Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: Incredulous on January 23, 2018, 10:49:40 PM

Title: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Incredulous on January 23, 2018, 10:49:40 PM


It is a modern phenomenon.  With the turn of a new year, Father Wegner unveils another re-branding project.

This time, the PR message uses a "career gal" news-anchor, to report on the exciting world of the SSPX.

(http://fsspx.news/sites/sspx/files/styles/dici_item_thumbnail/public/media-vimeo/251705641.jpg?itok=7FUz3fP-)

Give it some time, since the SSPX has only recently entered the Conciliar mainstream.

Eventually, Father will catch-up to the level of sophistication achieved by EWTN... "Reporting live, from the Vatican!"

SSPX News (http://fsspx.news/en/news-events/news/weekly-video-news-recap-pro-abortion-militants-sentenced-new-priests-argentina)
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Cantarella on January 23, 2018, 11:23:13 PM
This is masculinized attire for a woman. It has meaning behind it and it is done in purpose. The "business suit" is not proper dress for a traditional Catholic lady. It denotes a feminist desire of competitiveness in the outside world, the world of men, instead of domesticity and nurturing behavior. This is not a good role model for girls and I am surprised that the SSPX is sinking this low nowadays.

As Pope Pius XII said in his allocution on Fashion:

Quote
“One cannot minimize the importance of style's influence for good or for evil. The language of clothing, as we have already said, is the more effective when it is more ordinary and is understood by everyone. It might be said that society speaks through the clothing it wears. Through its clothing it reveals its secret aspirations and uses it, at least in part, to build or destroy its future.”  



 
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Maria Regina on January 24, 2018, 01:36:50 AM
 The news from Rome on this SSPX website is all positive. Not surprising.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: stgobnait on January 24, 2018, 02:59:46 AM
 ???  Speechless!
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: kiwiboy on January 24, 2018, 03:34:28 AM
hilarious!
These people are blind, and being punished for their blindness.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: SeanJohnson on January 24, 2018, 07:35:05 AM
I was surprised to see Cantarella's post has received as many thumbs-down as it has thumbs-up (thus far).

Rhetorically, I would love to know from the thumbs-downers:

1) Are you SSPXers?

2) What precisely are you objecting to?

3) If you are a woman, do you wear pants in the home?

Genuinely interested in your responses (and I promise not to respond; just trying to understand).

If you do not want to say anything openly, maybe you could respond in the Anonymous forum?
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Mr G on January 24, 2018, 07:50:59 AM
I was surprised to see Cantarella's post has received as many thumbs-down as it has thumbs-up (thus far).

Rhetorically, I would love to know from the thumbs-downers:

1) Are you SSPXers?

2) What precisely are you objecting to?

3) If you are a woman, do you wear pants in the home?

Genuinely interested in your responses (and I promise not to respond; just trying to understand).

If you do not want to say anything openly, maybe you could respond in the Anonymous forum?
I was somewhat surprised too, as this is a Resistance forum, so I thought most would agree with Cantarella.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Ladislaus on January 24, 2018, 08:04:19 AM
Wow.  There are no words.

Apart from Cantarella's objections, which are spot on, the SSPX is a PRIESTLY Society and should not have a woman doing PR type reports for them.  They don't have enough priests who could act as spokesmen for the Society?

Plus, I find her style highly annoying.  She doesn't know what to do with her hands.  In addition, she has a very undignified (for a religious program) manner of speaking.  I don't care for her tone of voice and facial expressions ... all of which speak to her being a modern woman.

Not to mention that the use of "News Babes" is a well known tactic to get viewers to watch for less-than-wholesome reasons.  Perhaps they're trying to attract the interest of young men as prospective seminarians?

:facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

I've always objected to how EWTN tried to be "too cool" in making themselves seem slick according to the standards of modern society ... but that SSPX would succuмb to this?  This tells me all I need to know about the NeoSSPX.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Mr G on January 24, 2018, 08:08:15 AM
Some more commentary from Non Possumus: http://nonpossumus-vcr.blogspot.com/ (http://nonpossumus-vcr.blogspot.com/)
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Ladislaus on January 24, 2018, 08:13:19 AM
Some more commentary from Non Possumus: http://nonpossumus-vcr.blogspot.com/ (http://nonpossumus-vcr.blogspot.com/)

Great commentary.  It's not just the feminism ... but the overall worldliness and secularism (outrageously expensive seminary, picture of seminarians adoring the Mercedes Benz, all repugnant).

