The "good Catholic men who for two decades have been bringing the Statue from the choir" are the TFP, whom have not always been so good according to some SSPX/Resistance faithful who have been on that pilgrimage many times.
| (https://traditioninaction.org/Questions/Images/F_046_OLGS.jpg) Our Lady of Good Success (https://traditioninaction.org/booksOLGS.htm) |
The SSPX will likely tell you their manly young priests were "just weak", from missing their normal Chocoberry oatmeal breakfasts before heading out to move the statue of Our Lady of Good Success.
It is beyond them to ever admit that Our Lady was letting them know she was unhappy with the SSPX touching her statue.
The Sadness of Our Lady of Good Success in Quito 2019
Atila S. Guimarães
This year I was able to be in Quito on February 2, the Feast Day of Our Lady of Good Success. I had never been in that colorful and beautiful city before. I arrived on February 1st and left on the 7th. From February 1st to the 3rd, when the Statue returned to her cloistered place in the Convent’s upper choir, I tried to stay with her as much as I could, which translates into about four or five hours every day.
(https://traditioninaction.org/OLGS/OLGSimages/A022_Majest.jpg)
Although photos with flash were not allowed in the Church and my camera is not a professional one, I took many pictures on those days, some of which I will share with my readers.
Upon entering the Church of the Immaculate Conception, which is majestic and very dignified – but not as rich as the Cathedral or the Church of San Francisco – one needs some time to adapt his spirit to that baroque atmosphere of old Quito. While this adaptation takes place, the eyes are drawn to the main Statue on the central altar, which replaces Christ Crucified during those days. There was the Statue of Our Lady of Good Success.
She reigns from her niche not only as the Abbess of the Convent of the Immaculate Conception but as the Empress of the world. The way she holds her staff gives the impression that she is ready to take some steps and descend in order to exert her dominion over all her subjects. I don’t know of any picture of Louis XIV in all his pomp that has more majesty than Our Lady in that Statue.
Her majesty, however, was not of an Empress who is being applauded by her subjects. It appeared to me to be rather the majesty of a Queen who is being rejected. She seems to be closed in her own dignity as if she were saying: “I continue to be myself in all my majesty, even when no one or just a few are open to me.”
She has something of the rejected majesty that can be seen in the Holy Shroud of Turin. God Incarnate was rejected, condemned for the good He did and crucified between thieves. His Sacred Face is the paradigm of majesty rejected: it is the Divine Majesty rejected. In my opinion, Our Lady of Good Success’ Statue revealed something similar on those days that she descended from her Abbess’ chair in the upper choir to be with the people of Quito.
The expression of the Sacred Statue did not soften during the two next days. On the afternoon of February 3, she was brought from the central altar to a place on an andor near the Communion rail, as an intermediary site before she would return to the cloister.
It was good for the faithful present who could see her more closely. But, viewing the sacred image closer, it seemed to me her sadness was still more pungent. She appeared to be on the verge of weeping, as the photos show.
Now, why was the Statue so sad? Are there reasons for this apogee of grievance?I believe there are many reasons for that sadness. I list just a few:
(https://traditioninaction.org/OLGS/OLGSimages/A022_Sad.jpg)
- Her Statue had to bear many Novus Ordo Masses said at her feet.
- The Convent nuns themselves do not have access to a Tridentine Mass and, when some good Catholics bring a priest to say one inside the Convent, the Superiors complain and prefer the New Mass in the vernacular.
- The New Mass is said for the nuns by two Franciscan priests. On February 3, one of these priests was denounced by the parents of two girls, then arrested and jailed for sɛҳuąƖly abusing their daughters. This news was in the headlines of the local newspapers and the topic was still making front page news on February 6.
- The Archbishop of Quito, Fausto Trávez Trávez forbade the group of good Catholic men who for two decades have been bringing the Statue from the choir to the Church from carrying out this work. He also prohibited them to organize the Procession of the Dawn, a solemn procession carrying a smaller statue of Our Lady through the streets of the city in the dawn hours of her feast day, February 2.
- He passed these charges to the priests of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), who overnight entered the picture and took over. The reason for this sudden complacence of the Archbishop with a group that says the Latin Mass, which he forbids in his whole Archdiocese, seem to be some rare exchange of favors on both parts.
- I also heard from well-informed persons that, when the SSPX priests tried to lift the Statue from the choir to bring her down to the Church, the Statue became so heavy that they were unable to do so. By the way, it is known that this is a common way for the Statue to show her displeasure: the Statue becomes so heavy that it cannot be transported even by a group of strong men.
According to these trustworthy sources, the situation was so embarrassing that the nuns did not know what to do. The Archbishop was called and he decided that the Franciscans should carry it down. The Statue allowed herself to be transported by the Franciscans, but they could not move the Child Jesus, who in turn became insurmountably heavy.
Here, I offer my readers some reasons – real or hypothetical, since I cannot guarantee the veracity of the rumors that were flying in Quito all while I was there – that may explain why Our Lady was so sad.
In any circuмstance, good Catholics need to make reparation for these and many other offenses being made daily against her and her Son. To call for reparation is the motif that inspired me to write these lines.
