Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: Raphaela on June 17, 2013, 05:35:31 PM
-
I've just found a very good German Resistance blog run by a layman, Paul Schenker, who's been supporting Tradition by writing and publishing since the 1960's.
http://poschenker.wordpress.com/
He links to the French website Avec l'Immaculee.
He gives an account of the banning by Fr. Schmidberger of two laymen from all the chapels in the German District of the the SSPX and from the church of St. Athanasius in Hattersheim which is affiliated to them. (I don't know how independent it is.):
http://poschenker.wordpress.com/2013/04/19/offener-brief-an-p-franz-schmidberger-bezuglich-seiner-kritik-an-den-schwestern-von-brilon-wald/
The laymen have been told by two priests of the XSPX that they will also refuse them Holy Communion outside of Mass, as to give it to them would be to evade "the punishment of Fr. Schmidberger". One of the laymen quotes from a letter from Fr. Schmidberger in which he is told that a reason for the ban is "the collection of signatures for an Open Letter" (supporting the Carmelites of Brilon Wald).
The Church of St. Athanasius, built by Fr. Hans Milch, the only parish priest in Germany to refuse to say the New Mass, is run by Actio Spes Unica and its website promotes the memory and writings of Fr. Hans Milch and Fr. Gregorius Hesse, two priests who would certainly be supporting the Resistance now. Their President says he wishes to distance the organisation from Bishop Williamson.
I'm surprised that a ban from entering the buildings is possible under German charity law.
-
I've just found a very good German Resistance blog run by a layman, Paul Schenker, who's been supporting Tradition by writing and publishing since the 1960's.
http://poschenker.wordpress.com/
He links to the French website Avec l'Immaculee.
He gives an account of the banning by Fr. Schmidberger of two laymen from all the chapels in the German District of the the SSPX and from the church of St. Athanasius in Hattersheim which is affiliated to them. (I don't know how independent it is.):
http://poschenker.wordpress.com/2013/04/19/offener-brief-an-p-franz-schmidberger-bezuglich-seiner-kritik-an-den-schwestern-von-brilon-wald/
The laymen have been told by two priests of the XSPX that they will also refuse them Holy Communion outside of Mass, as to give it to them would be to evade "the punishment of Fr. Schmidberger". One of the laymen quotes from a letter from Fr. Schmidberger in which he is told that a reason for the ban is "the collection of signatures for an Open Letter" (supporting the Carmelites of Brilon Wald).
You can see how important losing the Carmel of Brilon Wald has been
because of the vengefulness it evokes in the Menzingen-denizens.
The Church of St. Athanasius, built by Fr. Hans Milch, the only parish priest in Germany to refuse to say the New Mass,
I am very interested in seeing a list of the priests who had the fortitude
to hold out against the Newmass. I have never heard of this one. Now,
I have to wonder, how is his name pronounced? How can I speak it to
people without mispronouncing it?
is run by Actio Spes Unica and its website promotes the memory and writings of Fr. Hans Milch and Fr. Gregorius Hesse,
Now, I knew Canon Hesse, and I treasure the memory of giving him a
great joy that he took to his grave. I reported to him that my godson
was converted to the Faith from protestantism by listening to his lectures,
and he told me that now he can take consolation that all his efforts have
not been in vain. Those were his parting words to me, and the next I
heard of him was that he had died.
Was Fr. Hans Milch an influence on Fr. Gregorius Hesse?
two priests who would certainly be supporting the Resistance now. Their President says he wishes to distance the organisation from Bishop Williamson.
I highly doubt that Fr. Hesse would want to 'distance himself' from +W, and
by association, I figure the same would be true of Fr. Milch.
This is sad news, that the president of Actio Spes Unica would have this
view of things, but it is sadly consistent with the spread of the unclean
spirit of Vat.II manifest in the acts of the Menzingen-denizens like Fr.
Schmidberger.
