Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: SSPX News babe?  (Read 8795 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 13823
  • Reputation: +5568/-865
  • Gender: Male
Re: SSPX News babe?
« Reply #30 on: January 25, 2018, 04:55:19 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is absolutely insidious for the SSPX - and the "babe" herself. It's the same surreptitious tactics that were introduced +50 years ago by the conciliar crooks and demonstrates the pernicious mentality which the SSPX is striving to be on par with the conciliar church.

    Yet, go ahead and tell the SSPX that this is entirely unacceptable and they will look at you like you're crazy - same thing the Conciliarists did when things like this were protested +50 years ago. 

    IMO, they are aiming mainly at today's youth here, those younger folks who by now have been so over exposed to the secular feminist society that they will see this as normal and completely acceptable. It shouldn't be long now imo, another 3 - 5 years maybe and the slow boil will be complete.  
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse


    Offline Mr G

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2128
    • Reputation: +1326/-87
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX News babe?
    « Reply #31 on: January 25, 2018, 08:07:04 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, once again I stop by semi-monthly to see if there is any real news here and once again I come across a bunch of low IQ, narrow-minded, knee-jerk reactionaries anxious to drink the blood of fellow traditional Catholics.

    I shall have to disabuse you bumpkins. Both the young man and the young lady are traditional Catholics and very fine ones. The young man is not Jim Vogel, and I won't name the young lady because you are very strange and uncharitable people who I wouldn't trust not to try to contact her and let her know first hand how stupid you really  are. And for those of you who had such nasty criticisms for their appearances, I would love to see what you look like! I can only imagine.

    You people should be thoroughly ashamed. I will remember you in my Masses and rosaries. This is so very sad to me, knowing these two youngsters as I do, one of them born into tradition to a fine traditional family.
    Sorry, with my bad eye-sight, he looks to have the same hair style as Jim. (as my brother says, "all those white people look alike!") ;D


    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6293
    • Reputation: +3327/-1937
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX News babe?
    « Reply #32 on: January 25, 2018, 08:26:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is absolutely insidious for the SSPX - and the "babe" herself. It's the same surreptitious tactics that were introduced +50 years ago by the conciliar crooks and demonstrates the pernicious mentality which the SSPX is striving to be on par with the conciliar church.

    Yet, go ahead and tell the SSPX that this is entirely unacceptable and they will look at you like you're crazy - same thing the Conciliarists did when things like this were protested +50 years ago.  

    IMO, they are aiming mainly at today's youth here, those younger folks who by now have been so over exposed to the secular feminist society that they will see this as normal and completely acceptable. It shouldn't be long now imo, another 3 - 5 years maybe and the slow boil will be complete.  
    All priests did the Latin Mass in 1962, they were all like the SSPX but it was 1962. This is just the SSPX's turn at 1962.
    The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962

    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Mat 24:24

    Offline St Ignatius

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1024
    • Reputation: +794/-158
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX News babe?
    « Reply #33 on: January 25, 2018, 09:10:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    All priests did the Latin Mass in 1962, they were all like the SSPX but it was 1962. This is just the SSPX's turn at 1962.

    Most priests of the SSPX, that I've known over the years, had no problems with the era preceding 1962... (with the exception of bp. Williamson, of course...)


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41864
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX News babe?
    « Reply #34 on: January 25, 2018, 09:16:41 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Most priests of the SSPX, that I've known over the years, had no problems with the era preceding 1962... (with the exception of bp. Williamson, of course...)



    +Williamson is a refreshing voice in that regard.  He traces the root cause problems back to the beginnings of the Renaissance and knows FULL WELL that the Church has been thoroughly infested with heresy and modernism for hundreds of years now ... just reaching their culmination at Vatican II.  He doesn't believe that the 1950s were some "Golden Age" of the Church as many Trads do.  We didn't go from a Golden Age in the Church to sudden catastrophic collapse in one afternoon.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41864
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX News babe?
    « Reply #35 on: January 25, 2018, 09:38:50 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, once again I stop by semi-monthly to see if there is any real news here and once again I come across a bunch of low IQ, narrow-minded, knee-jerk reactionaries anxious to drink the blood of fellow traditional Catholics.

