here has the power to decide who is and who is not traditional "enough".

Marsha

Frances · « **Reply #14 on:** June 10, 2013, 04:58:41 PM »

:jester:If people are excluded for eccentricity, there goes just about everyone! Myself included!