Author Topic: In the SSPX you can deviate to the left or to the right (Read 4379 times)

Matthew · « **on:** April 22, 2016, 01:08:04 PM »

In the SSPX pews 5 years ago, you had three types of Catholics:

1. The under-principled: Attending this SSPX chapel because it's closer than my Novus Ordo parish. It's close by. Or because it's a good "Latin Mass". Or any other far-from-ideal reason. In this group are placed all those who attend SSPX chapels but don't really know what the SSPX (or the 50-year fight for Tradition, "Traditional Catholicism") is about.

2. The principled: Attending this SSPX chapel because the SSPX does the best job of fighting Modernism worldwide and looking out for the interests of the Church, forming the next generation of priests in the timeless manner (St. Thomas Aquinas) and following the prudent path of Archbishop Lefebvre. They are doing good, and I want to be a part of this organization. I want to be part of this Resistance movement against Modernism.

NOTE: Within this group, you have two sub-groups:

The heroic: Those who won't compromise in their principles and their love for truth/reality.
The compromisers: Those who are willing to compromise and ignore the facts/evidence in favor of a hopelessly optimistic interpretation.

3. The cultists: Attending this SSPX chapel is mandatory because the SSPX is the Church. The SSPX was specially set up by Providence, and now if you go to an independent chapel or something similar then you must be defective or disobedient. The SSPX is special -- one of a kind. The SSPX can't defect, because Christ promised to Peter that "the gates of hell will not prevail against it." (SSPX = Church, of course!)

We didn't notice this existing division at SSPX chapels across the country until the SSPX went off the right path. Then it became obvious that there is a big difference between #2 and #3. Most of Group #2 left to join the Resistance.

After the SSPX went off the path:

Group #1 still doesn't care -- it's still convenient and close for them. And it's still a rubrically correct Latin Mass.

Group #2 is much smaller. Some people might still be attending the SSPX "for the right reasons" but they are either ignorant of the news, hopelessly optimistic, and/or dipping their big toe in the swimming pool of Group #3.
Group #2 is now completely populated by Group 2 - compromisers, with all the Group 2 - heroic having left for the Resistance.

Group #3 still believes in the SSPX, because the SSPX hasn't gone out of business yet. All the organization and buildings are still there. The cult can continue.

Also note that it frequently happens that members of Group #1 graduate into Group #3, rather than Group #2. Long live human ignorance and fallibility!

Colombiere · « **Reply #1 on:** April 22, 2016, 03:27:04 PM »

Archbishop Lefebvre once referred to those who are "scandalized by truth and reality". What did he mean? Did he mean that they hide from truth or how would you explain this? What are the symptoms of being scandalized by truth?

MyrnaM · « **Reply #2 on:** April 22, 2016, 03:55:52 PM »

He probably meant the truth that scandalizes is the pope is a heretic.

MyrnaM · « **Reply #3 on:** April 22, 2016, 04:04:08 PM »

Just for fun I googled the phrase and came up with this quote:

Quote

"If people are scandalized by the truth, it is better to allow the birth of scandal, than to
abandon the truth" -Pope St. Gregory the Great

Last Tradhican · « **Reply #4 on:** April 22, 2016, 06:32:31 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

In the SSPX pews 5 years ago, you had three types of Catholics:

More like 15-20 years ago.

Also, whenever one undertakes to say "there are x types of people" it does not cover everyone.
I for one did not really attend a real SSPX chapel, since the priest that ran my SSPX chapel was an older priest ordained in the 1950's. I never met any people of the SSPX fanatical fan club at our chapel and we had sedes who attended and all was peaceful. I went to the chapel because the priest was a valid priest. I continue to go to SSPX chapels because I know the priests are validly ordained. I don't now expect anything else. This is what God has in His mercy given me. It may just be that 99% of Catholics are not receiving real sacraments.

wallflower · « **Reply #5 on:** April 22, 2016, 07:43:48 PM »

Quote from: Last Tradhican

Quote from: Matthew
In the SSPX pews 5 years ago, you had three types of Catholics:

More like 15-20 years ago.

I agree that the differences have always been there. Other than the occasional individual parish implosion/splits, there wasn't the threat of an SSPX-wide split. People fought but ultimately still lived and let live within the SSPX.