    I shall have to disabuse you bumpkins. Both the young man and the young lady are traditional Catholics and very fine ones. The young man is not Jim Vogel, and I won't name the young lady because you are very strange and uncharitable people who I wouldn't trust not to try to contact her and let her know first hand how stupid you really  are. And for those of you who had such nasty criticisms for their appearances, I would love to see what you look like! I can only imagine.

    You people should be thoroughly ashamed. I will remember you in my Masses and rosaries. This is so very sad to me, knowing these two youngsters as I do, one of them born into tradition to a fine traditional family.

    There's perhaps a small bit of validity to your objection.  Nevertheless, if people decide to become public celebrities, then they really need to develop a thick skin.  Where I say that your objection is valid is that the celebrities in question are under someone else's direction, and these criticisms are really criticisms of the SSPX leadership.  Perhaps the young lady doesn't even own the manly attire she's wearing in the video.

    Nevertheless, they're being misguided by the SSPX leadership into their participation in this homage to and accommodation of modern secular (and feminist) culture.  They're just pawns in this thing, and to the extent that they are, your objection has some validity.

    And this is inevitable.  Once the SSPX started to make accommodation to the Novus Ordo, then accommodation to the secular spirit of the modern world was not far behind.  In fact, Vatican II was touted as precisely that, the accommodation of the Church to the modern world.

    One might argue, I suppose, that this is the most effective way to appeal to the youngsters of our generation.  Hmmm, where have we heard that before?  Now, how far are we from hearing about the first electric guitar at an SSPX Mass?  Then balloons and beachballs will follow close on.

    No, that mentality is not only wrong, but it's been proven a tragic epic fail by the Novus Ordo.  Young people left the Church in droves despite all these attempts to make the Mass look like a pop concert.  When I came to the Tridentine Mass, I was drawn to it precisely because it was DIFFERENT, because it took me OUT of the secular world, and lifted me closer to God.  If I wanted to go to a rock concert, I could find much better productions than inside a Novus Ordo church.

    I used to watch a cartoon show called "King of the Hill".  And the main character's son at one point decided to start a Christian rock band.  After hearing them perform, the father pronounced, "Bobby, you're not making Christianity better; you're making rock-n-roll worse."  So these poor attempts to imitate popular culture are usually awkward (due to the misalignment between them) ... and only end up drawing ridicule upon those who attempt them.  

    Mega-Church Protestants are notorious for this kind cheesiness.  And they fill their meeting halls with many thousands bringing millions of dollars.  But the SSPX has forgotten that the major draw there is that people can walk in from their grossly-immoral lives, drop their tithe in the basket, and walk back out to their adulteries and fornications all the while feeling completely justified and "saaaaved" for having made an appearance to drop off their tithe.  So the Catholic Church cannot and must not compete with these on their terms.

    If the SSPX wanted to create an informative news program, they could have chosen spokespeople with a bit more gravitas and not followed the feminist and largely impure model of the "infobabe" ... perhaps a priest or a dignified professor or a brother.  Ah, but then, they wouldn't appeal to the "youfs" of the modern age ... for being so uncool.

    What I find even worse than these news blurbs was that repugnant picture of the seminarians adoring the Mercedes Benz.  That turned my stomach nearly inside out.  I can already predict the next steps.  First, the infobabe needs to show a little more cleavage to get more views.  Finally, drape her in a bikini over top of the Mercedes Benz (instead of showing some boring seminarians) ... and the transformation will be complete.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10305
    • Reputation: +6215/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX News babe?
    « Reply #36 on: January 25, 2018, 09:39:14 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Even from a societal standpoint, the 50s were anything but ideal.  There's no way the 60s would've existed if the 50s had been so 'golden'.  I enjoy hearing an occasional story from the Hollywood 'stars' who are still alive and they talk about Sinatra and life in the 50s.  Very scandalous stories and it wasn't confined to LA or Vegas. 

