Author Topic: The calm before the storm? (Read 8694 times)

John Steven · « **Reply #30 on:** August 24, 2014, 03:05:25 PM »

Quote from: Graham

Quote from: Neil Obstat
Quote from: John Steven
Neil, why are you so concerned about what Bishop Fellay is doing or what is going on in the SSPX? Do you not attend a chapel that is staffed by independent priests?

It sounds like you don't think that whatever happens to the SSPX should be anyone's concern unless he goes there exclusively. Correct?

If I happen to assist at Society Masses somewhat frequently, would that matter to you, somehow? Would I have your permission in that case to be concerned?

Maybe a better question is, why should you care what I think is important? You don't have to read my posts, after all. Put me on "hide" and forget I exist if it makes you more comfortable. After all, isn't your comfort number one? Or, are you a spy for Fr. Rostand, who could be asking you to ask questions like this because he would get in trouble for posting here on CI? (Not to mention the trouble he'd be facing when the Faithful start asking him why he doesn't want them to post on CI when he's doing it himself! HAHAHAHA)

How would he know to refuse me Communion if he can't ID my person? Or Fr. Couture for example, who's posting warning labels on the front door.

(Here's a horror story for you: tell him, "Neil Obstat could be ANYONE at the Communion rail today! Maybe he's a CROSS DRESSER!! -- So long as he's not the cross-bearer!!" Hey- maybe that's why they dropped that practice in Idaho?)

At least his Cebu pastor printed it up instead of using a post-it like a note to the milkman. Is that okay with you? Maybe he should have achieved your approval first. You'd better send him an e-mail post haste!
Right after you put me on hide, that is. :farmer:

.

:roll-laugh2:

I don't find it funny at all

Neil Obstinate's personal musings, conjecture, rash judgment, unhealthy suspicion, with some special formatting thrown in along with snide comments and a complete lack of charity seem to be the result of staring intently at his own navel.

Adolphus · « **Reply #31 on:** August 24, 2014, 03:19:59 PM »

Quote from: cassini

These priests still offer daily Mass and two Sunday masses. Confessions are often held during Sunday Mass and at other times. First Friday devotions are held, First saturday devotions also and all day adoration on first Thursdays. Baptisms are available and visits to the sick and dying. Easily taught catechisms are available and parents can teach the faith from them as was done from the 1940s.

I agree with you! There are priests members of the SSPX who are still faithful the true doctrine. Some of them are too busy to be aware of what is going on (one has to consider that many priests have to travel a lot from one Mass Centre to another, to prepare sermons, to hear confessions, to pray the Holy Mass and the Breviary, to prepare conferences and the catechism for adults, etc). Some others are aware of the SSPX's authorities' betrayal, but prefer to stay inside of the Society thinking that there they can serve God better there.

Thus, there are still good priests inside of the SSPX.

Quote from: cassini

But now, even this is under threat by those who insist in causing conflict among the few of us left. 99% of the congregation are very grateful to be served by the SSPX priests we have. The 'resistance' as we witness even on this thread want us to complain, call all SSPX priests neo-modernists, leave them, put complaints in the basket during Sunday Mass if you don't mind.

I don't know what is that that you call the resistance. Those priests who left the SSPX or were expelled from it are not the resistance, since they do not resist any longer: the Society's superiors are not their superiors now and so they do not resist them. Those priests who are still members of the SSPX and who disagree with their authorities and resist them are the resistance, since they do resist.

Quote from: cassini

As yet, no modernism has entered my chapel. Fight your battle where it is happening, at the top of the Society, do not drag in every priest in the SSPX, every person being served by the SSPX, as though they had anything to do with policy decided among a society of priests.

To answer this, I just can quote Bp. Fellay himself:

Quote from: Bp. Fellay

«Little by little one gives up the fight and ends by accepting the situation. Everything in Campos still looks traditional, no doubt, so that the people see nothing different. The shrewder ones among them, however, note the tendency of the priests to speak more often and respectfully about news from Rome, omitting their past warnings and ignoring the present day deviations. To become accustomed to this situation and to cease to correct it is a great danger.»