Maybe the SSPX is going to use these "News Babes" to attract the right kind of young man to fill their new seminary.  Perhaps they'll even have some of these woman floating around the seminary to make it interesting.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Last Tradhican on January 24, 2018, 08:36:08 AM
Does not surprise me. Any organization that teaches their seminarians that EENS means that anyone can be saved in any religion by their belief in a God that rewards, will swallow any camel. She likely is not even an SSPXer
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Last Tradhican on January 24, 2018, 08:38:53 AM
Next they'll have a teenager in skinny jeans
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Ladislaus on January 24, 2018, 08:48:28 AM
She likely is not even an SSPXer

That was my guess also.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Mr G on January 24, 2018, 08:50:27 AM
Does not surprise me. Any organization that teaches their seminarians that EENS means that anyone can be saved in any religion by their belief in a God that rewards, will swallow any camel. She likely is not even an SSPXer
I think she does go to the SSPX parish in St. Marys, but I am not 100% certain as there is so many people here but she does look familiar.
But as you said in a previous post, it is the worldliness that is the problem. Once these priests keep silent on the worldliness, then it (worldliness) flows right in.
This might explain what is actually going on: https://tradidi.com/sspx/liberalism-and-catholicism-the-missing-appendix (https://tradidi.com/sspx/liberalism-and-catholicism-the-missing-appendix) 
" We can define liberalism in a word: fear. Let it be clear that I am not talking about cowardice. Many liberals have been the bravest and the most chivalrous of men. They were not afraid for themselves, certainly, but rather, for the Church herself. Certainly such an attitude can only be honorable, even touching. But also, it must be said, it is somewhat injudicious, even disrespectful, and even, I am obliged to say, un-Christian. Undoubtedly they would have given their lives to save the Church. That is very good. But it would have been much better, and more realistic, not to tremble for her and not to believe so easily that she needed them so.
They warn that, unless their ideas are accepted, all is lost: religion, the Church. The modern world, they warn, will turn its back on the Catholics, and all will be lost. The Catholics must not blunder, they must make themselves liked, they must not lose their reputation. Catholics must not antagonize the modern world, and so on..."


"It is this very fear, the foundation of liberalism and of present-day apologetics, that tends to insinuate into the clergy a new spirit. Such is the voice of the new school: it is necessary to go along to get along. The Church must bring herself up to date. If not, she is lost. It is high time to see to it."
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Last Tradhican on January 24, 2018, 09:03:26 AM
" We can define liberalism in a word: fear. Let it be clear that I am not talking about cowardice. Many liberals have been the bravest and the most chivalrous of men. They were not afraid for themselves, certainly, but rather, for the Church herself. Certainly such an attitude can only be honorable, even touching. But also, it must be said, it is somewhat injudicious, even disrespectful, and even, I am obliged to say, un-Christian. Undoubtedly they would have given their lives to save the Church. That is very good. But it would have been much better, and more realistic, not to tremble for her and not to believe so easily that she needed them so.
They warn that, unless their ideas are accepted, all is lost: religion, the Church. The modern world, they warn, will turn its back on the Catholics, and all will be lost. The Catholics must not blunder, they must make themselves liked, they must not lose their reputation. Catholics must not antagonize the modern world, and so on..."


"It is this very fear, the foundation of liberalism and of present-day apologetics, that tends to insinuate into the clergy a new spirit. Such is the voice of the new school: it is necessary to go along to get along. The Church must bring herself up to date. If not, she is lost. It is high time to see to it."
I disagree completely, liberalism has nothing to do with chivalry, it is just the result of denying God's Grace. It's that simple. 
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Smedley Butler on January 24, 2018, 09:18:54 AM
Hired actor news readers, prepared scripts in front of green screens with fancy production values. 

