Author Topic: The Charm Offensive begins (go back to sleep, go back to sleep!) (Read 3127 times)

Ratisbonne · « **on:** May 31, 2012, 03:37:59 PM »

Fr. Couture, instead of answering Fr. Pfeiffer's substance, has started the Charm Offensive:

http://www.sspxasia.com/Appeal_May_31_2012.pdf

I expect we'll see more letters from District Superiors like this - and probably sermons this Sunday as well.

If Fr. Couture wants us all peaceful, quiet, and docile, then he needs to fix the real problems that have brought about by Menzigen.

Those who have caused the uproar need to fix it, not call for us to be quiet! Shall we trade Catholicism for Quietism? Is not the fortitude of Pfeiffer also a gift from the Holy Ghost, and why aren't the other priests displaying it?

Obviously people are waking up, and it's making an impact. Deo Gratias.

Diego · « **Reply #1 on:** May 31, 2012, 05:46:08 PM »

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Incredulous · « **Reply #2 on:** May 31, 2012, 06:06:12 PM »

Quote from: Ratisbonne

Fr. Couture, instead of answering Fr. Pfeiffer's substance, has started the Charm Offensive:

http://www.sspxasia.com/Appeal_May_31_2012.pdf

I expect we'll see more letters from District Superiors like this - and probably sermons this Sunday as well.

If Fr. Couture wants us all peaceful, quiet, and docile, then he needs to fix the real problems that have brought about by Menzigen.

Those who have caused the uproar need to fix it, not call for us to be quiet! Shall we trade Catholicism for Quietism? Is not the fortitude of Pfeiffer also a gift from the Holy Ghost, and why aren't the other priests displaying it?

Obviously people are waking up, and it's making an impact. Deo Gratias.

Good point!
We need to show support for those Priests and Bishops standing up
to the sell-out. Come forth and be counted.

brainglitch · « **Reply #3 on:** May 31, 2012, 07:00:06 PM »

What exactly is wrong with the letter? I am not for a "deal" but I really don't see anything wrong with it.

JPaul · « **Reply #4 on:** May 31, 2012, 09:57:46 PM »

Quote from: brainglitch

What exactly is wrong with the letter? I am not for a "deal" but I really don't see anything wrong with it.

The problem is the subtext of the letter which is, Be quiet, don't speak of it, don't think about it, and be quiet, be quiet, be quiet.

The velvet glove shrouds the iron hand.

trento · « **Reply #5 on:** May 31, 2012, 10:08:12 PM »

Well, at least Fr. Couture has charm that most of the lay popes here do not have. Even Bishop Williamson did not speak in such disparaging terms against Bishop Fellay, unlike his supporters here.

JPaul · « **Reply #6 on:** June 01, 2012, 08:00:24 AM »

Quote from: trento

Well, at least Fr. Couture has charm that most of the lay popes here do not have. Even Bishop Williamson did not speak in such disparaging terms against Bishop Fellay, unlike his supporters here.

The comments were directly related to the content of the letter, not the author.
You need to see the difference.

"Even Bishop Williamson....", what does that represent, that he has now become
the Dark Lord of the west?

Francisco · « **Reply #7 on:** June 01, 2012, 09:05:10 AM »

Charm offensive is correct. But it wont work. In the old days the pseudo mandarin would just tell people to " drop it!" - yes, those two words only.

Matthew · « **Reply #8 on:** June 01, 2012, 10:18:05 AM »

Why is everyone calling this letter "charming" -- as if it has nothing objectionable about it?

Am I the only one that noticed that it's a propaganda piece, subtly insinuating that everyone against Bishop Fellay, or against an agreement, is acting on emotion and/or has issues with his spiritual life?

It's every bit as bad as the recent letters from Fr. Rostand (US District Superior), or any other propaganda piece with Menzingen's stamp of approval, which claim that all anti-agreement talk is a sordid ball of speculation, idle gossip, rash judgment, hatred, and rumor, and that we'd all better "head to the box" if we're reading or talking about this deal.

As I said in another thread:

Quote from: Matthew

I'm not fond of Fr. Couture's letter. It's the latest installment from the Powers That Be, which always has the same theme: Pay, Pray, and Obey. He implies that those against an agreement are necessarily acting on emotion. He also implies that any criticism of the Agreement or Bishop Fellay must necessarily be rash judgment or rumor -- that nothing said could possibly be a rational analysis of the facts. Personally, I don't believe that assessment of the "anti-Accordistas" is very charitable.

I like to give Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer some credit. He's been an SSPX priest for many years, and I wouldn't make rash assumptions about his spiritual life. He has suffered more for Christ than either of us...

When I see propaganda, subtle politics, and character assassination, I feel like I'm watching CNN, and dealing with the White House, not Menzingen. Something is horribly wrong.

