Author Topic: Running an experiment on the SSPX (Read 3712 times)

Matthew · « **Reply #5 on:** July 15, 2015, 11:14:43 AM »

Another point --

Recall that the SSPX has, in many instances, claimed that the Resistance is non-Catholic, sectarian, evil, mortally sinful, etc.

So if they allow videos of our "satanic mortal sin wallowing" which looks SUSPICIOUSLY LIKE THE EDIFYING WORKS OF THE CLASSIC SSPX, it might get a few people to stop and think!

Again, that would break the spell, so they just censor it. They don't rebut or "limit the damage" by posting comments on the video -- no, they just delete it. It's too dangerous to their propaganda and well-crafted illusions they have created for the faithful.

They may have fooled many, but they haven't fooled me, or many others here on CathInfo. I, for one, see right through their tricks.

Matthew · « **Reply #6 on:** July 15, 2015, 02:34:05 PM »

Here is a response from one of the members I e-mailed about this video:

Is this kind of cult mentality common in the neo-SSPX? This kind of acquiescence to the Conciliar Church (Blessed Paul VI!??)

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, it appears that there is a bona fide crisis in the SSPX. The Resistance most certainly has a most solid reason for being -- nothing less than preserving the Catholic Faith!

This is seriously messed-up stuff. You can't make this up. Read on:

Quote

Dear lost and confused soul who wanders away from his Heavenly Father's Home, the Catholic Church,

So many lies and calumny the work of the Archbishop! You are like the Protestants before you. You have no authority and no claim to injustice against you from any authorities in Church much less from the superiors of the Archbishop's original pious union of Apostolic life duely erected in the Catholic Church under Bl. Paul VI (a martyr, I believe).

Of course, a Society affiliated group is going to take down a video of a priest who disobeys and calumniates their associates and chosen priests and spiritual directors. That's just common sense. Just the "resistance" tries to negate all the Society's work when it is against them and their lies.

Finally, I know for a recorded fact Fr Schmidtberger was the Archbishop's first choice for his successor in the episcopate for the original four he wanted to consecrate, but he refused knowing the grave consequences and responsibility of being a bishop. Archbishop Lefebvre did not want to consecrate Williamson, and in fact, he was his last choice.

Sincerely

jman123 · « **Reply #7 on:** July 15, 2015, 02:42:59 PM »

I'm on those groups. Sspx faithful has tough moderators.

Matthew · « **Reply #8 on:** July 15, 2015, 02:47:40 PM »

I'm going to address some of his points here:

Quote

Dear lost and confused soul who wanders away from his Heavenly Father's Home, the Catholic Church,

So the SSPX is the Church now. At least no one can claim that the SSPX thinks they are the Church! But you're right -- we're not in communion with Bishop Fellay (the Pope?) which puts us outside of God's church (the SSPX?).

So many lies and calumny the work of the Archbishop! You are like the Protestants before you. You have no authority and no claim to injustice against you from any authorities in Church much less from the superiors of the Archbishop's original pious union of Apostolic life duely erected in the Catholic Church under Bl. Paul VI (a martyr, I believe).

Blessed Paul VI? A martyr? What have you been smoking?

Of course, a Society affiliated group is going to take down a video of a priest who disobeys and calumniates their associates and chosen priests and spiritual directors. That's just common sense. Just the "resistance" tries to negate all the Society's work when it is against them and their lies.

Nice calumny there against Fr. Zendejas as well as the Resistance in general, but can you substantiate any of that? What has Fr. Zendejas said against the SSPX (or any individuals) that isn't true? Some substance would be nice.

Finally, I know for a recorded fact Fr Schmidtberger was the Archbishop's first choice for his successor in the episcopate for the original four he wanted to consecrate, but he refused knowing the grave consequences and responsibility of being a bishop. Archbishop Lefebvre did not want to consecrate Williamson, and in fact, he was his last choice.

Is this the re-written history they teach nowadays? The Ministry of Truth must be working overtime. Seriously, though, this is the first time I heard that one. I bet some accordista priest just made that up to shut up a Bishop Williamson supporter who raised that point with him.

Sincerely

Ladislaus · « **Reply #9 on:** July 15, 2015, 03:10:44 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

And this video has NOTHING about the Resistance in it, except for images of the priests involved.

THIS ^^^ is all it takes.