WHO is funding the SSPX?
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: JmJ2cents on January 24, 2018, 09:20:33 AM
I was also surprised at the thumbs down on Cantarella's post.  What gives.  It makes you wonder who is reading this forum?  Feminism is rampant in the "traditional" circles.  I know in St. Mary's Kansas they have an on site female college counselor.  She is there for all the "ladies" who are interested in College.  She can help you apply and figure out your housing situation.  I'm sure no one is surprised. I'm not.  
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: St Ignatius on January 24, 2018, 09:22:22 AM
I'm of the opinion that this "info-babe" is to facilitate the drones that the new-SSPX needs for it's base... They don't need, or want, thinking men.  

No man worth his salt, would heed to such a PR stunt... this tactic can only be detrimental to the intellect.  

The SSPX is finished.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Smedley Butler on January 24, 2018, 09:24:16 AM
This is masculinized attire for a woman. It has meaning behind it and it is done in purpose. The "business suit" is not proper dress for a traditional Catholic lady. It denotes a feminist desire of competitiveness in the outside world, the world of men, instead of domesticity and nurturing behavior. This is not a good role model for girls and I am surprised that the SSPX is sinking this low nowadays.

As Pope Pius XII said in his allocution on Fashion:



 
Indeed.
Lots of ladies in the Resistance wear pants and allow their daughters to do so.
Sets a bad example. 
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Smedley Butler on January 24, 2018, 09:26:45 AM
That was my guess also.
She and her male counterpart are actors hired by Wegner's PR firm.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Meg on January 24, 2018, 09:29:12 AM
The female "News Anchor" says towards the end of the video (in reference to +ABL).."when he found the society in order to preserve the priesthood." 

I wonder if this is the new motto of the SSPX, in that the real reason for the existence of the SSPX is to preserve the order of priesthood.

Maybe they also mistakenly believe that the priesthood can be preserved by reconciling with Modernist Rome. 

Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Mr G on January 24, 2018, 09:39:19 AM
She and her male counterpart are actors hired by Wegner's PR firm.
Not exactly (although they are SSPX employees, but not by the PR Firm), Jim Vogel (the male counterpart) is a parishioner and I think the young women is also.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Smedley Butler on January 24, 2018, 03:03:21 PM
n/m
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: PG on January 24, 2018, 04:50:07 PM
I am glad I did not yet post anything about these new sspx videos.  I would never have come up with the brilliant "news babe" line.  However, I personally dislike the male from the first video more.  He has a queer haircut.   And, I hate that square popping wall!  I mean it looks like a modern artists rental apartment in a NY highrise.  Ugly.  I dislike that the female wears that suit top too, but she seems pleasant enough.    

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVF4gGOUd9s
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Meg on January 24, 2018, 05:52:01 PM
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.


I, for one, am not so concerned with the young lady's appearance. Her apparel and demeanor are fine. 

What concerns me is the content. The young lady mentions twice about the SSPX priesthood, and she says toward the end that +ABL formed the Society in order to preserve the priesthood. That's true to a certain extent, but it quickly became clear to the Archbishop that in order to maintain the priesthood, that he would have to stand up for truth, which meant standing against the Council and Modernist Rome.

Where, in the video, does the young lady say anything about the Council or Modernist Rome?
It would seem that the SSPX no longer believes in saying anything against the Council or Modernist Rome. Why is that?

It seems that they are now just about maintaining the priesthood, and the TLM, and certain aspects of Tradition. And they appear to have given up the greater battle that +ABL fought.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: SeanJohnson on January 24, 2018, 05:52:22 PM
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.

I agree it is sad that such a fine young lady is so misled and exploited by the SSPX.

No doubt, they have convinced her she has done a good deed, and yet, she has turned her back on the social teachings of the popes and the old SSPX.

Woe to them who call evil good!
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Ekim on January 24, 2018, 07:30:59 PM
What I find interesting about the video regarding the seminary in Germany is that the seminarians do not mention that the Novus Ordo is a danger to the faith. They simply say they do not like it’s protestant orientation. No more do they speak of it as leading to heresy or the cause of great sacrilege.  Now they prefer the Traditional Latin Mass; as I prefer steak over peanut butter and jelly.