Atila S. Guimaraes states:Excellent observations Mr G. Though I doubt the SSPX priests themselves were the ones that tried to carry the statues. I also doubt that the "Franciscans" they mention were priests, being as the Novus Ordo priests "subcontract" even the distribution of the Blessed Sacrament to laymen. There is not enough information in the article to make a decision one way or another. I am surprised that Mr. Guimaraes, who is always very detailed in his investigative work, should write such a thin article.
"The Archbishop was called and he decided that the Franciscans should carry it down. The Statue allowed herself to be transported by the Franciscans, but they could not move the Child Jesus, who in turn became insurmountably heavy."
1. ) Supposedly the statute of Our Lady was able to be carried by priests who exclusively offer the Novus Ordo, but not the SSPX.
2.), "the group of good Catholic men who for two decades have been bringing the Statue from the choir to the Church" are the TFP, a group that does not preach the full message of Fatima and does not denounce the errors and heresies of Vatican II or the hierarchy. Yet, the statue has allowed the compromisers to carry her but now not the SSPX. Atila suggest that this is Our lady's disapproval with the SSPX but why no disapproval all these years with those who compromise with the Novus Ordo?
The TFP works together with the Franciscans and the Conceptionist Convent during the Feast of Our Lady of Good Success, and for the procession on Feb 2nd. But it is the Franciscan priests who bring down the original statue from her place above the altar. The TFP members would carry the smaller replica of the statue through the streets of Quito for the dawn procession.The Guimaraes article then is totally unreliable since he says "The Archbishop of Quito, Fausto Trávez Trávez forbade the group of good Catholic men who for two decades have been bringing the Statue from the choir to the Church from carrying out this work", it does not say Franciscan priests. Moreover, you say the statues are brought down from their place above the altar, while Guimaraes says it is brought down from the choir.
The statue of Mary only descends from the altar a few times a year for a short period of time. She comes down to visit her people, it has nothing to do with which Mass is being said. The arrangement between the archbishop and SSPX to take away the right of the Franciscan priests is what would have caused the statue to stay put until the matter was resolved.
Indeed, the common talk in Quito was that the Archbishop had been pressured by creditors to pay the huge debt he had assumed during Pope Francis’ visit to Quito in 2015 and was unable to pay. It was being said everywhere that the SSPX advanced the needed amount of money in exchange for the Prelate’s pledge to replace that group of good Catholics who traditionally oversaw the descent of the Statue and organized the Procession of the Dawn.When the pope visits cities, the cost is astronomical. I'd say in the millions of dollars (the popes visit to Ireland cost $32 million Euros). Why would the SSPX pay millions or even $10,000 to carry the statue down from a choir loft?
When the pope visits cities, the cost is astronomical. I'd say in the millions of dollars (the popes visit to Ireland cost $32 million Euros). Why would the SSPX pay millions or even $10,000 to carry the statue down from a choir loft?
How many SSPX priest went on this pilgrimage, that they had enough priests to carry the statue?
Yes, perhaps those priests need to get some weight training equipment at their residence. :laugh1:Or dare I say Resistance training?
Or dare I say Resistance training?
The Guimaraes article then is totally unreliable since he says "The Archbishop of Quito, Fausto Trávez Trávez forbade the group of good Catholic men who for two decades have been bringing the Statue from the choir to the Church from carrying out this work", it does not say Franciscan priests.If you read the whole article you would find...
:laugh1:
Yes, the SSPX priest would certainly benefit from Resistance training.
I also heard from well-informed persons that, when the SSPX priests tried to lift the Statue from the choir to bring her down to the Church, the Statue became so heavy that they were unable to do so. By the way, it is known that this is a common way for the Statue to show her displeasure: the Statue becomes so heavy that it cannot be transported even by a group of strong men.
According to these trustworthy sources, the situation was so embarrassing that the nuns did not know what to do. The Archbishop was called and he decided that the Franciscans should carry it down. The Statue allowed herself to be transported by the Franciscans, but they could not move the Child Jesus, who in turn became insurmountably heavy. So, for that first night the Statue remained in the Church without the Christ Child in her arm. The next morning the Mother Superior could easily pick up the Child and place Him in the arm of His Mother.
Which side of the story is true however, only those directly involved know the truth.
I know someone that went there recently. The SSPX Priests did not carry the statue the Franciscans did. There is a power struggle going on and the SSPX is not involved.And again :facepalm:..
Well, my son was told that the TFP and SSPX used to alternate taking turns to care for the statue ... but then the SSPX just stopped showing up. So it was left to the TFP for a while. I have an e-mail out to some high-ranking TFP members I know to see if there's any truth to the TIA article.Ladislaus, any news from the TFP?
Has Vox Catholica or SSPX made any other statements about these attacks? Curious to hear what either of them have to say in response to Tradition in Action's rebuttals, which seem to be pretty solid.
OKAY, The SSPX Priests didn't attempt to carry the Statue ! Hows that work for you ?Oh, and who’s your source for that information? Because Atila Guimaraes and several others from TIA have been regular contributors to the spreading of the devotion of Our Lady of Good Success at The Conceptionist Convent, so I would imagine with all the reporting and visits to Quito they’ve done over the years, that it would have given them some excellent contacts and valueable sources of information at that location.