Graham · « **Reply #32 on:** August 24, 2014, 03:25:37 PM »

Quote from: John Steven

Quote from: Graham
Quote from: Neil Obstat
Quote from: John Steven
Neil, why are you so concerned about what Bishop Fellay is doing or what is going on in the SSPX? Do you not attend a chapel that is staffed by independent priests?

It sounds like you don't think that whatever happens to the SSPX should be anyone's concern unless he goes there exclusively. Correct?

If I happen to assist at Society Masses somewhat frequently, would that matter to you, somehow? Would I have your permission in that case to be concerned?

Maybe a better question is, why should you care what I think is important? You don't have to read my posts, after all. Put me on "hide" and forget I exist if it makes you more comfortable. After all, isn't your comfort number one? Or, are you a spy for Fr. Rostand, who could be asking you to ask questions like this because he would get in trouble for posting here on CI? (Not to mention the trouble he'd be facing when the Faithful start asking him why he doesn't want them to post on CI when he's doing it himself! HAHAHAHA)

How would he know to refuse me Communion if he can't ID my person? Or Fr. Couture for example, who's posting warning labels on the front door.

(Here's a horror story for you: tell him, "Neil Obstat could be ANYONE at the Communion rail today! Maybe he's a CROSS DRESSER!! -- So long as he's not the cross-bearer!!" Hey- maybe that's why they dropped that practice in Idaho?)

At least his Cebu pastor printed it up instead of using a post-it like a note to the milkman. Is that okay with you? Maybe he should have achieved your approval first. You'd better send him an e-mail post haste!
Right after you put me on hide, that is. :farmer:

.

:roll-laugh2:

I don't find it funny at all

Neil Obstinate's personal musings, conjecture, rash judgment, unhealthy suspicion, with some special formatting thrown in along with snide comments and a complete lack of charity seem to be the result of staring intently at his own navel.

His first two paragraphs answered your prying as well or better than it deserved. The rest was quite amusing. I think we can allow ourselves some amusement about neo-SSPX antics. Fr. Rostand certainly did in his famous 'Against the Rumors' out-takes.

Wessex · « **Reply #33 on:** August 25, 2014, 06:15:56 AM »

Quote from: J.Paul

cassini,
Quote
As yet, no modernism has entered my chapel. Fight your battle where it is happening, at the top of the Society, do not drag in every priest in the SSPX, every person being served by the SSPX, as though they had anything to do with policy decided among a society of priests.

A valid complaint. The resistance so called, are no longer in the Society, for whatever reason. They should therefore leave the Society, and get on with the business of resisting something other than Bishop Fellay.

Yes, I think the SSPX has replaced Rome as the traget for resistance!

True Faith · « **Reply #34 on:** August 25, 2014, 08:28:52 AM »

Quote from: Wessex

Quote from: J.Paul
cassini,
Quote
As yet, no modernism has entered my chapel. Fight your battle where it is happening, at the top of the Society, do not drag in every priest in the SSPX, every person being served by the SSPX, as though they had anything to do with policy decided among a society of priests.

A valid complaint. The resistance so called, are no longer in the Society, for whatever reason. They should therefore leave the Society, and get on with the business of resisting something other than Bishop Fellay.

Yes, I think the SSPX has replaced Rome as the traget for resistance!

Uh....that's because the SSPX is the direct threat to traditional Catholics at this point.

Should you go off to another country to fight in the main battle during a war or stay home and fight the enemy on your doorstep?

JPaul · « **Reply #35 on:** August 25, 2014, 09:01:54 AM »

Quote from: True Faith

Quote from: Wessex
Quote from: J.Paul
cassini,
Quote
As yet, no modernism has entered my chapel. Fight your battle where it is happening, at the top of the Society, do not drag in every priest in the SSPX, every person being served by the SSPX, as though they had anything to do with policy decided among a society of priests.

A valid complaint. The resistance so called, are no longer in the Society, for whatever reason. They should therefore leave the Society, and get on with the business of resisting something other than Bishop Fellay.

Yes, I think the SSPX has replaced Rome as the traget for resistance!

Uh....that's because the SSPX is the direct threat to traditional Catholics at this point.

Should you go off to another country to fight in the main battle during a war or stay home and fight the enemy on your doorstep?