Charlotte NC Bill · « **Reply #6 on:** April 22, 2016, 08:11:23 PM »

I think those 3 groups pretty well captured it. My friend Terry S. is in Group 3. Most of my chapel is 1 and 3 obviously. There are several people there I don't mind talking too. Most are, to some extent, scandalized by truth and ignorant of reality. And no " scandalized" by truth is more than not being able to handle the fact that the Pope is firmly in the camp of the enemy. It's just that ignorant, Americanist, movement "conservative" lemming that disbelieve reality until they get it from their Friends on Fox. One little gnome told me that she agreed that she'd like to see the Muslims driven from the Holy Land but not the Jєωs. I said, " Oh, those Christ-hating Jєωs..you like them don't you?" Actually the little gnome ( whose daughter was married for 3 mos. ) doesn't know that Israel has given ISIS air support, doesn't know that Israel has treated the ISIS wounded. Doesn't know that Israeli officers and soldiers have been found among the ISIS dead. The little gnomes and their Americanist husbands must be avoided unless you want your Sunday ruined. ( That's what they're aiming for btw more often than not )...they're not worth talking to because they don't know anything. They probably still think the Muslims did 9-11 because they're utterly incapable of thinking a thought that they know isn't Jєω-approved.
Now Jacob Rothschild and George Soros are using throngs of Arabs/Africans to sack and destroy Europe and these people still don't get it...All Pablo and Pfeiffer care about is that " sheep stealing Puerto Rican" priest. That and spreading venom against the bishop they should be working for.
My friend Terry thinks the enemy is afraid of the Traditional Sacraments. Most of these people are too afraid of the Jєωs to even call them out on their lies ( even in pvt conversation ) but they think that the enemy is afraid of their smells and bells...Madness. :reporter:

Wessex · « **Reply #7 on:** April 23, 2016, 04:32:34 AM »

To the observant these distinctions were apparent from the beginning. To be unhappy with the unfolding conciliar church did not mean unity with regard to specific objections to new doctrine and liturgical practice, let alone the intractable position of heretical popes which continues to bedevil the SSPX and its derivatives. ABL's new institution was far from a haven of precise religious belief; more like a vehicle where an opposition can fight between themselves in various little corners.

Habituation propelled most church-goers before V2; a dose of Sunday mystery and magic was not going to unduly affect their real lives. The V2 solution aimed to cut through all this mystery and magic and sanctify modernism and proceeded to make itself redundant to those whose lives were not empty. Conciliarism confirmed that religion was optional while traditionalism embarked on various missions to justify itself by firstly reintroducing ancient liturgy which was the easy bit and secondly bringing in strict doctrine which was going to be somewhat harder. I would say folk are constantly balancing the inconvenience of not being mainstream with some lingering religious instinct without too much regard for partisanship.

JPaul · « **Reply #8 on:** April 23, 2016, 09:39:05 AM »

Quote from: MyrnaM

He probably meant the truth that scandalizes is the pope is a heretic.

Which in the SSPX can be known, but never said.

Charlotte NC Bill · « **Reply #9 on:** April 23, 2016, 09:51:19 PM »

At one time the SSPX inspired me...now it simply does not. There's no greater militancy than at a typical NO parish. Their whole focus is on THE LITURGY and a conservative atmosphere, nothing else.

kingferdinand · « **Reply #10 on:** April 24, 2016, 07:57:21 PM »

In the SSPX-MC, under the able leadership of Msgrs Williamson, Faure and Aquinas, you can move up and down. :jumping2:

Matthew · « **Reply #11 on:** April 24, 2016, 09:16:27 PM »

Quote from: kingferdinand

In the SSPX-MC, under the able leadership of Msgrs Williamson, Faure and Aquinas, you can move up and down. :jumping2:

First of all, you are woefully confused and/or uninformed. The SSPX-MC is the name Fr. Pfeiffer chose for his ever-dwindling group in Boston, KY. They currently have 2 priests, with a few others they'd like to "claim". But the reality is that MOST resistance Faithful have rejected them completely or partially (usually in the form of, "We'll host Fr. Hewko but not Fr. Pfeiffer") due to the ridiculous nonsense coming out of Boston, KY. Most of Fr. Pfeiffer's missions are a mere shell of their former selves, usually a small group set up as a "protest mission" with a new, die-hard, hand-picked leader (whose loyalty for Fr. Pfeiffer would rival the loyalty exhibited by Japanese Kamikaze pilots, or members of the Jim Jones cult) after the main group found a more stable Mass situation with one of Fr. Pfeiffer's countless "enemies" (who are all, objectively speaking, good priests and a healthy section of the Resistance.)

But the others you mention are not SSPX-MC. They are "Resistance" or part of an loose coalition of independent chapels solidly dedicated to the position of +Lefebvre.

Anyhow, taken together with your first post, comparing Fr. Zendejas to Bishop Fellay and Pope Francis (you said that English was a second language for all of them)...but then you also threw Archbishop Lefebvre in there. So you think all four of them are "peas in a pod"?

That would make sense though -- since you reject +Williamson, +Faure, +Thomas Aquinas, and Fr. Zendejas, you might as well reject Archbishop Lefebvre. Because THEY ARE 5 peas from the same pod!

Anyhow, I've seen the kind of "contribution" you have to offer this forum. No thanks.

Even if your posts cost 0.0000001 cents to store on my server's hard drive, I would still consider it too expensive!