No more is the Novus Ordo a “poisoned soup” to be avoided at all costs for danger of death, but rather a soup of lesser quality, that is simply not preferred.

Sad indeed!

http://fsspx.news/en/news-events/news/sspx-seminary-zaitzkofen-germany-produces-video-following-life-seminarian-34569 (http://fsspx.news/en/news-events/news/sspx-seminary-zaitzkofen-germany-produces-video-following-life-seminarian-34569)
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: St Ignatius on January 24, 2018, 10:07:28 PM
I agree it is sad that such a fine young lady is so misled and exploited by the SSPX.

No doubt, they have convinced her she has done a good deed, and yet, she has turned her back on the social teachings of the popes and the old SSPX.

Woe to them who call evil good!

Indeed!

I'm not so concerned with this young female's demeanor, but rather that she has been exploited by the hierarchy of the SSPX to subvert the intellects of the masses of the faithful.

Surely, some of the bishops and priests are embarrassed by the fact that their priestly fraternity is being represented by a young female?
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Incredulous on January 24, 2018, 10:51:44 PM
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.

What did you say here?

"... anxious to drink the blood of fellow traditional Catholics."

 Why would you compare us to blood libel Jєωs and St. Mary's youngsters to innocent Gentiles?

    If you know these two youngsters and are from St. Mary's, then I suspect you also know how the SSPX started out there in the
    1970s?  It was a humble beginning right?  Many families lived in trailers.  
   
    I suppose for those suffering from the St. Mary's bunker mentality, they wouldn't know that Fr. Wegener re-branded your  
    religious order?  They wouldn't notice all the modernist compromises and how proud the SSPX has become?

You may be ashamed of us.
But we're incredulous of how you and your fellow St. Mary's Catholics allowed Menzingen to sell you down the river, and how you insist on remaining oblivious to it?

Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: stgobnait on January 25, 2018, 04:01:26 AM
The criticism of the video is not against the individuals therein, it is simply highlighting the immense change in the presenting of the SSPX as a bulwark against modernism in the Church, I would have expected this of the Indult pretenders, it shows how far the SSPX has fallen in order to appease Rome, how thoroughly up to date they have become.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Stubborn on January 25, 2018, 04:55:19 AM
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.  
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Mr G on January 25, 2018, 08:07:04 AM
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
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Last Tradhican on January 25, 2018, 08:26:13 AM
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.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: St Ignatius on January 25, 2018, 09:10:23 AM
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...)

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRRj5PeBQVzGJN9IxIG04w7JURBwbkR2kyskm6PWo6h9aV9nwVz)
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Ladislaus on January 25, 2018, 09:16:41 AM
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...)

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRRj5PeBQVzGJN9IxIG04w7JURBwbkR2kyskm6PWo6h9aV9nwVz)

+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.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Ladislaus on January 25, 2018, 09:38:50 AM
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.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Pax Vobis on January 25, 2018, 09:39:14 AM
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.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: St Ignatius on January 25, 2018, 09:50:38 AM
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...
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: B from A on January 25, 2018, 10:10:17 AM
+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.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: B from A on January 25, 2018, 10:15:36 AM
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

Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: wallflower on January 25, 2018, 06:53:32 PM
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.

Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Mr G on January 26, 2018, 07:53:31 AM
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".  
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Ladislaus on January 26, 2018, 08:11:52 AM
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.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Mr G on January 26, 2018, 08:41:41 AM
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".  
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Mr G on January 26, 2018, 08:49:28 AM
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".
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Pax Vobis on January 26, 2018, 09:04:29 AM
Quote
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's not strange, it's brilliant.  Just like all of modern society, they are catering to women.  In this case, they are appealing to the trad mothers of the large catholic families, so that when a 'deal' is made, they will make the emotional decision and stick with the society, even when the husbands (hopefully) might realize the hypocrisy and dangers of such a move.  The sspx knows their actions are irrational and contradictory, and that men will see right through it.  So they have kicked out rational, manly priests from their group and they are appealing to the 'feminine' attributes of catholicism, same as did V2.  
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on January 26, 2018, 10:20:54 AM
I don't agree with modern background setting for the news segment of the SSPX.  I did enjoy the music.  EWTN Live with Father Mitch  has one of the best Catholic sets I have seen.  It would be more appropriate for a Priest to report the news.  

