Quote from: Sigismund

Quote from: CathMomof7

I left Mass today very confused and disturbed.  My husband left with the same impression, only he is prone to hot-headedness, so he was a bit angry as well.

Our priest today publicly chastised those of us who visit internet forums and criticize the superiors of the Society.  He gave a sermon on Obedience as taught by St. Ignatius.  He even went so far as to say "if you superiors tell you black is white then you must believe it."  He said, also, that he has been to these forums and read some of the comments criticizing Bishop Fellay and Fr. Rostand, and that those who are doing this are no true Catholics, but Catholics without charity.

Worse, he compared those critical of the Society to Protestants, inferring that this is what Martin Luther did.  He said we are wrong to think we can "form our own opinions" about what is happening within the Society.

This is not Catholicism.  It is Stalinism.  A priest without jurisdiction can not command you to do anything.  And criticizing the SSPX only makes you a Protestant if the SSPX has decided to formalize the arrogance that I have always thought was just below the surface within it and formally declare that it IS the Church.  

Well said, Sigismund!

So.......................

Criticizing the SSPX only makes you a Protestant if the SSPX has decided to
formalize the arrogance ... and formally declare that it IS the Church, in which
case you "protested" against the Church...


Hmmm... something doesn't quite add up here. For one, "to decide to formalize
and formally declare" literally does not mean that the declaration took place. To
decide to do something is not the same thing as doing it, in this case. It's not like
having lust in your heart and thereby committing mortal sin, for example. All
it literally means is that the INTENTION to declare is there. That's not the same
thing as a formal declaration, by ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION..........................






It took me a while to "unpack" this message....


Criticizing the SSPX would only appear to

make you a Protestant if you were to believe that

the SSPX had formally declared that it IS the Church,

in which case you would have

"protested" against what would seem to be

the Church.



How would the SSPX formalize its arrogance in

this matter? For example, if it were to proclaim that

"outside the SSPX there is no salvation," or, that

"membership in the SSPX is necessary for anyone

to be truly Catholic."



There. Message unpacked............................  :reporter:

I'm sorry to hear about the priest acting so rudely.  Has he been unpleasant on other occasions?

If you left the SSPX chapel, is there a sede chapel or an independent chapel that you could assist?  

Or would you become a home aloner?  In the absence of any traditional chapels, this would be an acceptable alternative.  

God help the SSPX in these hours of turbulence.

God bless the CMRI and all Traditional Catholic.
         

Quote from: Sigismund

Quote from: CathMomof7

I left Mass today very confused and disturbed.  My husband left with the same impression, only he is prone to hot-headedness, so he was a bit angry as well.

Our priest today publicly chastised those of us who visit internet forums and criticize the superiors of the Society.  He gave a sermon on Obedience as taught by St. Ignatius.  He even went so far as to say "if you superiors tell you black is white then you must believe it."  He said, also, that he has been to these forums and read some of the comments criticizing Bishop Fellay and Fr. Rostand, and that those who are doing this are no true Catholics, but Catholics without charity.

Worse, he compared those critical of the Society to Protestants, inferring that this is what Martin Luther did.  He said we are wrong to think we can "form our own opinions" about what is happening within the Society.

This is not Catholicism.  It is Stalinism.  A priest without jurisdiction can not command you to do anything.  And criticizing the SSPX only makes you a Protestant if the SSPX has decided to formalize the arrogance that I have always thought was just below the surface within it and formally declare that it IS the Church.  

Well said, Sigismund!

Matthew,

Perhaps it was well said after you corrected my typos.  Thanks.

Our priest today publicly chastised those of us who visit internet forums and criticize the superiors of the Society.  He gave a sermon on Obedience as taught by St. Ignatius.  He even went so far as to say "if you superiors tell you black is white then you must believe it."  He said, also, that he has been to these forums and read some of the comments criticizing Bishop Fellay and Fr. Rostand, and that those who are doing this are no true Catholics, but Catholics without charity.

I read this to my 19 year old daughter.  She was shocked.  She suggested that if this ever happened at the SSPX chapel we attend about twice a month she would stand up immediately and tell father (during his sermon) that this is evil.  

