Author Topic: SSPX priest retreat: families should have no more than 5 or 6 children (Read 9647 times)

For Greater Glory · « **Reply #15 on:** August 18, 2013, 06:47:54 PM »

ggreg said: But I am not spearheading the resistance.

Thank the good Lord you're not heading up the resistance, ggreg!!!

Maybe Fr. Pfeiffer could have used different words, but I think he's encouraging these priests to step out, to be a part of the resistance and the good bishop is telling them to stay put! For heaven's sake, aren't we supposed to be growing the resistance? I guess it is true. We need a leader.

And as far as being up a creek with a paddle :roll-laugh1:have a little faith in God!

Novus Weirdo · « **Reply #16 on:** August 18, 2013, 06:50:58 PM »

Quote from: ggreg

But I am not spearheading the resistance.

Someone leading the resistance needs to be circuмspect in their language when speaking in public. Especially when someone is videoing you and going to stick it on YouTube. Did he learn nothing from Williamson's h0Ɩ0h0αx comments.

Has Bishop Fellay ever used the adjective "demonic" or anything as strong, when describing Bishop Richard Williamson?

I wonder how Bishop Williamson feels about his prudential, pastoral, advice to SSPX priests being called "demonic advice" by Fr. Pfeiffer? After all if the resistance does destroy itself in short order, or find it is financially unsustainable, then those priests are up sh!t creek without a paddle.

Maybe in the same spirit of prudence Bishop Williamson might decide that supporting the resistance's figurehead who are ready in their anger and zeal to throw out terms like "demonic advice", is not the swansong he wants for his life's work.

This filth you oink is better suited for I(diot) A(rdens).

Graham · « **Reply #17 on:** August 19, 2013, 04:02:33 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

Just as they don't want early marriage. Earlier in the talk Father Pfeiffer speaks of marrying (at the end of the month he will) a young couple that the SSPX has refused to marry and has been sending pathetic messages to Father Pfeiffer and Ortiz to try to stop himn.

Because they lust for control and money, and Catholic families are secondary.

Yes, this situation is beyond the pale.

We have people here saying that an 18/19 year old couple are too young and immature to marry!

And "they've only been courting for a year" (several months more, in fact, but some people seem not to let honesty hold them back) which apparently is much too short a time.

These objections are specious and illegal, and everyone here in Quebec knows they're specious and illegal, but many don't care, because the DS has spoken.

Matto · « **Reply #18 on:** August 19, 2013, 04:04:54 PM »

Quote from: Graham

We have people here saying that an 18/19 year old couple are too young and immature to marry!

Did the priest refuse to marry them?

Graham · « **Reply #19 on:** August 19, 2013, 04:27:16 PM »

Quote from: Matto

Quote from: Graham
We have people here saying that an 18/19 year old couple are too young and immature to marry!

Did the priest refuse to marry them?

Yes, exactly.

Matto · « **Reply #20 on:** August 19, 2013, 04:28:00 PM »

Isn't that against canon law?

Telesphorus · « **Reply #21 on:** August 19, 2013, 04:37:24 PM »

It wouldn't surprise me if the SSPX tried to claim the marriage was invalid, the same way conciliarists deny the validity of SSPX marriages.

Graham · « **Reply #22 on:** August 19, 2013, 04:38:44 PM »

I am open to correction, but it is my understanding that a priest cannot refuse a couple who fulfill the requirements of Church law. I cannot fathom on what basis the SSPX priest decided this couple is incapable of a valid marriage, but that is what he did. It seems to rest on the idea that they are too young.

This has the smell of a 'power trip' that went awry.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #23 on:** August 19, 2013, 04:43:07 PM »

Quote from: Graham

I am open to correction, but it is my understanding that a priest cannot refuse a couple who fulfill the requirements of Church law. I cannot fathom on what basis the SSPX priest decided this couple were incapable of a valid marriage, but that is what he did. It seems to rest on the idea that they are too young.

This has the smell of a 'power trip' that went awry.

It's their general policy. (as I know from another such case) What other policy could they have if they want couples to have no more than 5 or 6 children?

Look, the French priest at our chapel gave a sermon stating that in our day and age people needed to marry later because of "lack of maturity."

When I mentioned this to a travelling redemptorist who gave missions, he was surprised. He had said that equivalent to a high school diploma was generally an indication of readiness for motherhood.

Liberal middle class people don't like early marriage, and considerations (at least realistic considerations) of morality and chastity are very much secondary for them.

bowler · « **Reply #24 on:** August 19, 2013, 06:29:15 PM »

The SSPX schools do not prepare the boys to be working men. They focus on the liberal arts and not math, sciences, business, or blue collar positions. No wonder they say the young men are not ready for marriage. With the type of schooling they receive from the SSPX, they will NEVER be ready for any work but teaching and the priesthood ( teachers and priests that do not know how to use a screw driver!).

They might as well neuter the young men, they don't educate them to be capable of supporting anyone, but maybe themselves.

bowler · « **Reply #25 on:** August 19, 2013, 06:33:59 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

Look, the French priest at our chapel gave a sermon stating that in our day and age people needed to marry later because of "lack of maturity."

Who's fault is that if they went to SSPX schools and attended SSPX chapels? It is the fault of the priest that is complaining.

Zeitun · « **Reply #26 on:** August 19, 2013, 06:46:15 PM »

Quote from: bowler

The SSPX schools do not prepare the boys to be working men. They focus on the liberal arts and not math, sciences, business, or blue collar positions. No wonder they say the young men are not ready for marriage. With the type of schooling they receive from the SSPX, they will NEVER be ready for any work but teaching and the priesthood ( teachers and priests that do not know how to use a screw driver!).

They might as well neuter the young men, they don't educate them to be capable of supporting anyone, but maybe themselves.

They are minor seminaries.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #27 on:** August 19, 2013, 07:04:51 PM »

Quote from: bowler

Quote from: Telesphorus

Look, the French priest at our chapel gave a sermon stating that in our day and age people needed to marry later because of "lack of maturity."

Who's fault is that if they went to SSPX schools and attended SSPX chapels? It is the fault of the priest that is complaining.

Bowler, I'm not sure that position really has to do with jobs and wages that are available to young men as much as it has to do with pure liberalism. They don't like early marriage because it doesn't fit with modern society, and they want to fit in with modern society, more than they want to hold fast to Catholic Tradition. It's not just a matter of whether the boys have family wages or not. They want the girls to go for careers.

If they're saying that families shouldn't have more than 5 or 6 children, it's not just a matter of whether or not they believe families can "afford it" - it's that they consider families larger than that to be incompatible with the attitudes in the "modern world" that they are being branded to fit in with. They are people who really have little serious interest in preserving Catholic Tradition other than as a form of social networking and nostalgia.

For Greater Glory · « **Reply #28 on:** August 19, 2013, 10:38:47 PM »

Tele said:
They want the girls to go for careers.

I can second that!

Luker · « **Reply #29 on:** August 20, 2013, 08:44:19 AM »

I watched this talk by Fr Pfieffer and thought it was quite good, it gave me much to think about.

But in regards to the young couple mentioned that were refused marriage, could it be a prudential decision of the priest because the young man say didn't yet have a decent full time job? a job that could support even a new family? So the priest asked them to wait a year to get their financial ducks in a row. Just asking, but it does concern me that the SSPX refuses/delays marriages. I have heard of other cases mentioned as well.

Luke