Ladislaus, any news from the TFP?
CARRISSIMA, I HAD A COUPLE RELATIVES THAT JUST CAME BACK FROM THERE ,THEY WERE AN EYEWITNESS ! THAT IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME.Eyewitnesses of what? That the Franciscans carried the statue? Again, like others have said here, Atila never said that the SSPX carried the statue: it was reported that THE SSPX ATTEMPTED to carry it, the Statue became "insurmountably heavy", and since the situation was so embarrassing, the Archbishop was called, who ordered the Franciscans to come in and carry the statue, which they did.
But then again, a lot of CI topics go poof and disappear down the memory hole.
Cosmas: OKAY, I'll make this as simple as I can, The Society Priests did not attempt to carry The Statue. The Franciscans carried the Statue.
...The Franciscans carried the Statue.That is an established fact stated several times, why do you keep repeating it?
OKAY, I'll make this as simple as I can, The Society Priests did not attempt to carry The Statue.Because you’re family didn’t see them attempt to move it, then it never happened?
Well, you seem to speak with absolute confidence, and I, personally, have no reason to doubt you or your source(s).:laugh1:
So then, let's just put the topic to rest. If after over 2500 views, and 40 responses the alleged 'heavy statue' story is a fabrication, and there is not a shred of truth to it, then let's just drop it.Are you an armchair moderator for online forums? What do you care where this thread goes? Start a new one with a more valuable topic if you like, it’s a free country :cheers:
Sorry, Matthew, too many topics on CI, undeserving of seemingly exhaustless attention, and endless commentary, survive into the indefinite future. We're talking now about topics which, sometimes, get 10,000 plus views, and hundreds of comments, long after they become irrelevant, long after the victim has died, turned to dust and blown to the wind. This is fast turning into one of those topics. Stick a fork in it!
Those are just quotes from individuals like us on CI, absolutely worthless. We'll have to wait till Guimaraes elaborates further on these two amazing miracles (the statue can change its weight and the her facial expressions.), which I for one do not believe.Last Tradhican: You doubt Our Lady can change her facial expressions. Let's put your doubt to rest: there were witness and news reports on the Miracle of 1941, in which Our Lady of Good Success (the statue) raised and lowered her eyes. I am including both Part I and Part II below for your reading convenience.
On July 5, 1941, Peru invaded the borders of Ecuador – the western Province of El Oro and the Andean Province of Loja. Fierce fighting broke out, and Ecuador was facing superior forces and what appeared to be a long and bloody war. By mid-July many lives had been lost and it seemed there would be no immediate end to what today is called the War of ‘41.
On July 24, the Triduum in honor of Our Lady of Good Success started in the Church of the Immaculate Conception in downtown Quito, across from the Government's Palace. The life size miraculous statue of Our Lady of Good Success, which usually sits in the Abbess’ seat in the upper choir, was brought down to reign above the main altar so that the faithful could join the cloistered Conceptionist nuns in asking her intercession. On July 27, as the Triduum was coming to its close, Our Lady of Good Success worked a miracle for the Ecuadorian people, offering a great hope to a distressed population, a hope that was very quickly fulfilled. Our Lady lowers & raises her eyes It was around 9 a.m., various ladies were near the main altar praying to Our Lady when they observed that the Statue of the Virgin of Good Success opened her eyes wide, turned them downward at them with a look of great compassion and, then, raised them upward. This happened several times. Visibly moved by the miraculous event, they remained in prayer, several of them weeping, but they did not tell the others present in the church what they had witnessed.
Deeply moved but fearful that he was experiencing some optical illusion, he went to tell the ladies who were praying so fervently in the church what he had witnessed. They confirmed it, telling him that they had seen the same miracle only about an hour earlier. (2) The news rapidly spread through the whole city. One person told another, “A miracle at the Church of the Conception!” “Hurry, Our Lady is moving her eyes at the Conceptionist Church!” In a short time, it seemed that all the inhabitants of Quito, a city known for its piety and devotion to Our Lady, were heading toward the Conceptionist Church with the hope to see for themselves the miracle, as the Statue continued to raise and lower her eyes at intervals throughout the day. Learning of the prodigy, a reporter from the Quito daily El Commercio hurried to the crowded square to interview witnesses of the marvel. He spoke with the distinguished Señora Matilde Chiriboga de Salvador, who told him with great excitement: “I saw the Blessed Virgin open and close her eyes, just as thousands of persons have seen it today.” (3)
Many witnesses said that the face of the image would take on a rosy color. Then, her eyelids, which are normally half-closed, would open wider and she would turn her gaze downward on the people. Afterwards, she would raise them to Heaven and, then, lower them to their natural position. Throughout the miracle, the Statue was permeated with a supernatural light, glowing with a heavenly aura. (5) Almost all the persons who came to view the Statue – some believers, others not – saw the miraculous Virgin raise and lower her eyes. There were some few, however, who said that they could not see anything, notwithstanding their religious predisposition, even though all those around them – men, ladies and children – were witnessing the marvel. For example, there was the curious case of two university students, one a devout Catholic youth and the other a socialist, who entered the church out of curiosity over the event that everyone was speaking about. The Catholic saw nothing, while the socialist saw the miracle. Filled with emotion, he fell to his knees, his face bathed in tears. (6)
This marvelous maternal sign of Our Lady's concern for her people continued through the evening and night, only ending at around 3 in the morning of the next day. Thousands of persons witnessed the miracle. Clearly, Our Lady had interceded for the Ecuador people, for on that day, Monday, July 28, it was reported that a ceasefire had been called. The war was over. On July 29, Peru and Ecuador signed the Rio Protocol and the Peruvian forces withdrew from Ecuadorian soil. There was no doubt in the minds of the faithful that this prodigious event was a sign that the Mother of God had heard their prayers and come to their aid in that time of dire distress.