This is the kind of thing that +W is up against in his decision to consecrate
bishops. It would be far less complicated if traditional groups who support
and commemorate heroes like Fr. Milch and Fr. Hesse would be more in step
with the program instead of inimical to it. For as it is, consecrations might
be more of a wedge that divides rather than a balm of preservation.
The question he must weigh is, which direction is it going? Are things on
the increase? Is there more support for the Resistance? Or is it fading,
and less support? Would consecrations shatter the fragile vase that holds
the Faith of Catholics or would they guard it from the snares of the devil?
I'm surprised that a ban from entering the buildings is possible under German charity law.
That's a good point. Maybe there is another law that supersedes it, like
the one that says you can't incite racial unrest or whatever.
How would they enforce it? Is there now a system like the police have
of mug shots of criminals, and every ExSPX chapel has a book with photos
of the people (and children?) who are VERBOTEN from entry, and a man
stands guard at every doorway with an iPad carrying the files to view???
-
Good old Father Schmidberger is a "class act".
First he attempts to defame the Carmelites for resisting the SSPX capitulation.
Now he bans their faithful supporters from the Sacraments.
Wonder why the faithful want to distance themselves from +W ? Is it due to his expose of chimney-less gas chambers which is part of Germany's political dogma?
-
Father Hesse would have been a great bishop!
-
Wonder why the faithful want to distance themselves from +W ? Is it due to his expose of chimney-less gas chambers which is part of Germany's political dogma?
That's the reason!!
-
Good old Father Schmidberger is a "class act".
First he attempts to defame the Carmelites for resisting the SSPX capitulation.
Now he bans their faithful supporters from the Sacraments.
Wonder why the faithful want to distance themselves from +W ? Is it due to his expose of chimney-less gas chambers which is part of Germany's political dogma?
The nαzι h0Ɩ0cαųst is the dogma outside of which there is no salvation!
But you debase the nαzι h0Ɩ0cαųst when you commercialize it.
What do the Hollywood elite say when they visit Jerusalem?
There's no business like Shoah business (http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2012/03/01/no-business-like-shoah-business-the-golden-goose-of-holocautianity-and-the-real-reasons-for-irana-phobia/)!
-
Fr. Schmidberger wields whatever power he has which I suspect may be now on the decline. The Swiss have a firmer control of the German zone. Also his day has come and gone along with his hero in Rome. How heavily some trads invested in Ratzinger; they reaped a paltry dividend. And now ABL's chosen leaders use all the tricks in the book to control their own personal fiefdoms! Are we surprised?
-
How can I speak it to people without mispronouncing it?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a9/De-Milch.ogg
-
Raphaela: "I'm surprised that a ban from entering the buildings is possible under German charity law". Private buildings included?
-
Raphaela: "I'm surprised that a ban from entering the buildings is possible under German charity law". Private buildings included?
If the chapels of the SSPX are just "private buildings", then the (Neo-)SSPX is a sect.
-
It's just WRONG to use the Mass and the Sacraments as a political weapon. The priests who knowingly do so will be punished by God.
-
It's just WRONG to use the Mass and the Sacraments as a political weapon. The priests who knowingly do so will be punished by God.
My priest told me that it is a mortal sin for any priest to withhold the
sacraments for a nefarious purpose.
There are very specific rules that apply. Only a narrow demographic
qualifies as those who would be so affected. One of them is a public
sinner who scandalizes the community by his unCatholic life or
behavior in a public capacity, such as Nancy Peℓσѕι or Biden receiving
Communion while they are pro-abortion, or Mel Gibson while he is
living in sin with a woman who is not his wife.
But for anyone to be opposed to the political leanings of a pious
union of priests that has no jurisdiction over the Faithful -- there is
no way that can ever qualify as a public sinner. No way, Jose.
-
Wonder why the faithful want to distance themselves from +W ? Is it due to his expose of chimney-less gas chambers which is part of Germany's political dogma?[/color]
That's the reason!