If a "superior" (and please note that there are no SSPX priests who have jurisdiction over the lay faithful, so neither he nor Bishop Fellay is a legitimate superior of any of the laity) commands us to believe what is opposed to reason (e.g., "black is white") then he is a cult leader, a wolf in sheep's clothing.  

Has it really come down to this?  Is the SSPX being transformed into a cult?  Just yesterday I would never have believed it.  I am beginning to become unsure.

The church is made up of human beings. And very fewe are exempt from being worthy of some criticism. Even Paul criticised Peter when he was wrong.  

It's nearly two years since 'William of Norwich' posted a text on Angel Queen and then Ignis Ardens. In reading the first post on this thread, it reminded me of the piece from 'White Rose Rebel'? I am open to correction but believe a 'White Rose Rebel' posted the following.

Request for assistance from those who love Catholic Tradition‏

Those who love Catholic Tradition asked among other things the following.

These questions, let it be always remembered, are centred upon Maximilian Krah and his meteoric rise in importance in the internal work of the SSPX in Germany, Austria and Switzerland, most specially in relation to finance, administrative “asset management” and legal matters.
These questions are only tangentially and incidentally related to Mgr. Williamson, and whether one likes or dislikes him, agrees or disagrees with him on any subject, is not relevant to the work of the team.

The work of the team is concentrated on why Krah has emerged, what he is involved in, and why he has received patronage at high level. That many reasonable questions, backed by irrefutable evidence in the public domain, have been posed and not responded to only adds to the suspicion that replies have not been forthcoming because the truth would be something less than edifying.

The concerns outlined in this thread suggests

CONCLUSION: Help, however minor it might appear, in relation to any question, in whole or in part, will be most welcome. Remember that: while vital and disturbing questions remain unanswered by those in a position (laymen, laywomen, priest or bishop) to furnish those answers to the faithful who are the raison d’être of the SSPX, Catholic Tradition remains at risk. Vatican II was not the cause of subversive Modernism, but the long-prepared fruit of subversion by Modernists working in the dark at all levels of the Church.

Questions have not been answered regarding a very disturbing episode in the SSPX. Those who love Catholic Tradition cannot and will not sit back and watch the Society be destroyed by these dark forces at work.

Catholic Tradition remains at risk.The faithful are the raison d’être of the SSPX

Quote from: OP

Our priest today publicly chastised those of us who visit internet forums and criticize the superiors of the Society.  He gave a sermon on Obedience as taught by St. Ignatius.  He even went so far as to say "if you superiors tell you black is white then you must believe it."  He said, also, that he has been to these forums and read some of the comments criticizing Bishop Fellay and Fr. Rostand, and that those who are doing this are no true Catholics, but Catholics without charity.

I read this to my 19 year old daughter.  She was shocked.  She suggested that if this ever happened at the SSPX chapel we attend about twice a month she would stand up immediately and tell father (during his sermon) that this is evil.  

If a "superior" (and please note that there are no SSPX priests who have jurisdiction over the lay faithful, so neither he nor Bishop Fellay is a legitimate superior of any of the laity) commands us to believe what is opposed to reason (e.g., "black is white") then he is a cult leader, a wolf in sheep's clothing.  

Has it really come down to this?  Is the SSPX being transformed into a cult?  Just yesterday I would never have believed it.  I am beginning to become unsure.

I am sure there must have been be a quiproquo somewhere. St Ignatius in his Rules for Thinking with the Church indeed did write:

Thirteenth Rule. To be right in everything, we ought always to hold that the white which I see, is black, if the Hierarchical Church so decides it, believing that between Christ our Lord, the Bridegroom, and the Church, His Bride, there is the same Spirit which governs and directs us for the salvation of our souls. Because by the same Spirit and our Lord Who gave the ten Commandments, our holy Mother the Church is directed and governed.

and then Fr. La Roux mentioned the beautiful scenery of Virginia as something desirable.

There was nothing to prevent expansion of the Winona facility for a fraction of the cost.

They wanted a change of location.  Warmer, and close to the corridors of power.