|
In the last article, (https://www.traditioninaction.org/OLGS/A019olgsMiracle_1.htm) we saw that Our Lady of Good Success started to make herself better known in the middle of the 20th century, as she had promised she would, when she worked a miracle witnessed by thousands of Ecuadorians in the Conceptionist Church in Quito.
On Sunday, July 27, 1941, the last day of the Triduum, the miraculous statue of Our Lady of Good Success raised and lowered her eyes numerous times. Believers and nonbelievers alike flocked to the church to witness this miracle that signaled the Queen of Heaven's intercession in that bitter war. The miracle continued throughout the day and into the early hours of the next morning. Then, the statue returned to the upper choir, where she sits over the Abbess chair, governing her predilect Convent until the end of the world, another promise she made to Mother Mariana de Jesus Torres in the 16th century. The Ecuadorian people soon felt the effect of her intercession: By Monday afternoon, the daily newspapers were announcing that a ceasefire had been called. A truce was signed on July 29, and the Peruvian forces withdrew from Ecuador's soil. Testimonies of witnesses The facts of this stunning miracle were published in numerous papers throughout Ecuador. These news reports were collected by Fr. Benjamin Rafael Ayora y Cueva, a Doctor of Theology, in a booklet titled Our Lady of Good Success of Quito and the International Conflict with Peru in 1941. In his work, we find moving testimonies of witnesses of the miracle of 1941: (1)
"One lady, pointing toward the statue, said between sobs and tears, 'Don't you see the great miracle the Virgin is working?' Then, I saw the Virgin open her eyes, turn them in the direction of the altar and, then, return them to their former position. It was something supernatural and I will never in my whole life forget it." Another lady asserted that she, together with her husband, saw at the distance of about six feet the miracle. She explained that her husband was a retired military officer and a Freemason and that when he saw the statue's eyes move, he almost fainted because it proved something he had never believed. They were blessed, she affirmed, to be actual witnesses of this great event that had contributed to the conversion of her husband. "Upon returning to our home," she said, "he swore he would do all he could to convert his companions at the Lodge to the Catholic Religion. I asked him to pray with me, and he knelt and prayed with me." Another witness, Señor Rafael Pérez, gave this testimony: "My whole life I have been an unbeliever. I never believed the miracles of the saints and always thought they were the inventions of priests to exploit the religious sentiment of the foolish believing people. But, what I saw on Sunday night at 8:30 p.m. changed me.
"'I arrived at the corner and saw that the crowd was milling around, trying to enter the Church of the Conception. A lady explained to me that inside the church the Statue of the Virgin of Good Success was working a miracle. In my eagerness to confirm the fact, I managed to get in the church, opening a way with great difficulty and situated myself as close as I could to the statue. There, I experienced a sensational surprise. "'I observed the Virgin turn her eyes to Heaven and, then, lower them several times. It seemed to me it could just be an optical illusion so, rubbing my eyes, I fixed them again on those of the Virgin and the same thing took place again. After calmly observing the statue for one hour, I was convinced of the veracity of this great event and I left, musing that the national and international misfortunes of the time could well have caused the Virgin and God to have mercy on the Ecuadorian people, who at that moment were suffering one of the greatest misfortunes of their history." Another reliable witness, Señora Isabel de Ramírez, affirmed that she also saw the miracle of Blessed Virgin of Good Success. On the night of Sunday, July 27, after hearing the news, she went to the Conceptionist Church with her sister, two of her sister's children and a servant. They entered the church and, after situating themselves very close to the sacred Statue, she experienced a strange sensation.