I don't think so. In my experience the German faithful who live in the Federal Republic of Germany (BRD) distance themselves from Bishop Williamson mainly because they're told to do so by the superiors. The faithful want to keep "their" Neo-SSPX and its buildings, they worked hard for it during the past decades. And in their eyes the good bishop "endangers" the peace in the Neo-SSPX. Unfortunately, so many of them are more or less liberalised. And so they don't know anymore that there can be no peace without the truth.
In my experience the faithful were always rather reluctant concerning the good bishop, because he's always been "too" anti-liberal and "too" truth-loving for most Catholics. He always called a spade a spade, and that's not popular in our modern times. So it's also not popular in our modern Neo-SSPX.
That's so in many Neo-SSPX districts, isn't it?
I think that the good bishop's 2008 interview (where in a few moments he explained the h0Ɩ0h0αx) was only a catalyst of what was already rumbling on for years.
By the way, many German Neo-SSPX laypeople don't believe in the h0Ɩ0h0αx.
And now, back on topic. :-)
-
Raphaela: "I'm surprised that a ban from entering the buildings is possible under German charity law". Private buildings included?
If the chapels of the SSPX are just "private buildings", then the (Neo-)SSPX is a sect.
What Fr Schmidberger does with the laymen mentioned in this thread, who are just not in agreement with Bishop Fellay and Fr Schmidberger, but who're absolutely faithful Catholics, is a clear infringement of the Church Law: of the old Canon, but also the new Canon!
And no less a figure than the well known German senior Church Law expert Father professor Georg May from Mainz, who was consulted by the laymen mentioned in this thread, this professor who's an eminent authority in such questions, stated that Fr Schmidberger's exclusion of these laymen because they're in disagreement with him and with Bishop Fellay, is a perversion of justice, a perverson of Church Law, and very grave.
So, AtH is correct, as usual. A Roman-Catholic Holy Mass is not a private meeting. A chapel's prior where the Holy Sacraments are spent, has no right to exclude a faithful Catholic. There's only two exceptions where it is allowed to do so: if the person in question would be a known heretic, or a known mortal sinner (for example living in public adultery).
Concerning a house ban, because of a chapel being a private property: Catholic superiors can only use this to make faithful laymen who're in disagreement with them, to leave the building after Holy Mass, so that for example they can't distribute flyers or the like. Or these superiors can use the civil right to exclude people who would demolish the building.
But several senior traditional priests told me that it's not possible for any Catholic priest or superior to exclude a Catholic layman who's asking for the Holy Sacraments, wherever they're being spent.
Additionally in the case of this thread, one (or more?) of these laymen was denied the Holy Sacrament of the Confession. An upright SSPX priest was asked to spend this sacrament outside the SSPX chapel (because of a house ban where the superior said he would call the police), and was ready to do so, but was prohibited to spend the confession outside the Neo-SSPX chapel's property by his superior...
Alas, this is no a Fr Schmidberger ego-trip. He knows that Menzingen is standing behind him in this aspect. Also Fr N. Pfluger already excluded Catholic laymen from the Holy Sacraments, when he was district superior. Doesn't the US district do similar things? I think I read it here on Cathinfo some weeks ago, about a dying boy being denied the last Sacrament.
When in autumn the Austrian and German district superiors will be replaced by the two "little Swiss" (as Bishop Williamson used to say in his recent Asian lecture) who're 100% loyal to Bp Fellay, this a perversion of justice will continue.
Yes, this infringement of the Church Law is a clear sign of a sect. I heard from a good source, that after a Neo-SSPX priest was confronted with Fr. May's sound argumentation, the Neo-SSPX priest just "replied": "Then sue us!", well knowing that in today's Church crisis you won't find a traditional ecclesiastical court. So they don't mind them breaking the Church Law. Incredible.