    If war is a punishment for sin, and if catholics didn't clean up their act after WW1 (which they didn't), so WW2 was sent as another punishment, then the 50s was a continuation of the sinful catholic world which started before WW1.  The 60s proves that the 50s catholic's spiritual roots were short and superficial.

    Offline St Ignatius

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1024
    • Reputation: +794/-158
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX News babe?
    « Reply #37 on: January 25, 2018, 09:50:38 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Even from a societal standpoint, the 50s were anything but ideal.  There's no way the 60s would've existed if the 50s had been so 'golden'.  I enjoy hearing an occasional story from the Hollywood 'stars' who are still alive and they talk about Sinatra and life in the 50s.  Very scandalous stories and it wasn't confined to LA or Vegas.

    If war is a punishment for sin, and if catholics didn't clean up their act after WW1 (which they didn't), so WW2 was sent as another punishment, then the 50s was a continuation of the sinful catholic world which started before WW1.  The 60s proves that the 50s catholic's spiritual roots were short and superficial.


    Very important point...


    Offline B from A

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1106
    • Reputation: +687/-128
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX News babe?
    « Reply #38 on: January 25, 2018, 10:10:17 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • +Williamson is a refreshing voice in that regard.  He traces the root cause problems back to the beginnings of the Renaissance and knows FULL WELL that the Church has been thoroughly infested with heresy and modernism for hundreds of years now ... just reaching their culmination at Vatican II.  He doesn't believe that the 1950s were some "Golden Age" of the Church as many Trads do.  We didn't go from a Golden Age in the Church to sudden catastrophic collapse in one afternoon.
    Even from a societal standpoint, the 50s were anything but ideal.  There's no way the 60s would've existed if the 50s had been so 'golden'. ...

    Quote
    Quote from: Bp. Williamson, July 1, 1998 - Can Society Catholics withstand Catholicism without the Cross? 

    Question: can the Society withstand this tornado-force dream? Can Society Catholics, especially priests, withstand the mighty suction of Fiftiesism, that glossy version of Catholicism without the Cross, all the outer trappings of Tradition, but with none of the substance (cf. II Timothy Ill, 5)? The glamorous modern world which seduced so many priests and bishops into Vatican II is more glamorous and modern than ever - what guarantees that the Society will not in turn go the way of all conciliar flesh? 

    ...Listen to a Society priest now working in the U.S.A.: "Here, either a priest fights like a hero, or he slips into Fiftiesism without even realizing it. It's strange, but that's how it is. A priest must have unusual strength of character and rock-solid convictions to stand fast, or he will slide the way the whole modern environment encourages him to slide. So a polarisation is inevitable in all our parishes. That was not so yesterday, when a comfortable conservatism was still possible, but the days of those good conservative priests are gone. Today it's all or nothing. This or that priest may vigorously deny they are liberal, but if they are incapable of serious, steady, almost heroic action, they will give way in practice. You may even not be liberal, but if you do not do what you should do, you will still act like a liberal."

    I have long asked myself whether the Society will last until the Chastisement. If it does, God will have given it a special protection. Time will tell if that is His will.

    Offline B from A

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1106
    • Reputation: +687/-128
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX News babe?
    « Reply #39 on: January 25, 2018, 10:15:36 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Fiftiesism as compared to pre-Reformation England
    August 3, 1998

    Dear Friends and Benefactors,

    Following on the mention of "Fiftiesism" in last month's letter, a reader reasonably asked what it is, and if there is anywhere he can read up on it. Since Fiftiesism is a serious threat to "Traditional" Catholics, and since little has to my knowledge been written about it as such, let us examine it here.

    "Fiftiesism" is a name for the kind of Catholicism that was generally practised in the 1950's, between World War II and Vatican II. To many Catholics who can look back that far, the 1950's seem like a golden age for the Church, because all kinds of Catholic systems were still up and running that crashed a few years later. On the other hand, precisely because so many Catholic systems crashed in the 1960's and 1970's, not all can have been well with the Church in those 1950's. There must have been "something rotten in the State of Denmark".

