I have known Fr. Stafki since he was a little boy.  Unfortunately, Hollingsworth really has him pegged.  He is a very nice priest who is unfailingly cordial, but he will always choose to obey his superiors' orders and execute those orders with exactitude.  He has been trained to prize obedience above all other virtues.

Fr. Stafki's case is classic.

Just because a priest is good, holy and highly beloved by God doesn't mean we should imitate that priest.

Worthy of imitation and full of Sanctifying Grace/charity are NOT the same thing.

For example, there are probably some very holy adults with Downs Syndrome living a holy child's life. But due to the fact that my mind is much more complicated (filled with thoughts and information) than theirs, I can say without hesitation that their path to holiness is NOT God's will for me.

Fr. Stafki believes that the will of God is expressed in the will of HIS superiors, and that it trumps even the cause of truth. He is wrong about this, but since he doesn't know that he is wrong, he is not guilty.

Subjective innocence might get a person to heaven. God judges you based on what you knew and what you understood. But subjective innocence doesn't make you worthy of admiration or imitation.

I'll see your "Fr. Stafki trusts his neo-SSPX superiors" and raise you "Fr X in the Novus Ordo believes that Obedience is where it's at, and that one has to be officially united to the Pope/Conciliar Church to be good." There are plenty of those. I'm sure there are a few good, holy priests in the Novus Ordo. It doesn't make them any less wrong about their priorities.

But for those of us "who know better", joining them is simply not an option. God has given us more, and he expects more of us.

Specifically, we know that Obedience comes under the cardinal virtue of Justice. Whereas Faith, Hope and Charity are Theological virtues which have FIRST RANK. That is why it is not wise or permitted to follow OBEDIENCE when it goes against FAITH. You are chasing after a lesser good (a hundred dollar bill is blowing away) and ignoring a greater good (saving your family from your crashed vehicle, which is on fire).

The fact that a man was confused, emotional, and didn't know what to do MIGHT excuse his behavior chasing after a hundred dollar bill he dropped after getting into an accident. But the fact remains that he SHOULD HAVE saved his family and not worried about the hundred dollar bill blowing away.

That is why we can say that objectively speaking WE ARE CORRECT and everyone who disagrees with us is simply wrong. Truth is objective.

That is also why we can't obey our parents when they command us to do something  against charity, like murder someone. Faith/Hope/Charity always come first.

In conclusion, I have nothing against Fr. Stafki personally, so I most certainly don't hate him. I don't need to tear him down. God love him, I hope he saves his soul. But I can't follow his course of action, as it's objectively less than the good I am currently following. If I joined him, it would involve a malicious compromise on my part.

But for me to get to where Fr. Stafki is, would involve something bad: willful ignoring of the truth, and/or brainwashing and/or drugs and/or brain surgery.

I can't un-know what I know. And it's not just my personal opinion, but it's right there in the manuals of Catholic morality. Therefore I can't follow him or any other "holy priest" in the neo-SSPX.

I'm learning a lot from the last few pages of posts.

I could be wrong, but it's possible that given time, Fr. Stafki (who is not unintelligent, and who strives for holiness, and expects others to do so as well) may see the problems in the SSPX for himself. He evidently doesn't see them now, but that could change, even though he places too much importance on obedience to SSPX leadership. After all, Fr. Pierre Roy's situation was similar, until he woke up, and realized that something was very wrong.

It can be really difficult to try to get Catholics to see that there's a big problem. How can we convince them of it? They may just have to see it for themselves, hopefully.

1. There are highly intelligent men who apparently believe in atheistic evolution -- that the whole ordered universe came from nothing, with no Creator. So intelligence itself isn't a guarantee of anything.

2. I agree with you on this one point: that we should/must hold out hope for Fr. Stafki to "see the light" at some point, if we are giving him the benefit of the doubt at all.

Either he
A) sees it already and made his (malicious) choice, or
B) is innocent, but doesn't see the problem yet.

You really only have those 2 options.

For Bishop Fellay, I'm choosing A). I would make the same choice for certain other SSPX priests who are hostile to the Resistance, being willing to use the Devil's handbook when fighting them. Sadly, I must also place Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer in this category.

Our Lord said, "By their fruits you shall know them."

But for those priests who haven't shown evidence of malice (like Fr. Stafki), the virtue of Charity inclines me to choose B). To assume he is innocent, hold out hope for him, and pray that he sees the light.

Quote from: Meg

I'm learning a lot from the last few pages of posts.

I could be wrong, but it's possible that given time, Fr. Stafki (who is not unintelligent, and who strives for holiness, and expects others to do so as well) may see the problems in the SSPX for himself. He evidently doesn't see them now, but that could change, even though he places too much importance on obedience to SSPX leadership. After all, Fr. Pierre Roy's situation was similar, until he woke up, and realized that something was very wrong.

It can be really difficult to try to get Catholics to see that there's a big problem. How can we convince them of it? They may just have to see it for themselves, hopefully.