I also find it interesting that so many Accordistas use primarily the "Argument of Authority". For example, appealing to Fr. Couture's letter, while ignoring Fr. Pfeiffer's sermon. They're both priests, no? And why appeal to Bishop Fellay, while ignoring the sober, substantial warnings of the other THREE Bishops? True, Bishop Fellay is the Superior General, but considering the SSPX raison d'etre is lawful disobedience of the Pope...If we can resist the Pope "to the face", who has the promise of infallibility, why not Bishop Fellay, who has no such promise?

This letter is full of "pay, pray and obey" which is insulting to our intelligence.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #9 on:** June 01, 2012, 10:32:00 AM »

Quote from: Francisco

Charm offensive is correct. But it wont work. In the old days the pseudo mandarin would just tell people to " drop it!" - yes, those two words only.

Yes, a person can rely on their arrogance. And their impudent refusal to level.

JPaul · « **Reply #10 on:** June 01, 2012, 01:51:19 PM »

Quote

This letter is full of "pay, pray and obey" which is insulting to our intelligence.

Absolutely! it is according to the script. They all echo the leadership's diagram. Each from a slightly different angle but, always that same message.
It is being run like a wall street advertising campaign with the customary talking points, calm, quiet, charity, authority, obedience, rumors, rashness.etc. etc.

It is indeed insulting and speaks clearly of the elitist attitude in Menzigen.
Just imagine priests being persecuted for clamoring about the grave dangers to souls that is present. The Church does not punish her Children for fidelity to her.
This spirit is from without. It comes from the outer darkness and brings with it lies, secrets, and ambiquity of speech.

We have and are seeing it unfold before us. Where is the love of the flock?

Clemens Maria · « **Reply #11 on:** June 01, 2012, 02:42:37 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Why is everyone calling this letter "charming" -- as if it has nothing objectionable about it?
...
This letter is full of "pay, pray and obey" which is insulting to our intelligence.

Well I prefer to give it the best possible interpretation (according to the rules for thinking with the Church by St. Ignatius of Loyola). I noticed a couple of things about it, 1) It didn't actually condemn Fr. Pfeiffer nor Fr. Chazal, and 2) It didn't say one way or the other that an agreement would be a good thing. I take that to mean that as long as we are kind and gentle we can resolutely and vigorously oppose a deal with Rome. In fact, it appears that Fr. Couture doesn't have any problem at all with Fr. Pfeiffer nor Fr. Chazal so I believe that I can follow the directives in the letter while at the same time praising Frs. Pfeiffer and Chazal for their courage in publically opposing any kind of agreement or deal. Thank you Fr. Couture!

Matthew · « **Reply #12 on:** June 01, 2012, 03:08:30 PM »

As someone else pointed out, the timing of Fr. Couture's letter, and the circuмstances surrounding its release almost force a person to read between the lines and find an additional message.

By not being direct and more explicit, this letter is confusing at best.

Just like the docuмents of Vatican II can mostly be interpreted in a Catholic sense, even though passages here and there are intentionally ambiguous and were later used to destroy the Church. Was Vatican II a good thing? Unequivocally "no". Can you give most passages of the Vatican II docuмents a Catholic interpretation? Yes. But is that the point? No. The point is rather the harm for souls that could be (and in 2012, has been) done with such docuмents.

TKGS · « **Reply #13 on:** June 02, 2012, 06:36:16 AM »

Quote from: Clemens Maria

Well I prefer to give it the best possible interpretation (according to the rules for thinking with the Church by St. Ignatius of Loyola).

This is what happened in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Most people "preferred" to give the changes, the bishops, their parish priests, etc, the "best possible interpretation" of their motives, thinking that the Church was doing for them something that would be good for their souls, holy and pleasing to God, helpful for their salvation.

Instead, look what they actually got.

On another topic, stevusmagnus compared the situations we see today in the SSPX with the Church in general in the early period of the Crisis in the Church. He noted how this current crisis can give us a lot of insight as to how so many people abandoned the Church because the trusted people who were untrustworthy even as everything they had been taught to be unchangeable was changing on a daily basis. I believe it is likely (not inevitable, but likely) that the same thing is happening here and, ultimately, the majority of the SSPX priests and faithful will simply go along only to unwittingly find that their faith is completely changed in ten years.

What will be sad is that few will remember that they will be believing everything they used to condemn.

Wessex · « **Reply #14 on:** June 02, 2012, 07:03:08 AM »

The traditionalist movement proved that the power of the hierarchy could not change the attachment to the faith for a certain percentage of Catholics. Forty years on, a new generation is being subject to the same process and there will still be a remnant that will resist. Its size has yet to be determined.