    For instance the magnificent building now housing the Seminary in Winona was put up by the Dominicans, sparing no expense, in the early 1950's, only to be abandoned by them in 1970, and sold for a song. And this Novitiate for their central United States Province was merely one Catholic institute amongst thousands all over the world that followed this path from riches to rags. Can the 1950's really have been such a golden age as they seem?

    Fiftiesism is then the name for what was wrong alongside - or inside - all that was right in the practice of Catholicism in the 1950's. Church structures stood tall but termites were burrowing away within, so that with one strong push from Vatican II, the structures were all ready to fall over. Traditional Catholics today must take thought to avoid re-building a Church of the 1950's all ready to fall over again!

    To illustrate what was good as well as bad in the Catholicism of the 1950's, let us think of English Catholicism in the 1520's, just before the Reformation in England of the 1530's and 1540's.

    On the good side, England looked in the 1520's like a completely Catholic nation. It had been Catholic for nearly 1,000 years, with the result that for an Englishman then to be Catholic was the most normal and simple thing in the world. Young King Henry VIII was so Catholic that he was awarded by Rome the title of "Defender of the Faith" for his refutation of Luther's errors! As for the English people, a scholarly book was written a few years ago to prove how Catholic they still were, as though the Reformation was none of their fault.

    Alas, on the bad side, what were the fruits of this 1520's Catholicism? By the end of the 1550's Catholics were being persecuted, and Queen Elizabeth I was skillfully and ruthlessly maneuvering England into national apostasy, wherein to remain Catholic was a glorious but highly dangerous avocation. Catholic priests were hunted down by her secret police, hanged, drawn and quartered as traitors, so that while an English priest in the 1560's had to have the same Catholic Faith and priesthood as a priest in the 1520's, nevertheless in the transformed circuмstances he was called upon to be a quite new kind of priest. Hence the Jesuit Order, "old and new".

    What had happened? The Catholicism of English Catholics in the 1520's had been tried by the Lord God and found wanting. As events of the 1530's and 1540's proved, their Catholicism, which we might call "Twentiesism", had been too much of a shell-game. The clergy had "lacked grace" (Thomas More). As for the people, they had resisted, for instance in the Pilgrimage of Grace, but not enough. So God punished English Twentiesism by letting it turn into the permanent shell-game of Anglicanism (known in the U.S.A. as Episcopalianism), founded on Elizabeth's Anglican Establishment.

    Now imagine a Jesuit priest in England of the 1560's saying to the small congregations of his faithful remnant, "My dear people, all is changed, changed utterly, a terrible beauty is born. No more Twentiesism!", and you can see why a Traditional priest would say to Traditionalists in the 1990's, "No more Fiftiesism!"

    In fairness to English Catholics of the 1520's, the problem of their shell-game had been building up over many generations before them, and it did not mean that every English Catholic was losing or would lose the Faith, because of course there was a glorious first harvest of martyrs under Henry VIII, and a second under Elizabeth I.

    In fairness likewise to the Fiftiesism of our own time, the pre-Vatican II shell-game was the end-product of 150 years of Liberal Catholicism blending Church and world, attempting to combine the values of the Faith with those of the Revolution, and not every Catholic of the 1950's proved to be deep-down in love with the world, because, as in Reformation England, a by the grace of God faithful remnant pulled through Vatican II to constitute the bedraggled but glorious remains of the Tridentine Church known to us as "Tradition", or the Traditionalists"!

    At the heart then of Fiftiesism in our own time is that while outwardly the Faith in the 1950's seemed to be lived, practised and defended, and the Mass was the Mass of all time, nevertheless inwardly too many Catholics' hearts were going with the world. Thence it was simply a matter of time before all those strict priests celebrating the ancient liturgy with every detail in place, would throw away their birettas and loosen up with eucharistic picnics improvised from one moment to the next. Americans old enough remember how suddenly this change could take place, almost overnight. The inside was rotten. Many Catholics pretended to love God, but really they loved the world. God spat them out at Vatican II.