No, I didn't thumbs down and I don't wear slacks or yoga pants.  No gentleman would call a young woman "babe" unless it was his wife.  That is a disgrace. I felt that the beautiful young lady was dressed modestly according to the teachings of the Catholic Church.  Being Catholic doesn't mean dressing frumpy.  Young ladies Catholic school uniforms would include blazers.  

However, I have seen troubles with many involved in theatre, TV , social media.  

If we had children, we would want them to learn their Catholic faith as a priority to prepare them for religious life or marriage.  There is too much emphasis on recreation.   Hard work is frowned upon including Trad Catholic communities. 

There are many excellent Catholic social media operated like Cathinfo and Finer Fem.  



There was a case of a young Catholic couple who homeschooled their children , went to Mass.  Thanks to their Catholic social media business they ended up divorced.  Very sad and disturbing.

Most in TV , theatre, etc have become atheists or have given in to temptations and vanity.  Many female newscasters dress terrible and indecent.   It is freezing out and they are wearing a tight sleeveless dress looking like bimbo at a nightclub.  Most of these men on news are feminine or practicing sodomists.  It is sad that many mothers let their children take dance classes wearing immodest clothes and dance moves.  ( and some of these are trad Moms). 

Bishop Williamson made good points during a talk where he encouraged good Catholic work ethics and hard work.  







Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Ladislaus on January 26, 2018, 10:37:01 AM
No gentleman would call a young woman "babe" unless it was his wife.  That is a disgrace.

I think you misunderstand the comment.  It's a reference to the modern "infobabe" phenomenon ... where news channels have been hiring attractive, yet often unqualified and not particularly intelligent, women (often immodestly dressed) to attract viewership.  Not that this lady is unintelligent (I was just providing a general definition).  Long gone are the days of the Dan Rather or Charles Kuralt types presenting the news in a serious and dignified manner (not that I agree with the liberal views of these men).  Evidently, also, long gone are the days of having a senior dignified priest with some gravitas presenting the views of the "priestly" society of St. Pius X.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Smedley Butler on January 26, 2018, 10:42:52 AM
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.
Now that is the response of a seriously hardcore brainwashed SSPX cult member right there.
Let this be the example: the SSPX is a CULT.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on January 26, 2018, 10:58:34 AM
"Bumpkin?" :farmer:

I say that lacks charity.  Does that mean Saint Pope Pius X grew up as a "bumpkin"?

Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on January 26, 2018, 11:02:43 AM
There was a fine married trad Catholic man with a fine wife and children. That fine man was didn't realize that we could see him posting to other articles within newsfeed on Facebook.  He was defending a woman who was arrested with having sex with her own daughter.  This from the fine trad catholic.  Many other Catholics within Facebook Trad Cat group viewed and ignored it. 
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on January 26, 2018, 11:13:54 AM
 now  I understand.  

Many females in the secular news industry are prostitutes/adulterers. Even some of the males.  

Barbara WaWa on live TV defended pedophiles/pederasts.  

And then there are weinsteins ' babes who were ok the sex abuse for a long time.  They would do anything for money and fame
Even Oprah.  

Now these gymnists.  What decent Mother would allow their daughters to see a pervert doctor?

Fox News girls dress like bimbos.  
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: hollingsworth on January 26, 2018, 11:25:16 AM

Quote
No, I didn't thumbs down and I don't wear slacks or yoga pants.  No gentleman would call a young woman "babe" unless it was his wife.  That is a disgrace. I felt that the beautiful young lady was dressed modestly according to the teachings of the Catholic Church.  Being Catholic doesn't mean dressing frumpy.  Young ladies Catholic school uniforms would include blazers. 
Finally, some perspective!  This is just one more CI topic which could have been withheld or closed down from the beginning.  On balance, the whole discussion is ridiculous and unfruitful.  I agree that the lady was dressed modestly, at least from the waist up.  Now if she was wearing only her underwear from the waist down, that might might justify a few comments from overly punctilious trads.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: aryzia on January 26, 2018, 11:48:28 AM
If you don't listen to the SSPX babe, you're uninformed. If you listen to the SSPX babe, you're misinformed. Modified version of a Mark Twain quote.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Ladislaus on January 26, 2018, 12:13:37 PM
What decent Mother would allow their daughters to see a pervert doctor?