-
Do they have charitable status in Germany, Ethelred? They're an "e. V.", a registered association, but do they get any tax benefits, as charities do in England and America? Here they have to be of public benefit to have that status, so if they started banning people from chapels open to the general public, they would lose the tax-breaks and be deregistered, as I understand it. They could only ban people who were causing obvious disruption or threatening harm to the people or the building. (Charity law wouldn't be concerned with refusing the sacraments, of course, just access to the chapels.)
The two laymen have even promised not to hand out leaflets on SSPX property and are still banned.
-
Do they have charitable status in Germany, Ethelred? They're an "e. V.", a registered association, but do they get any tax benefits, as charities do in England and America?
Unfortunately I don't know. I'm going to ask. If I get answers, I'm going to quote them here.
The two laymen have even promised not to hand out leaflets on SSPX property and are still banned.
Yes. Their sacrifice to endure an unjustified ban, has its worth. I heard that the case is discussed amongst more German SSPX priests, and that also some priests who're on the side of Menzingen usually, don't support this ban because they see it's a perversion of justice and see that Prof May is correct.
Also laypeople who would never oppose Menzingen and Stuttgart got angry when they've learned about the ban, and took their priests or priors to task.
Then the brave Fr Zaby, chaplain of the brave Carmelites, wrote a very fiery open letter in German, in which amongst other things he also comments this banning from the sacraments, and he used the word "sect" for it. Here on Poschenker blog (http://poschenker.wordpress.com/2013/06/12/gibt-es-uberhaupt-eine-konzilskirche-oder-vielmehr-keine/). (Careful, it's a bit polemical, probably because of the nasty things Fr Schmidberger wrote about him and the Carmelites.)
So, although probably Menzingen & Stuttgart won't change their wrong course, there could be a moral victory.
And in order to underline that it's not a problem of the German district, but a Neo-SSPX wide one, I've just got message from some friendly person in America who says that other districts are affected as well, keyword: Resistance laymen banned from sacraments.
-
Then the brave Fr Zaby .. open letter ... he also comments this banning from the sacraments
Sorry, it seems I linked to the wrong letter. Can't link to my meant letter from memory at the moment. Maybe later. :-)
-
It's just WRONG to use the Mass and the Sacraments as a political weapon. The priests who knowingly do so will be punished by God.
My priest told me that it is a mortal sin for any priest to withhold the
sacraments for a nefarious purpose.
There are very specific rules that apply. Only a narrow demographic
qualifies as those who would be so affected. One of them is a public
sinner who scandalizes the community by his unCatholic life or
behavior in a public capacity, such as Nancy Peℓσѕι or Biden receiving
Communion while they are pro-abortion, or Mel Gibson while he is
living in sin with a woman who is not his wife.
But for anyone to be opposed to the political leanings of a pious
union of priests that has no jurisdiction over the Faithful -- there is
no way that can ever qualify as a public sinner. No way, Jose.
Same thing the NO Bishops do to homeschooled children who do not attend their full of filth "CCD" or "retreats."
-
I am very interested in seeing a list of the priests who had the fortitude
to hold out against the Newmass. I have never heard of this one. Now,
I have to wonder, how is his name pronounced? How can I speak it to
people without mispronouncing it?
I think "Hans Milsh" would be the nearest.
Was Fr. Hans Milch an influence on Fr. Gregorius Hesse?
Very unlikely. Fr. Milch was murdered in 1987 at the age of 63 (by an Italian vagrant he was trying to help), when Fr. Hesse was still secretary to Cardinal Stickler.
There are many sermons, talks and writings by him, but nothing translated. Also many audio recordings on Youtube (under Hans Milch, Pfarrer Milch, Pfarrer Hans Milch), but only two with English subtitles:
"The Second Vatican Council Unmasked"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxGVXkpgQmo (6 parts - 78 min.)
"The Church and the Imminent Fall of Europe"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13W1cZn7is0 (3 parts - 35 min.)