Señora Isabel continued: "After some moments of devout observation, I noted with great astonishment that the pupils of her eyes as well as her eyelids returned to their natural position. This marvel repeated itself several times in intervals of some few minutes. I witnessed it. The same miracle was seen by all my family members who were present." The report concludes: "This grand miracle was confirmed by many honorable matrons of our society, who also viewed it with great admiration and emotion. These ladies include Señoras Elvira Chiriboga de Salvador, Lola Lasso de Uríbe, María Lasso de Eastman Cox, Victoria Pérez de Quiñones, María Luisa Muñoz de Mancheno, Señorita Gangotena Jijón and many others. "Other witnesses include Canons Ayora, Arcos and Andrade as well as a group of guards and military men." (2) General acceptance of the miracle A journal in Ibarra asked Fr. J. E. Vásquez, a Jesuit priest who lived in Quito, to confirm the reports of the miracle. Although he did not view the prodigy himself, the priest told the reporter that it was certainly worthy of belief, given the many credible witnesses of the miracle of Our Lady of Good Success. The interview follows: (3)
Fr. Vásquez: "I did not learn all the facts about it until the following day. Here in the house we heard news of what was taking place in the Conceptionist Church, but none of us could get into the Church when the doors opened that evening because the crowds were too large. The final word on this, as on any miracle or supernatural thing, falls strictly to the Ecclesiastical Authority and to us, according to the official ruling. "But, in the meantime, we can certainly accept the testimony of so many persons of sound mind, good judgment and reliable faith who reported what they saw and persevere in their statements, notwithstanding some few differences in details, as has happened in so many other apparitions, since that of Our Lord Jesus Christ to St. Paul to the one of the Blessed Virgin in Lourdes and, even more recently, the miracle of our Sorrowful Mother at the Jesuit College. "Similar manifestations prove that Mary, the August Mother of God, to whose Son's Sacred Heart our Republic is consecrated, has not abandoned us and that, thanks to her most powerful patronage, we should expect good success in our efforts and enterprises, in all that does not depart from the holy Law of God and the teachings of the Church." In the next and final article we will look at the meaning of the miracle as interpreted in 1941, as well as its significance for our times. To be continued Quote 1. "Prodigioso milagro em Quito - Declaraciones de testigos presenciales del milagroso suceso acontecido en la Igresia de la Concepción de Quito, el domingo 27 de Julio de 1941," La Vox Catolica, Loja, October 12, 1941, in Fr. Benjamin Rafael Ayora y Cueva, Nuestra Señora de 'El Buen Suceso' y el Conflicto Internacional con el Peru en 1941 [Our Lady of Good Success of Quito and the International Conflict with Peru in 1941] and was published with ecclesiastical approval (Quito, Editorial Ecuatoriana, 1946) n. XII, pp. 31-33.(https://www.traditioninaction.org/#facebook) |
Last Tradhican: You doubt Our Lady can change her facial expressions. Let's put your doubt to rest: there were witness and news reports on the Miracle of 1941, in which Our Lady of Good Success (the statue) raised and lowered her eyes.The statue is said to have raised and lowered its eyes once in 1941, and look at all that was written. That was almost 80 years ago. Now Guimaraes says that it changed facial expressions and raised and lowered its weight, in a few lines. I'll believe it after years of verification by a multiplicity of investigators like the 1941 eye movement.
The statue is said to have raised and lowered its eyes once in 1941, and look at all that was written. That was almost 80 years ago. Now Guimaraes says that it changed facial expressions and raised and lowered its weight, in a few lines. I'll believe it after years of verification by a multiplicity of investigators like the 1941 eye movement.First your excuse for doubting the article is because you doubt Our Lady can work miracles through the statue. Now you acknowledge that she can work miracles, but you switch your excuse by saying we only know for sure unless there has been copious amounts of docuмentation.
Incredulous, I just want to point out that this SSPX book was published by a Novus Ordo publishing company (http://www.gracewing.co.uk/). Its foreword (written by a Novus Ordo priest, Fr. Paul Haffner) mentions "Saint John Paul II" and "Blessed Paul VI".
(https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fhcs.fsspx.org%2Fsites%2Fsspx%2Ffiles%2Fstyles%2Fdici_image_full_width%2Fpublic%2Fnews%2Fmaxresdefault_6.jpg%3Fitok%3D09xoYYkn&f=1)
"There is surely a scientific explanation to the statue's perceived changes!"
Carrisima: You believe a random guy (Cosmas) on a forum’s family members over one of the longest running advocates/writers online for Our Lady of Good Success in the US? What’s your agenda? SSPX defender no matter what the circuмstance?
Cosmas: OKAY, I'll make this as simple as I can, The Society Priests did not attempt to carry The Statue. The Franciscans carried the Statue.This thread has now over 3021 views, with 54 replies, and more, probably, queuing up to present long paste and copy screeds in large letters, taking us deeper into the weeds.
I also heard from well-informed persons that, when the SSPX priests tried to lift the Statue from the choir to bring her down to the Church, the Statue became so heavy that they were unable to do so.Both can’t be right. One of these two people has to be misinformed.
Both can’t be right. One of these two people has to be misinformed.You are right hollingsworth, I'm sure we will see the result of all this very soon. In the meantime I'm going to keep an eye on the website for further updates.
The "good Catholic men who for two decades have been bringing the Statue from the choir" are the TFP, whom have not always been so good according to some SSPX/Resistance faithful who have been on that pilgrimage many times.
What a mess!Unresearched and emotionally biased? No. Mr. Atila and Dr. Marian Horvat are among the foremost researchers of Our Lady of Good Success in the United States. They do not have a record for emotional biases, either, which you can verify by reading any of their many hundreds of articles on the TIA site about a variety of topics.
Let's get back to reality here, Mr. Guimaraes article is showing itself to be unresearched and emotionally based, very uncharacteristic of him. Here are just three quotes that he wrote in this article that discredits the entire article:
1) The statue can change it's face according to how it feels - this would be a spectacular miracle for the world to see, not just a comment in an article. What proof does he have?