Indeed, many of these "mothers" literally prostitute out their daughters so they can enjoy fame and fortune.  It's disgusting.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: jvk on January 26, 2018, 03:43:48 PM
Tongue in cheek here: Maybe the "news babe" is a nun?  
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: 2Vermont on January 26, 2018, 04:54:08 PM
I would agree with those who believed the bigger issue was how the reporter described ABL's purpose for founding the SSPX:  to preserve the priesthood.  Whereas it's my understanding that this was part of his intent, whatever happened to his issues with the Council?
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: kiwiboy on January 26, 2018, 06:00:30 PM
Now that is the response of a seriously hardcore brainwashed SSPX cult member right there.
Let this be the example: the SSPX is a CULT.

You beat me to it!


So I think we are all in agreement. We should lynch these two news presenters.

I'll bring the pitchforks.

Who wants to bring the straw? and the gasoline? And the ropes?
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Incredulous on January 27, 2018, 10:08:18 AM
You beat me to it!


So I think we are all in agreement. We should lynch these two news presenters.

I'll bring the pitchforks.

Who wants to bring the straw? and the gasoline? And the ropes?

What are you saying?   :heretic:

Don't touch the wholesome "youngsters"!   

First, we need to interrogate the News set director and his supervisor, which is likely Fr. Wegner.

For not one detail of that video was left unsupervised by the District Superior.



Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: PG on February 04, 2018, 11:41:13 AM
Ladislaus mentioned about a bmw photo with sspx seminarians.  I just now saw it for the first time.  One cannot help but notice the left leg genuflection of the seminarian.  It is blasphemous.  If trads think they can sanctify all these clever fundraising schemes, they are dreaming.

I think when we talk of red lighting.  We need to talk about red lighting certain things.  Funds/money absolutely must be red lighted when it comes to the sspx.  

 http://nonpossumus-vcr.blogspot.com/     bottom of page.

Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Ladislaus on February 04, 2018, 12:16:00 PM
Ladislaus mentioned about a bmw photo with sspx seminarians.

And another thing with this new generation of SSPX seminarians/priests is that they all look and act alike ... almost as if they came from some clone factory.  Back in the old days, every priest had a unique personality and even look about him.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Incredulous on February 04, 2018, 08:28:07 PM
Ladislaus mentioned about a bmw photo with sspx seminarians.  I just now saw it for the first time.  One cannot help but notice the left leg genuflection of the seminarian.  It is blasphemous.  If trads think they can sanctify all these clever fundraising schemes, they are dreaming.

I think when we talk of red lighting.  We need to talk about red lighting certain things.  Funds/money absolutely must be red lighted when it comes to the sspx.  

 http://nonpossumus-vcr.blogspot.com/     bottom of page.

I think it was a Mercedes Benz and they were just acting silly, but it's hard to dodge the materialism charge all the same.

If they had raffled a late model Toyota Corolla, we couldn't make the charge.
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Last Tradhican on February 04, 2018, 10:06:51 PM
The SSPX should take a vow of poverty, return all the properties to the faithful, and trust in God to provide. 
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Benzel on February 05, 2018, 02:00:48 AM
(http://stas.org/sites/sspx/files/styles/gallery_thumbnail/public/US-STAS%20new%20seminary/MED-Gallery/mercedes_92_1.jpg?itok=2sbmvzUz)

http://stas.org/en/media/photos/mercedes-benz-c300-4matic-5812 (http://stas.org/en/media/photos/mercedes-benz-c300-4matic-5812)
Title: Re: SSPX News babe?
Post by: Incredulous on February 05, 2018, 08:41:32 AM
News babe + Mercedes
(https://itisamellsworld.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/img_2855-copy1.jpg)
It's only one "re-branding" step away.