    But why in the 1950's were so many Catholics inwardly loving the world? Because the modern world, industrialized and suburbanized, is too much with us, all-glamorous, all-powerful, all-seductive. For even if a man and his family are intent upon remaining Catholic, still man remains a three-layered creature, not only individual and familial but also social, and all three layers are connected. Hence society exerts an enormous anti-Catholic pressure upon Catholics when it has been, like ours, largely in the grip of Masonic Revolutions for the last 200 years.

    To illustrate Fiftiesism here in the U.S.A. (since most readers of this letter are Americans, but of course Fiftiesism was worldwide, as was Vatican II), let us quote three anti-Catholic principles firmly believed in by many American Catholics of the 1950's (and 1990's?), one social, one familial, one individual, amongst many others.

    False social principle: separation of Church and State. This deadly error means that Jesus Christ is no longer King over society, He is only King of the sacristy. Society can supposedly do as it likes, and Our Lord has nothing to say! On the contrary read in the Bible the history of the People of God from Abraham and Moses through David, Solomon and Ezra to see if God's religion tells peoples what as peoples they must do!

    False familial principle: co-education. Boys are designed by God quite differently from girls because He has quite different parts for them to play in life. So the Catholic Church has always known and taught that from as early an age as possible, let us say no later than seven or eight, they should be taught differently and separately. Yet how many "Catholics" in the U.S.A. were accustomed to coeducation in the 1950's and still see no problem with it in the 1990's? Not even in the most primitive tribes will you find coeducation! They have too much sense!

    False individual principle: the split between "religion" and real life. To how many "Catholics" in the 1950's was "religion" what one did on Sunday morning while in real life the world was being saved, for instance from Communism, by the American Constitution, free enterprise, etc. etc.? No doubt the Faith was believed in, every article of it, but how many "Catholics" let that Faith form their character and define their view of the world? How many "Traditionalists" to this day really put their trust in Our Lord Jesus Christ to solve problems of home, family, politics, education, economics, the arts, etc., etc.? How many on the contrary seek to "enjoy" the world as much as they can, to have all possible "fun", while keeping just short of mortal sin? That is pure Fiftiesism, and it will have the same disastrous results.

    What is the solution to Fiftiesism, then and now? It is not complicated. The problem lies in pretending to put God first but not really doing so. The solution lies in obeying the First Commandment first, in loving the Lord God - Jesus Christ - with all our heart, with all our soul, with all our strength and with all our mind, and in putting no other gods or solutions before Him. Nor is it impossible to do so. The world, the flesh and the Devil may dominate our environment as never before in all history, but God remains God and we remain children of His Mother.

    A powerful and practical means she obtained from her Son to help us put the First Commandment back in place is the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius. ... Go to the retreats where you hear they really knock down, drag out the retreatants! Those are where the action is!

    And may Our Lord pull all of us back from the world, the flesh and the Devil, lest His Chastisement catch us still in Fiftiesism, ready for Hell!

    Sincerely yours in His Sacred Heart,

    Bishop Richard Williamson


    Offline wallflower

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1866
    • Reputation: +1983/-96
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX News babe?
    « Reply #40 on: January 25, 2018, 06:53:32 PM »
  • Thanks!7
  • No Thanks!0
  • I was avoiding this topic because I felt that the criticisms were harsh. (Note the operative word "felt"). I don't know the two people but I felt the sting of the criticism as though I do. I think they are likely very excited about this opportunity and believe they are doing something good and it's hard to trample on that.

    However, I do believe the instinct of this crowd in questioning the SSPX leadership in this regard is on point.

    It is very strange to me as well that the news channel of a traditional Catholic priestly society is being represented by a young woman. It falls so very much in line with all the modern marketing techniques, it cannot be denied. She is young, she is pretty, all external appearances perfectly in place. If anyone knows marketing, they know that every single detail in casting and setting is calculated and the draw of external appearances is high priority.