2) The statue can makes itself heavy so that no one can lift her, and makes itself light so that even an elderly lady can lift it. - Again, this would be a spectacular miracle for the world to see, not just a comment in an article. What proof does he have?
3) The bishop got bribed by the SSPX - this is a serious charge that he posts based on only hearsay (which he acknowledges in the article) . Not only that, it makes no sense, why would the SSPX pay the millions of dollars of which the Bishop is still in debt after the pope's visit, or even $10,0000, just to get the privilege of replacing the Franciscan priests who have always been carrying the statues down from a choir loft?
If I were you, I wouldn't give much credence to Atila Guimaraes, who is the unquestioned chief of Tradition in Action.
Some years ago, to my openmouthed stupefaction, Tradition in Action claimed that Fr. Guerard des Lauriers had claimed that ABL had said the New Mass at Econe until 1971. I haven't looked back at the piece yet, but my recollection is that it had ABL inviting eminent traditionalist to his Mass at St. Mary Major in May 1969 that turned out to be a New Mass. No, I am not making this up. You can pull it up on the Tradition in Action site. This is all obviously complete madness. Guimaraes was a TFP member and a fervent disciple of Professor Plinio. Like PP, he's quite smart and sound on a number of things, and somewhat whacko on others. +Castro de Mayer, who was a friend and ally of PP, finally ended up breaking with him and I believe ordered his flock to have nothing to do with TFP. I believe it was because TPF had generated into a nut cult with PP as the cult leader. As a result (although he denies it), Guimaraes is very hostile to the SSPX. So if you're looking for allies who hate the Society, TIA fills the bill. But if you insist on reliable information, I don't think it's what you need.
As you can see, Fr. Haenny was really angry. Among other things, he was in Quito and Guimaraes wasn't.
In caritate,
Jack
John McFarland has chimed in, for what it's worth:1) The American priests who were at Econe at the time have said that they were the ones that convinced ABL to stop doing the Novus Ordo. So, there should be no "open mouth stupefaction" at hearing that others saw the same.
If I were you, I wouldn't give much credence to Atila Guimaraes, who is the unquestioned chief of Tradition in Action.
Some years ago, to my openmouthed stupefaction, Tradition in Action claimed that Fr. Guerard des Lauriers had claimed that ABL had said the New Mass at Econe until 1971. …..
As you can see, Fr. Haenny was really angry. Among other things, he was in Quito and Guimaraes wasn't.
Look, everybody knows that I'm no fan of the Neo-SSPX.No, actually. Who are you? :)
John McFarland has chimed in, for what it's worth:McFarland claims Mr. Atila was not in Quito. That was a mistake. Mr. Atila was in Quito for (I believe) over a week. He was present while these things occurred, which is why he wrote the articles in the first place.
I’m an old friend.
No, actually. Who are you? :)
1) The American priests who were at Econe at the time have said that they were the ones that convinced ABL to stop doing the Novus Ordo. So, there should be no "open mouth stupefaction" at hearing that others saw the same.
2) Guimaraes begins his article with "This year I was able to be in Quito on February 2, the Feast Day of Our Lady of Good Success".
I’m an old friend.
Still waiting for some evidence that discredits my post.
If someone wants to say “oh look, the Society has compromised and is working with Novus Ordo people” let them say it. When someone says that Our Lady is more pleased with ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs and pedophiles, I want some evidence.
Guimarães writes in his initial article: “The Statue allowed herself to be transported by the Franciscans, but they could not move the Child Jesus, who in turn became insurmountably heavy. So, for that first night the Statue remained in the Church without the Christ Child in her arm. The next morning the Mother Superior could easily pick up the Child and place Him in the arm of His Mother.”
If Our Lady was going to perform a miracle to show displeasure, in this day and age, how does it make ANY sense at all with the scandals in the church that She would allow this order, as Guimarães puts it “infected with ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs” to carry her? How does that add up?
I’m not arguing that the monastery ISNT infected, I’m just saying this doesn’t make any logical sense. I think the TFP folks are just upset they weren’t allowed to carry her, and they’re making up stories and relying on the superstition of the Ecuadorian people to try and get back into the good graces of the convent, and that’s fine. Just don’t make up rediculous and literally unbelievable stories about statues not being able to be picked up... in this day and age I’m sure that there was a cell phone in the crowd taking pictures, or video or something. All I’m saying is before I believe, I wanna see it with my own eyes, and not fall prey to any “vain babblers.”
Call me Doubting Thomas.
Okay Davy, you don't have to believe in Our Lady of Good Success and recent events.:jester: :applause: :popcorn: :cheers:
Actually, we didn't expect any dead Freemason to have the virtue of Catholic discernment.
(https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fpbs.twimg.com%2Fmedia%2FDHaFUMgXUAAuFia.jpg&f=1)
Now go on, get out of here, before I find your grave and spit on it.
One person's account doth not a miracle make. There needs to be more credible evidence for this "miraculous" story. So far, there's just heresay.What is incredible is that the SSPX has not said anything about "the miracles", for that would be the first point I would bring up. The SSPX instead chose to defend the bishop "honor" against the charges of being bribed, which is the last thing I would do, as all Novus Ordo bishops have skeletons in the closet. The SSPX set themselves up with that defense, and Guimaraes jumped on it first.