He was a convert from Protestantism in an interesting way. He was in the German Army in Italy in 1944-45, was captured by the Americans and was then in a POW camp in France for 20 months. He was converted there by the French chaplain and received into the Church in the local parish church. As soon as he was freed he started training for the priesthood and was ordained in 1953.
He always worked in the Frankfurt area and from 1962 was parish priest of Hattersheim, a small town on the edge of Frankfurt. He managed to keep saying the traditional Mass in the parish church and was the only priest to do that. There were a handful of retired priests who continued to say the TLM at convent chapels and side altars, but even these were clamped down on by the German Bishops Conference in Lent 1976 and all stopped doing so. So from February to August 1976 Fr. Milch was the only priest saying the Traditional Mass in Germany. That August the SSPX opened a chapel in Munich, but with just one priest, Fr. Klaus Wodsack. (Fr. Schmidberger was teaching at the German-speaking house of studies in Switzerland.)
Fr. Wodsack had said his First Mass in Fr. Milch's church that July. Archbishop Lefebvre had also said a Pontifical High Mass there in April 1975, but Fr. Milch's bishop turned a blind eye until 1979, when he started more openly supporting Archbishop Lefebvre and he was then suspended.
He then built a new church in Hattersheim, St. Athanasius, and worked as an independent priest together with the SSPX, who have used the church since he died.
-
Fr. Milch was murdered in 1987 at the age of 63 (by an Italian vagrant he was trying to help)
If I remember correctly, this Italian vagrant was possessed. And brave Fr Milch did several (Latin) exorcism on him. Then, one day when Fr Milch thought the devil would finally be gone, he laid down arms so to speak. This was a deadly mistake, because at the next occasion the vagrant who was very likely still being possessed, killed the poor father: he or rather his demon crucified Fr Milch actually.
Later, when the police questioned the vagrant, he couldn't remember anything, which makes it very likely that indeed he was possessed when he or rather his demon murdered the father. Because possessed people don't remember what they did during a session, as a possession outbreak is being called sometimes.
Very moving story. I'm sure there's a detailed text somewhere on the Internet.
As moving as the apostolate of brave Fr Milch was. He would be turning in his grave if he knew that his independent chapel now follows the Neo-SSPX' joining Newrome and banning faithful Catholics.
Those staying faithful are really just the remnant of the remnant (of the remnant)...
-
"The Church and the Imminent Fall of Europe"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13W1cZn7is0 (3 parts - 35 min.)
In this video, the sermon starts at 3:40. The beginning is Fr. Milch talking about the recent death of his 90-year-old mother whom he had converted, which isn't translated. The "subtitles" for that bit are an apparently sedevacantist introduction to Fr. Milch (he was never a SV himself).
-
he or rather his demon crucified Fr Milch actually.
There's a detailed description of his murder in his two-volume biography which the German District recently published. I ordered a copy - 1730+ pages!! (Mostly sermons and writings.) But I don't know how long it will be for sale. Fr. Milch was always 100% against any "deal" with Rome and spoke and wrote against it very forcefully throughout the 1980's. He gives very thorough reasons. He said conservative and pseudo-traditionalist Catholics were the worst enemies of the Church. I'll try and translate some more of what he said. Give me a day or two!
Fr. Milch wasn't actually crucified, but it was clearly a ritual murder. He'd been having a meal with the man in his appartment in Wiesbaden and the man killed him by stabbing him in the head, then drove a wooden stake into his chest. It turned out that the man, who'd recently tried to perform an exorcism, believed himself to be Moses and had wanted Fr. Milch to declare the Pope deposed. The wooden stake, he believed, was Moses' staff which he'd found 4000 years later in the River Main.
-
.
PLEASE NOTE:
I have started a new thread for the topic of Fr. Hans Milch:
Fr-Hans-Milch-never-said-the-Newmass-only-priest-in-Germany-to-do-so (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Fr-Hans-Milch-never-said-the-Newmass-only-priest-in-Germany-to-do-so)
So as to keep these two important subjects from confusion, please make
an effort to put discussion relating to Fr. Milch in the new thread.
