Isn't that going to attract the wrong kind of seminarian? Like, the lavender variety?
I'm not saying all modern SSPX seminarians are lavender. But those young men who ARE of the lavender persuasion will be attracted to this new seminary ideal. THAT is the problem.

It is a foregone conclusion that Traddieland was infiltrated from day one of its existence.  The MO of the Enemy doesn't change once he's got us on the ropes.

Delicacy??? LOL  I am sure His Effeminacy Danielle Dolan could do a Masterclass on that one  

Fiftiesism is just a repackaging of something said by (among others) the anonymous author of The Interior Life. Said author called it what it is: materialism in piety.  He did so in the last part of the 19th century, well before any of our modern ecclesiastical 'heroes' were born.

Yes, the 50s was a spectacular manifestation of the illness diagnosed long before; however, Fiftiesism is (imo) a poor, inaccurate name for the phenomenon.

Perhaps, but it's recent enough, that many people have living memory of it, and even for those who don't, it's readily accessible and culturally relatable.  All you have to do, is to take familiar sitcoms, those lodestars of pop culture, and put an imaginary layer of Catholicism over top of them --- Happy Days, Leave It To Beaver, and so on.  Pretend everybody is Catholic, and imagine what it would look like.  Easy.

Do you have a link to that book on the interior life by an anonymous author?

I am not a tech-savvy online kinda guy, but it was published be Roman Catholic Books and edited by Joseph Tissot.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/19113620-the-interior-life

Bump!

Established in the SSPX seminaries in 2006

THE THREE D'S
------------------
Delicacy - ???
Disinterestedness - "Whatever the superior wants, that's what I want". Complete passivity.
Dependence

Of all the virtues the SSPX American seminary could be pushing on its seminarians -- to the extent they even have a shorthand "Remember the 3 D's!" they can remind each other with -- those three "virtues" are some very curious sɛƖɛctıons for their FUTURE PRIESTS.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


And now, the future is here.
The nexgen SSPX priest is no way equipped to assist the faithful in resisting the CÖVÌD genocide and the "Mark of the Beast".

Proof is in the pudding. Results of the 3-D’s. Started off strong with good “old school” Priestly mentors  and fell victim to the 4th D....DESTROYED!

He talks about blind obedience and never thinking for himself during his entire 7+ year seminary formation.  

I listen to this and just scratch my head.  How, Why, did this happen???



Hate to give this Priest “views” but it gives insight into SSPX priestly formation...or lack their of.

I didn't see the whole video, but I understood that his spiritual director knew about his struggles. He says that he asked to be expelled and that it was taken as a joke.
You really have to know your priests these days. Each and every one of them is a different case. Don't be naive enough to trust just any traditional priest.
On a more positive side, he sounds like a very honest person. He says he doesn't want to be seem as the victim. I believe that he has some chance of repenting and saving his soul before his time is over. Lord, have mercy.

Bump!

The battle between the SSPX and Resistance SEEMS to have subsided as of late -- however, we must remember that if the SEMINARIES HAVE FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGED THEIR FORMATIVE PROCESS AND CURRICULUM, then the SSPX is still toast.

What IS the SSPX, besides the sum of its priests? And I guess a pile of resources (money and real estate)?

If the priests ordained year after year, starting in 2008 or so are much lower quality and of poorer formation, isn't the SSPX doomed to constant decline, year over year, as older priests are outnumbered, sidelined, re-educated, demoralized, retired, and deceased?

The SSPX is still toast, humanly speaking.

Oh, how many sincere Catholics will be ruined by the SSPX seminary? I hope they don't teach Fr. Robinson's Modernist guide yet.

It would be helpful if we could learn about their true seminary curriculum?

Several years back, Fr. Joe Pfeiffer accused the seminary of making dramatic curriculum changes. Reading books which impacted their priestly formation away from Catholic tradition.

If we could just get the list of books for their seminary program, it would give us something solid and be insightful. 

Otherwise, if an ex-seminarian would come forward and explain the program, that would help us to go beyond the 
"Three D's" to see how they are forming them.

I fully agree. I have always favored and preferred facts, hard data, proof, evidence, etc. whenever we can get it.

Unfortunately, we seem to be coming up short in this area. I don't know how many young men leave the SSPX seminary, or where they "hang out" online, if they use the Internet at all. I think we might be running into that phenomenon of the young person who is completely aloof from the Internet, or at least all forums and social media in the broadest definition. This group is larger than you think. I know of countless Trad Catholics IRL, who I couldn't stalk or read their posts online if I wanted to. And that assumes I'm not banned from any Trad forum and that anything on Facebook is public, even if you have to locate them by name (rather than using a search engine, which would make it easier).

In other words:

I know dozens of Trads under 40, or even under 30, who I couldn't "check up on" even if I searched for them on Facebook, and scoured ALL known Trad forums. How can so many Trads not need the company of other Trads? Seems messed up to me.

It would be like 3/4 of Trads being teetotalers and not keeping any alcohol in the house. My first thought would be: is alcoholism that rampant among Trads? It is always easier to completely abstain than to use with moderation. There are some good quotes along these lines. So therefore I have to wonder: why are Trads so particularly unable to balance forums and the Internet? Why do so many of them give up, saying it ruins/takes over their life, prevents them from taking care of their family, etc.? Lots of people manage to "drink responsibly" when it comes to the Internet, social media, and forums. Why are Trads so pathetic in this department?

Again, when I hear someone brag about how they go way over-and-above the norm to completely avoid something, really making themselves stand out, I think to myself "Good for you, that's an excellent way to deal with one's weakness. Give it up completely!"  Except for sin, of course. Abstaining from all sin, or all sin in a given area, shows strength, not weakness.

For example, if a man told me, "I don't even risk accidental glances at magazines by the checkout aisle or immodestly dressed customers. I'm so devoted to avoiding immorality that I pay extra so all my groceries are delivered to me." 

Wouldn't you think that person is ABOVE-AVERAGE weak against sins and temptations of the flesh? I would. Because he's going out of his way, way over-and-above what is normal, to avoid a particular sin.

Likewise, if a man bragged that he "didn't keep any alcohol in the house, on principle" I would assume he had a "past" of alcohol abuse. Why else would he ban alcohol "on principle" considering it's not sinful in itself, and the Catholic Faith doesn't forbid its use?

I know what you're thinking: the Saints went over and above, to heroic heights, to avoid all sins. They stood out. HOWEVER, they were conspicuous in avoiding *all sins* not just one sin. For example, the man who brags about the lengths he goes to avoid (scrupulous non-sin) accidental glances at magazines? He's actually bragging and committing sins of pride. Saints wouldn't do this. And how is that grocery delivery service patron doing with all the OTHER sins that could send him to Hell? Pride? Anger? Lack of charity? Sins of the tongue? How is his prayer life?