What is incredible is that the SSPX has not said anything about "the miracles", for that would be the first point I would bring up. The SSPX instead chose to defend the bishop "honor" against the charges of being bribed, which is the last thing I would do, as all Novus Ordo bishops have skeletons in the closet. The SSPX set themselves up with that defense, and Guimaraes jumped on it first.
It took me time to absorb the meaning of the more detailed description of the Franciscan sex scandal.Your comment makes no sense to me, you recognize that the Franciscan Novus Ordos are a demonic abomination, yet you believe that Our Lady preferred to have them carry her instead of the SSPX? Am I missing something?
It plays out as a demonically engineered abomination at a one of the most important Marian Shrines in the Americas... a Shrine specifically dedicated to our times.
I believe Atila's assessment because it's consistent with other miraculous events in the history of the Shrine.
Your comment makes no sense to me, you recognize that the Franciscan Novus Ordos are a demonic abomination, yet you believe that Our Lady preferred to have them carry her instead of the SSPX? Am I missing something?The only thing you’re missing is that you’re thinking LOGICALLY. Maybe the problem is that you’re thinking at all, and not just blindly believing the drivel furiously typed online by mindless shills...
LT: Your comment makes no sense to me, you recognize that the Franciscan Novus Ordos are a demonic abomination, yet you believe that Our Lady preferred to have them carry her instead of the SSPX? Am I missing something?
DC: The only thing you’re missing is that you’re thinking LOGICALLY. Maybe the problem is that you’re thinking at all, and not just blindly believing the drivel furiously typed online by mindless shills...
I literally just posted evidence that shows a falsehood in the TIA article. Are you blind? Nobody has seriously addressed ANY of my objections and you’re mischaracterizing my posts. Grow up.
We are, collectively, really not up to making a final decision about the veracity of the event recorded by Mr. Guimares.
I literally just posted evidence that shows a falsehood in the TIA article.
DC:Atila said the statue of Jesus was too heavy to pick up. These photos seem to me to show priest picking up and holding the statue the evening Atila said it was “insurmountably heavy.”
Do you refer to those photos you posted? Just looked at them. I see a couple of priests busying themselves around the statue. I don't see any photos showing the statue being carried anywhere. Is this your (irrefutable) evidence? And, DC, I'll make every effort to "grow up." ;)
Your comment makes no sense to me, you recognize that the Franciscan Novus Ordos are a demonic abomination, yet you believe that Our Lady preferred to have them carry her instead of the SSPX? Am I missing something?
Last Tradhican confronts DC with a reasonable question. DC accuses LT of “thinking logically.” (I would say, perhaps, that we need more such thinking on CI.)
DC points to LT's "problem," i.e. that he is thinking at all, implying that LT should put the kybosh on his thought processes altogether. Then DC refers to the “drivel” promoted by “mindless shills.” I come away feeling that maybe DC himself fits neatly into that category.
By the way, it is known that this is a common way for the Statue to show her displeasure.
https://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/B999_M116_Sad.htmlAtila exposes himself, once again, as an arrogant pig who has the filthy habit of attacking priests and even a Saint. A layman has no business treating a man of God, who brings heaven down to earth in the Mass, with such disrespect.Two Proofs of SSPX’s ‘Temperance’Vox Catholica’s Attack
(https://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/Images/B_000_WhatPeopleAreSaying02_Cir_sm.jpg) (https://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/B000_WhatPeopleAreCommenting.htm)
Re: The Sadness of Our Lady in Quito 2019 (https://www.traditioninaction.org/OLGS/A022-Quito-ASG.htm)
Note from the Editor: Miss Salwa Bachar is in charge of TIA social media. What follows is a report I asked her to write after an irrational attack she suffered from the editor of the blog Vox Catholica, who I am not sure is a priest or not. After her reply, he found it more prudent to not answer her and made his comment and her reply invisible. A.S.G.
On Saturday, Feb. 9, TIA’s staff writer Salwa Bachar posted this comment on the channel Vox Catholica’s YouTube Video. It reads:
“I believe your viewers will benefit from reading this article (https://www.traditioninaction.org/OLGS/A022-Quito-ASG.htm)that gives more details about what happened in Quito last week:
Vox Catholica’s attack
Not even 10 minutes later, Vox Catholica’s editor replied to Salwa’s comment. His reply not only included false representations of Mr. Atila’s article (straw man fallacies) and accusations that Salwa was spreading “dirty propaganda from the non-Catholic sect called TFP,” but it was also rife with intimidations and threats of physical violence. The reply was the following:
“This article is Slanderous, and frankly whoever wrote it is in grave sin. The author falsely accuses the Archbishop of simony (accepting bribes for religious privileges etc.), it totally mischaracterizes the TFP (Tradition Family Property, who has been illegally forcing themselves on the sisters of the convent), and it states that the SSPX moved the statue from the upper choir and that is also a DIRTY LIE. I have video footage of the Franciscan Friars 1) Leading the procession, 2) Carrying our lady down from the upper choir and placing her on the altar, 3) I have video footage of the Archbishop attending the dawn procession on Feb. 2, which is the first time EVER that he has participated in this devotion 4) and the idea that the Society has enough money to go around the world bribing bishops for privileges is a sick lie. How dare you accuse a good bishop of sin! How dare you spread this dirty propaganda from the NON-CATHOLIC SECT known as the TFP.