The topic is obviously very important and could on its own turn into a
very large thread when members who knew him personally or even knew
others who knew him post their testimony.
These two topics are closely related though, so it's easy to see that they
might cross paths often and that's okay, but if we could provide links to
the other thread in the process it would go a long way to keeping the
respective subjects easier to read for newcomers.
That is, someone might be looking for the unjust denial of sacraments
today to people in Germany because it's happening to them as we
speak, and they might not want to wade through pages and pages of
material on Fr. Milch.
On the other hand, someone (like me!) who is very interested in the
story of this unquestionable HERO in the Faith AND MARTYR for the
cause of Tradition and the one true Church outside of which there is no
salvation, may like to see posts all in a row that are devoted to this
topic without pages of material on the unjust denial of sacraments to
the Faithful of Germany.
You see, in each case, the other topic in a book might be relegated to
footnotes. That is, footnotes in book A would be the main theme of
book B, while footnotes in book B would be the primary content of
book A.
This thread is book A.
The Fr. Milch thread is book B.
Let's try to keep the footnotes where they belong!!
-
Fr. Schmidberger wields whatever power he has which I suspect may be now on the decline. The Swiss have a firmer control of the German zone. Also his day has come and gone along with his hero in Rome. How heavily some trads invested in Ratzinger; they reaped a paltry dividend. And now ABL's chosen leaders use all the tricks in the book to control their own personal fiefdoms! Are we surprised?
Wessex,
As you know, I always enjoy your novel take on neoSSPX issues.
How true the point about our delirious fellow Trads investing so much hope in the familiar face of Pope Benedict.
Pope Francis is bringing them to the full sobriety they deserve.
-
There's a detailed description of his murder in his two-volume biography which the German District recently published. I ordered a copy - 1730+ pages!! (Mostly sermons and writings.) But I don't know how long it will be for sale.
It will surely "magically" be out of print, soon... as so many good old book formerly being available in the district.
Give me a day or two!
Take all the time you need. And many thanks in advance.
Fr. Milch wasn't actually crucified, but it was clearly a ritual murder. He'd been having a meal with the man in his appartment in Wiesbaden and the man killed him by stabbing him in the head, then drove a wooden stake into his chest.
OK, ritual murder then, thanks for the clarification!
-
Do they [=SSPX] have charitable status in Germany, Ethelred? They're an "e. V.", a registered association, but do they get any tax benefits, as charities do in England and America? Here they have to be of public benefit to have that status,
Yes. I just checked, and my sources in the German Republic say that the SSPX in the German Republic is indeed an "e.V." aka "Eingetragener Verein" and "gemeinnützig", i.e. with charitable status. And that it gets certein benefits from the state, like the people who donate to this SSPX e.V. can offset their donated sum against tax. My understanding is that this applies to all e.V.'s.
So this is apparently similar to the Anglo-Saxon area.
so if they started banning people from chapels open to the general public, they would lose the tax-breaks and be deregistered, as I understand it. They could only ban people who were causing obvious disruption or threatening harm to the people or the building. (Charity law wouldn't be concerned with refusing the sacraments, of course, just access to the chapels.)
Interesting! However, I don't know if this also applies to the German Republic SSPX.
Now could those poor SSPX laypeople in the USA or United Kingdom who were banned, do something against the banning via charity law? I know, it's very Don Quixote like in any case, but let's say theoretically.
-
Do they [=SSPX] have charitable status in Germany, Ethelred? They're an "e. V.", a registered association, but do they get any tax benefits, as charities do in England and America? Here they have to be of public benefit to have that status,
Yes. I just checked, and my sources in the German Republic say that the SSPX in the German Republic is indeed an "e.V." aka "Eingetragener Verein" and "gemeinnützig", i.e. with charitable status. And that it gets certein benefits from the state, like the people who donate to this SSPX e.V. can offset their donated sum against tax. My understanding is that this applies to all e.V.'s.