1. There are highly intelligent men who apparently believe in atheistic evolution -- that the whole ordered universe came from nothing, with no Creator. So intelligence itself isn't a guarantee of anything.

2. I agree with you on this one point: that we should/must hold out hope for Fr. Stafki to "see the light" at some point, if we are giving him the benefit of the doubt at all.

Either he
A) sees it already and made his (malicious) choice, or
B) is innocent, but doesn't see the problem yet.

You really only have those 2 options.

For Bishop Fellay, I'm choosing A). I would make the same choice for certain other SSPX priests who are hostile to the Resistance, being willing to use the Devil's handbook when fighting them. Sadly, I must also place Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer in this category.

Our Lord said, "By their fruits you shall know them."

But for those priests who haven't shown evidence of malice (like Fr. Stafki), the virtue of Charity inclines me to choose B). To assume he is innocent, hold out hope for him, and pray that he sees the light.

Makes a lot of sense. Thanks.

However, in you subsequent post after this one, describing how a priest needs to know about the world in order to lead his flock, I think that there's truth to it, but how does it differ from, say, Protestants and progressive Catholics who believe that priests should be able to marry in order to relate to their flock (just to cite one example).

Is the internet really the best way to learn about the world? How did priests learn about the world before the internet existed? You know a lot more about the Faith than I do (since I'm a convert). But these are questions that seem important. Thanks.

I have known Fr. Stafki since he was a little boy.  Unfortunately, Hollingsworth really has him pegged.  He is a very nice priest who is unfailingly cordial, but he will always choose to obey his superiors' orders and execute those orders with exactitude.  He has been trained to prize obedience above all other virtues.

I am sure Fr. Stafki really strives to do the right thing. I have no other impression in that regard.

However, the problem with the first impression he made upon the parish in his first sermon is one of utter tone-deafness.

We had been being lectured FOR MONTHS every Sunday by Fr. Wegner to "pay our debt" and stop being such "slobs" and "pigs, while being encouraged to engage in Stasi-like behavior and "report our fellow parishioners to the priests."

So, for Fr. Stafki to show up and immediately give his opening sermon on why we all need to GIVE THEM MORE MONEY - when our money has been misspent - and why we should NOT TALK ON THE INTERNET, but go talk to him instead, seems like he was taking MARCHING ORDERS from someone on what to say in his introduction. Now, I don't know WHO exactly is giving the marching orders, but I think it is safe to assume it is his District Superior, Fr. Wegner. Who apparently is totally tone-deaf.

Apparently as tone-deaf as Bp. Fellay, who also ignores the faithful WHO DO NOT WANT A DEAL WITH ROME - but keeps on negotiating anyway!

Quote from: SanAmbrosi

Why would one attend a chapel that they seem to HATE going to?  I am having a hard time getting it.  If I was regularly scandalized, I'd simply leave.  

On the other hand, if one goes into a chapel looking for something to be outraged by, one will find it without much difficulty.  

Your question reminds me of talking with "Jews." If you point out even very-well-docuмented heinous acts by "Jews," before you finish your sentence, they are already calling you a hater.  In their culture, heinous crimes against humanity is not "hate," but mentioning the crimes or who committed the heinous crimes is "hate." Have you inculturated that behavioral pattern?

I have stopped voting because I refuse to vote for "the lesser of two evils." In that vein, maybe my entire family should stop receiving the sacraments because of glaring lapses that several readers here have noted?

Do you advise that plan?

Just go to Father Finnegan's Mass.

Quote from: mw2016

Apparently as tone-deaf as Bp. Fellay, who also ignores the faithful WHO DO NOT WANT A DEAL WITH ROME - but keeps on negotiating anyway!

I wonder if some sort of "cultural misunderstanding" is going on between many SSPX parishioners (and some clergy) and the SSPX authorities.  The society is not an political or social American organization.  The SSPX is not a direct democracy.  Because some parishioners have agendas that are different from the SSPX leadership, folks are getting bent out of shape.

The parish building belongs to the Society.  Like someone already said, you all in Phoenix have many independent chapels to attend.  No one is forcing you to remain members of OLS.

While I agree completely that factually the Society is a priestly order, which shouldn't have much of anything to do with the faithful, per se, but the problem that is in REALITY the Society is funded solely by the Faithful.

Therefore, we don't own that building, but we sure as heck paid for it.

I think that entitles the attendees to some level of consideration in their opinion about whether or not we want to be a part of the entirely corrupt and perverse Novus Ordo.

Don't you agree?

...We owe our priests and pastor's obedience.  Now that is very offensive to the American ear;  I understand that, I'm an American too.  But we have to take off our "secular hat" and be Roman Catholic....

Rubbish. We owe obedience to GOD, not men.

Acts Of Apostles 5:29
But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men.

We took no vow of obedience to Bp. Fellay or his re-branded anti-society.

We are bound to resist Bp. Fellay's efforts and the efforts of his cabal to draw us into clericalism, Zionism, usury, and modernism.