    The problem is, most topics/products/channels don't have substance and that's why they have to rely so heavily on external, superficial appeal. The SSPX ought to have substance in spades and therefore have NO NEED for gimmicks. You could have the ugliest, oldest, most awkward and "uncool" priest on camera and if he is speaking truth, if he is a man of substance, people of good will will flock from all ends of the earth. Only modernism says otherwise because modernism is all about the veneer. God forbid anyone should learn to look past the warts on someone's nose. But in fact, people are so sick to death of the veneer that they will be doubly attracted to whomever purposely goes against it. That's how Trump got to be President. And that's also how the SSPX grew as much as it did for decades without the slick look. Bending over backwards in order to appease the modern world's voracious appetite for veneer is a massive sign of intestinal weakness. The SSPX should not care about anything but the truth and telling the truth, especially when it is not pretty or comfortable. And people of good will want to hear this truth from a man of authority and substance. That's it. No one else will do. It is a natural, God-given sense that no amount of artificial construct will eradicate.

    This casting choice absolutely smacks of the rebranding effort, which has proven itself to be an effort to look good to the world. A modern rebranding "expert" would 100% advise this choice 1) for appeal 2) to prove the SSPX is "open-minded", up to date and progressive in spirit. None of this is secret. They are very open and proud of their tactics. It is the very definition of their jobs. Trads are just too naïve sometimes.



    Offline Mr G

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2128
    • Reputation: +1326/-87
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX News babe?
    « Reply #41 on: January 26, 2018, 07:53:31 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yesterday, an older SSPX asked a group of us if anyone saw the videos, no one did. He then said that one of the younger SSPX who viewed the video, thought the videos were "corny".  

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41864
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX News babe?
    « Reply #42 on: January 26, 2018, 08:11:52 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • He then said that one of the younger SSPX who viewed the video, thought the videos were "corny".  

    I used the term "cheesy" ... but same difference.  As I said, when you try align the serious issues related to Traditional Catholicism with slick worldly production, that's the inevitable impression.  It's like all those stupid and corny T-shirts that Protestants wear.  Or putting a picture of Our Lord on a coffee mug.  There's a misalignment and incongruity.

    And, as with Vatican II liturgical implementations, the youth AREN'T BUYING IT.  They go to a rock Mass at a Novus Ordo Church and consider it "corny" and insipid.  Deep down they don't want this crap.  They're looking for something mystical in the Mass, not the same old garbage they see day in and day out in the secular world.  Or Christian rock in general.  You're trying to blend something serious, "Christianity", with the banal ... and the youth notice the incongruity immediately and call it "corny".

    EWTN has produced a lot of similar corny stuff ... although they have some more dignified programs as well.

    Offline Mr G

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2128
    • Reputation: +1326/-87
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX News babe?
    « Reply #43 on: January 26, 2018, 08:41:41 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yesterday, an older SSPX asked a group of us if anyone saw the videos, no one did. He then said that one of the younger SSPX who viewed the video, thought the videos were "corny".  
    Woops! I forgot to add "Priests" after SSPX. That should read: Yesterday, an older SSPX Priest asked a group of us if anyone saw the videos, no one did. He then said that one of the younger SSPX Priest who viewed the video, thought the videos were "corny".  

    Offline Mr G

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2128
    • Reputation: +1326/-87
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX News babe?
    « Reply #44 on: January 26, 2018, 08:49:28 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I used the term "cheesy" ... but same difference.  As I said, when you try align the serious issues related to Traditional Catholicism with slick worldly production, that's the inevitable impression.  It's like all those stupid and corny T-shirts that Protestants wear.  Or putting a picture of Our Lord on a coffee mug.  There's a misalignment and incongruity.

    And, as with Vatican II liturgical implementations, the youth AREN'T BUYING IT.  They go to a rock Mass at a Novus Ordo Church and consider it "corny" and insipid.  Deep down they don't want this crap.  They're looking for something mystical in the Mass, not the same old garbage they see day in and day out in the secular world.  Or Christian rock in general.  You're trying to blend something serious, "Christianity", with the banal ... and the youth notice the incongruity immediately and call it "corny".

    EWTN has produced a lot of similar corny stuff ... although they have some more dignified programs as well.
    What you said is so true. I have noticed that also, and experienced it when I was Novus Ordo, and now it is sickening to see the SSPX doing the same cheesy corny gimmicks as if they were selling some new product called "cheesy corn balls".