A resistance that is focused on Bishop Fellay, is no resistance at all, and remains no more than a fraternal ruckus in and around the Society.

Tradition and the Church need a true resistance.

True Faith · « **Reply #36 on:** August 25, 2014, 02:35:37 PM »

It's very simple.... Abp. Lefebvre started the SSPX in order to continue the line of tradition and to avoid modernism. Bp. Fellay is taking 'tradition' back to 'modernist' Rome where it will be crushed. Remember, the Abp. said that going back to Rome before her conversion would be ѕυιcιdє! Therefore, Bp. Fellay must be resisted if tradition is to continue on. He is allowing modernism to take over the SSPX! Being the highest authority in the SSPX and guardian of tradition makes him the focus.

And, if the resistance is causing a ruckus: mission accomplished! Resistance is shown by making objections heard and by taking action to alert others to the dangers at hand.

Say a prayer, then go to truetrad.com and check under "77 Poisonous Statements" made by Bp. Fellay. There's lots to resist!

What do you mean by "tradition and the Church" need a true resistance?

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #37 on:** August 25, 2014, 02:38:24 PM »

Quote from: stgobnait

if the sspx keep hemorraging people, as they are, there will be very little left in ireland, so any prior will be irrelevant.

No offense intended to the Irish but if they really were "oh so very Catholic" all along they would have led the resistance and refused anything to do with the novus ordo. Instead, the Irish went all secular on us.

stgobnait · « **Reply #38 on:** August 25, 2014, 02:41:37 PM »

have'nt you heard. its all about peace now.

JPaul · « **Reply #39 on:** August 25, 2014, 05:13:51 PM »

Quote from: True Faith

It's very simple.... Abp. Lefebvre started the SSPX in order to continue the line of tradition and to avoid modernism. Bp. Fellay is taking 'tradition' back to 'modernist' Rome where it will be crushed. Remember, the Abp. said that going back to Rome before her conversion would be ѕυιcιdє! Therefore, Bp. Fellay must be resisted if tradition is to continue on. He is allowing modernism to take over the SSPX! Being the highest authority in the SSPX and guardian of tradition makes him the focus.

And, if the resistance is causing a ruckus: mission accomplished! Resistance is shown by making objections heard and by taking action to alert others to the dangers at hand.

Say a prayer, then go to truetrad.com and check under "77 Poisonous Statements" made by Bp. Fellay. There's lots to resist!

What do you mean by "tradition and the Church" need a true resistance?

I and many do not need to be convinced of Bishop Fellay's infidelity. It is an established fact.

And what I mean is a true resistance would have as its center engaging itself against the modernist criminals in Rome, (starting in the papal hotel), in the chanceries, and in the pulpits, who are still moving almost unimpeded, in the continuation of the revolution and the destruction of the Church.

As long as the resistance so called limits itself to Bishop Fellay's modernism, without going beyond the closed circle of the SSPX, it is not a resistance in the context of the larger Church. Bishop Fellay and the Society are now a symptom, not the cause, and the resistance has diagnosed the symptom. The SSPX, as it was, is not coming back.
It is time to turn and confront the cause which now needs to be resisted and overcome, if it is God's will.

Wessex · « **Reply #40 on:** August 25, 2014, 06:39:46 PM »

People now attending the Society's chapels must realise that, however traditionalist the parishes and priests may appear, they do so as a group seeking worldly recognition and a place inside the Vatican's museum. The original attempt to convert Rome has resulted in their own conversion and the latest crop of superiors will become very conciliatory. Therefore, they should receive no more attention than other groups that have taken the Vatican shilling. For an account of how Catholics will be brainwashed in their 'safe' parishes, one only needs to look back and see what happened in the mainstream decades ago. History will repeat itself.

True Faith · « **Reply #41 on:** August 25, 2014, 06:57:59 PM »

J.Paul,

I think I see where you're coming from. I'm still a little unclear as to why you think the "so called" resistance isn't battling the church in Rome though. If one listens to Fr.Pfeiffer's sermons for example, it's certain that he is warning us about the modernism in the conciliar church, teaching us the Faith and mentioning the errors in the SSPX at the same time.

How does one go about forming this true resistance to Rome? What can we lay people do in your opinion?