So this is apparently similar to the Anglo-Saxon area.
so if they started banning people from chapels open to the general public, they would lose the tax-breaks and be deregistered, as I understand it. They could only ban people who were causing obvious disruption or threatening harm to the people or the building. (Charity law wouldn't be concerned with refusing the sacraments, of course, just access to the chapels.)
Interesting! However, I don't know if this also applies to the German Republic SSPX.
Now could those poor SSPX laypeople in the USA or United Kingdom who were banned, do something against the banning via charity law? I know, it's very Don Quixote like in any case, but let's say theoretically.
Maybe it would be more effective to hire a good attorney to enjoin the SSPX in class action lawsuit for racketeering?
The misrepresentations, lies, and intimidations used to tie-up real-estate, invest in the stock market and use the faithful's offerings for something other than the perpetuation of Traditional Catholic Faith can be docuмented.
The data base for proving the conspiratorial nature of Bp. Fellay's "Bait & Switch religions" plot is right here at Catholic Info.
-
Now could those poor SSPX laypeople in the USA or United Kingdom who were banned, do something against the banning via charity law? I know, it's very Don Quixote like in any case, but let's say theoretically.
As far as I know, except in Germany, no one has been banned from entering chapels, just from receiving the sacraments. Is that the case? I think it is in England. (And it hasn't actually happened here, it was just a threat that Bishop Fellay had made to Clare and Gregorio Sarto.)
I assumed this was why in Australia the XSPX threated people who attended Fr. Pfeiffer's Mass that they would no longer come and say Mass for them, rather than banning them from a specific chapel.
But a charity, and I assume in Germany as well, has to show it is benefitting the general public, hence the tax breaks (although it can be limited by its aims - a charity that helps alcoholics can't treat drug addicts, for example). But if one of the aims of a charity is to promote and further the traditional Mass, they can't stop people attending when their chapels are open to the public. A Buddhist monk in robes who is thinking of converting might want to come, or even an abortionist who is starting to have doubts about his ideas.
Anyone can be banned for disrupting the Mass or disturbing or threatening people, but it would have to be very clear and possibly a police matter.
-
But if one of the aims of a charity is to promote and further the traditional Mass, they can't stop people attending when their chapels are open to the public. A Buddhist monk in robes who is thinking of converting might want to come, or even an abortionist who is starting to have doubts about his ideas.
Anyone can be banned for disrupting the Mass or disturbing or threatening people, but it would have to be very clear and possibly a police matter.
Exactly. The civil law says that they lose their tax-exempt status if they start behaving as a private "club".
And they can't take refuge in "well, if only the Catholic Church were given her proper deference by the civil authorities" either -- the Catholic Church law is against them as well.
According to Catholic Church law, only notorious public sinners can be denied the Sacraments -- and sorry, but a man who publicly posted a harsh criticism of Bishop Fellay (signing it with his own name) does NOT count as a sin, much less a notorious one.
Only a cult leader would equate "he disagrees with me" and "notorious sinner".
I've said this before -- but this whole "Resistance = notorious sin" thing makes very little sense, unless they consider us in schism (from Bishop Fellay, the Pope) or Bishop Fellay is approved by Rome, but the Resistance is not so they're schismatic (like the SSPX used to be).
They certainly can't point to anything we're doing against the Faith or morals. If we disagree about Vatican II, then it's just that -- a disagreement. Bishop Fellay has no infallibility, under ANY circuмstances.
-
Bishop Fellay has no infallibility, under ANY circuмstances.
One of the problems I have with Bishop Fellay is that he acts like he has jurisdiction when in truth he has none and he should act like he has none.
-
Instead of complaining to Father P about not liking the latest event poster :rolleyes: we should be writing about this - especially those who attend the SSPX or have left recently.