Conspiracy_Factist · « **Reply #12 on:** April 25, 2016, 08:22:39 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

In the SSPX pews 5 years ago, you had three types of Catholics:

1. The under-principled: Attending this SSPX chapel because it's closer than my Novus Ordo parish. It's close by. Or because it's a good "Latin Mass". Or any other far-from-ideal reason. In this group are placed all those who attend SSPX chapels but don't really know what the SSPX (or the 50-year fight for Tradition, "Traditional Catholicism") is about.

2. The principled: Attending this SSPX chapel because the SSPX does the best job of fighting Modernism worldwide and looking out for the interests of the Church, forming the next generation of priests in the timeless manner (St. Thomas Aquinas) and following the prudent path of Archbishop Lefebvre. They are doing good, and I want to be a part of this organization. I want to be part of this Resistance movement against Modernism.

NOTE: Within this group, you have two sub-groups:

The heroic: Those who won't compromise in their principles and their love for truth/reality.
The compromisers: Those who are willing to compromise and ignore the facts/evidence in favor of a hopelessly optimistic interpretation.

3. The cultists: Attending this SSPX chapel is mandatory because the SSPX is the Church. The SSPX was specially set up by Providence, and now if you go to an independent chapel or something similar then you must be defective or disobedient. The SSPX is special -- one of a kind. The SSPX can't defect, because Christ promised to Peter that "the gates of hell will not prevail against it." (SSPX = Church, of course!)

We didn't notice this existing division at SSPX chapels across the country until the SSPX went off the right path. Then it became obvious that there is a big difference between #2 and #3. Most of Group #2 left to join the Resistance.

After the SSPX went off the path:

Group #1 still doesn't care -- it's still convenient and close for them. And it's still a rubrically correct Latin Mass.

Group #2 is much smaller. Some people might still be attending the SSPX "for the right reasons" but they are either ignorant of the news, hopelessly optimistic, and/or dipping their big toe in the swimming pool of Group #3.
Group #2 is now completely populated by Group 2 - compromisers, with all the Group 2 - heroic having left for the Resistance.

Group #3 still believes in the SSPX, because the SSPX hasn't gone out of business yet. All the organization and buildings are still there. The cult can continue.

Also note that it frequently happens that members of Group #1 graduate into Group #3, rather than Group #2. Long live human ignorance and fallibility!

I would consider myself group 2, I go to a sspx mass because my choice is that or stay home, if the priest was what I consider to be a modernist i would not go, I've been to a resistance mass, I like father Hewko but having 3 kids I think it would do more harm than good to have mass once a blue moon. I like what the priest at my chapel says, he speaks against the pope and vatican 2, if he ever stopped I would leave...if Bishop Fellay was my priestI would leave

.he like all the sspx priests and the resistance priests are wrong to think Bergogllio is our pope in my opinion but I don't hold it against them.I believe the mass is valid . He also teaches properly about no salvation outside the Church, although if pressed downstairs he does believe in the possibility in the nonsensical implicit baptism of desire...he has taken down the picture of Bergolio so i don't have to see that wretch of a face going downstairs....please tell me why I should leave the sspx at this time

Matthew · « **Reply #13 on:** April 25, 2016, 09:17:17 PM »

Quote from: Conspiracy_Factist

I would consider myself group 2, I go to a sspx mass because my choice is that or stay home, if the priest was what I consider to be a modernist i would not go, I've been to a resistance mass, I like father Hewko but having 3 kids I think it would do more harm than good to have mass once a blue moon. I like what the priest at my chapel says, he speaks against the pope and vatican 2, if he ever stopped I would leave...if Bishop Fellay was my priestI would leave

You bring up a very good point. Not ALL the "non-compromisers" have left; some simply have no other options. And for some of them, it is a matter of principle to choose a valid Mass over being home alone. Especially when you factor in the specific details of your family situation and the SSPX priest involved.

It's a question of prudence.

I shouldn't have said "all the non-compromisers have left". That is an exaggeration a.k.a. an error.

Anyhow, my point was that these 3 groups were all sitting next to each other 5 years ago, and now they're not. What changed? The apple cart was upset, that's all. The instability that was always there has now come to the surface.

MyrnaM · « **Reply #14 on:** April 26, 2016, 09:10:18 AM »

My observation is seeing, each week, more and more new people at Mount St. Michael. Not sure if they are just checking us out or looking for a new home. It is obvious they are Traditionalist, one can tell by their piousness.

It was a short time ago, I knew almost everyone, not so much anymore. I do know for sure of one family that is actually considering moving their family to Spokane because of what is going on within the SSPX. SSPX I have heard always had many sedevacantist among them, so for many it won't be too difficult of an adjustment. Also our priest very seldom bring up the subject of the Conciliar popes from the pulpit. Our sermons are 99% about Catholic devotions. i.e. this month is dedicated to the Blessed Sacrament so we are hearing much about Our Lord presence in our chapel.

I confess I fear about the trouble within the SSPX and how this will affect us once the enemy has SSPX in the palm of their hand they will come after us. It will take a lot before we are led to the slaughter since there is not incentive to move us. Violence is what I see for us.