“+Salwa Bachar, if I wasn't posting this response from my channel's account, I'd be using much stronger language, and if we ever met in real life, believe me, I'd take you behind the convent and share a couple of fist fulls of the truth with you. You need to seriously re-consider where you get your news from, and you need to do some fact checking before you go around accusing Bishops of grave sin. I'll be praying for you.” [emphasis added]
Salwa’s reply
After some hours, Salwa Bachar posted this comment in response to Vox Catholica’s threats:
“If you are so courageous, why don’t you present your grievances to the author of that article? I believe he stands behind what he affirmed. I am a lady who just advised your viewers to see the other side of the picture.
“The unruly fury you showed against me for just suggesting another point of view shows that you believe you are infallible and you punish violently with words and physical threats those who are not on your side. This behavior is what scholars say characterizes the belonging to a sect. The exposition of the truth is normally calm and rational, not what you did, resorting to baseless personal attacks and labels.
“The violence of your reaction also confirms suspicion that you are directly linked with SSPX, contrary to your website’s claim that you are 'not affiliated to any Catholic order or diocese.'”
To date, Vox Catholica has not responded.
For a snapshot of the Vox Catholica page, click here (https://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/Images/B_999_M116_Screen.pdf)Fr. B. Haenny’s Attack
(https://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/Images/B_000_WhatPeopleAreSaying02_Cir_sm.jpg) (https://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/B000_WhatPeopleAreCommenting.htm)
Dear Sir,
I have read your article on the “Sadness of Our Lady in Quito – 2019. (https://www.traditioninaction.org/OLGS/A022-Quito-ASG.htm)” Having been there myself for the lowering, I can tell you that the SSPX priests did NOT bring down the statue but it was the Franciscans. Perhaps some of the video and pictures I took of the event will be helpful to expose your lie.
Accusing the archbishop of simony and accepting a large donation of money based on the “talk of the town” is a calumny and a grave sin. If you have the proof, offer the evidence. If you don’t, retract your lie immediately. What kind of a Catholic man throws baseless and unproven accusations against a prelate of the Church? You talk of Catholic “knighthood” and “honor.” Such is not in the example of Catholic honor and chivalry that your mentor, Dr. Plinio taught you, I am sure, and that TFP so self-righteously claims to uphold. It is the tactic of Freemasons and all those who justify the means by the end. It is the tactic of all those in history who disregard morality, all those who serve as agents of the prince of lies. I can think of no other reason to publish such lies except that getting control of a convent of sisters and control of Our Lady is more important for you or for whoever you work for than honoring Our Lady’s requests and obedience to the hierarchy of the Catholic Church.
If you have any decency and honor you will retract this article and publish a full apology immediately and may God have mercy on you if you do not.
Fr. B. Haenny
The Editor responds:
Rev. Fr. Haenny,
It will be my great pleasure to answer your rabid diatribe when I find some spare time. Unfortunately for me, I have to postpone this pleasure for about 20 days since I am busy with two other ongoing projects.
To put some weeks between your message and my answer can give you time to cool your fury and check with your superiors to be sure that your points reflect well their position. It also will allow other like-minded protesters to come forth, so that I may answer all the objections together.
I like many aspects of bullfights and I am glad you assumed the role of the bull charging at the red cape in the ring.
Cordially,
Atila S. Guimarães
Atila exposes himself, once again, as an arrogant pig who has the filthy habit of attacking priests and even a Saint. A layman has no business treating a man of God, who brings heaven down to earth in the Mass, with such disrespect.Atila's response is proportionate because it is in response to Fr. Haenny's original e-mail:
Dear Sir,It seems to me that Fr. Haenny has that contempt for the TFP so typical in SSPX circles, all based on discredited misunderstandings and myths.
I have read your article on the “Sadness of Our Lady in Quito – 2019. (https://www.traditioninaction.org/OLGS/A022-Quito-ASG.htm)” Having been there myself for the lowering, I can tell you that the SSPX priests did NOT bring down the statue but it was the Franciscans. Perhaps some of the video and pictures I took of the event will be helpful to expose your lie.
Accusing the archbishop of simony and accepting a large donation of money based on the “talk of the town” is a calumny and a grave sin. If you have the proof, offer the evidence. If you don’t, retract your lie immediately. What kind of a Catholic man throws baseless and unproven accusations against a prelate of the Church? You talk of Catholic “knighthood” and “honor.” Such is not in the example of Catholic honor and chivalry that your mentor, Dr. Plinio taught you, I am sure, and that TFP so self-righteously claims to uphold. It is the tactic of Freemasons and all those who justify the means by the end. It is the tactic of all those in history who disregard morality, all those who serve as agents of the prince of lies. I can think of no other reason to publish such lies except that getting control of a convent of sisters and control of Our Lady is more important for you or for whoever you work for than honoring Our Lady’s requests and obedience to the hierarchy of the Catholic Church.
If you have any decency and honor you will retract this article and publish a full apology immediately and may God have mercy on you if you do not.
Fr. B. Haenny