Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: Diego on October 16, 2012, 05:51:29 PM
-
The good news is that every Sunday Mass at our parish was told that the parish collections no longer meet expenses.
Clearly the laity have decided to no longer fund the despotic Zionism.
-
Menzingen owns all the properties. They are throwing out our freinds. Why should we give them money? We may need it later to start the process all over again.
-
And the next step could be Father Rostand sending out "Focus Group"
leaders to the chapels to determine what the underlying problem is ?
(http://pubphotos.postbulletin.com/photos/thumbnails/2012/10/15/religious_leaders_peace_plaza/10-15%20REv%20Douglas%20Sparks%20ols.jpg)
-
But if expenses aren't met, then the chapels close? Everyone left without Sacraments while we work out the next phase? That could take awhile...especially in the areas that are satellites of larger centers.
-
Sad to say, but the leadership in Menzingen will only take notice if the collection plate dries up. Bamboozled by the modernists? No problem. Expelling loyal priests and bishops? No problem. Longtime parishioners leaving chapels in droves? No problem. Lack of funds for travel to Rome for the next round of "negotiations?" BIG PROBLEM!
-
Sad to say, but the leadership in Menzingen will only take notice if the collection plate dries up. Bamboozled by the modernists? No problem. Expelling loyal priests and bishops? No problem. Longtime parishioners leaving chapels in droves? No problem. Lack of funds for travel to Rome for the next round of "negotiations?" BIG PROBLEM!
Bingo.
There is no moral cause for any good Catholic to put money in an SSPX collection
basket any more. Everyone should be putting NOTES in that explain why the
money is missing:
Say goodbye to +Williamson, say goodbye to my money.
Who done it? You done it! No Funds For U.
Looking for money here? Well, I'm looking for Fr. Pheiffer.
Where's My Money? Oh, Where's My Fr. Chazal?
You take away my bishop, I'll take away my donations.
I used to contribute $$$$ but now I know better.
So, let the General Bursar know you've been had.
Want some cash? Ask Bernie Fellay, he's rolling in it.
Get creative. Let them know what's wrong with this picture. It is your DUTY.
-
Notes are to obvious for a small chapel where the same 2 people carry the collection baskets every week. I used a 1 dollar bill- wrote Chazal across it in permanent marker with large letters. Fold in half, clean side out. Watch them sift through the cash later and try to figure it out... :detective: ...so they get a buck, but not the usual weekly 40. Next Sun - "Williamson" - have to write smaller :laugh1:
-
Sad to say, but the leadership in Menzingen will only take notice if the collection plate dries up. Bamboozled by the modernists? No problem. Expelling loyal priests and bishops? No problem. Longtime parishioners leaving chapels in droves? No problem. Lack of funds for travel to Rome for the next round of "negotiations?" BIG PROBLEM!
Exactly!
-
I've read all the comments on this thread and totally agree. It goes against every fibre of my being to put money into the collection basket...BUT if we don't give enough to support our chapel won't +Felley just follow Rome's example and CLOSE THE CHAPEL????? After all the property is worth far more than what we contribute in the short term. With all the priests leaving or going to be dismissed +Felley will just repeat New Rome's pattern "not enough priests, not enough parishoners to support the chapel CLOSE IT" Could this be what he really wants?
I hope I'm totally wrong, so instead of hitting the disagree button please tell me why I'm wrong and if you see a solution. Please tell me why we should give or why we shouldn't.
Thank you.
-
My 2c (ha ha)
I'd try and ask your chapel's treasurer for a more complete picture. "Not meeting expenses" isn't the same as "can't pay the bills". Depending on the priest, they might start trying to guilt people into contributing more the minute the collection itself doesn't cover the monthly expenses (or sooner!), but that doesn't mean that there isn't a savings account which could be used.
Now, if the chapel's savings were being depleted on a monthly basis, would they consider closing the chapel? I have no idea, but doing so wouldn't be justified.
It might be the case that your chapel has no savings and that the collection is needed to continue operating as normal. If that was the case, I'd consider ways to support your local Mass without also sending money upstream.
-
My 2c (ha ha)
I'd try and ask your chapel's treasurer for a more complete picture. "Not meeting expenses" isn't the same as "can't pay the bills". Depending on the priest, they might start trying to guilt people into contributing more the minute the collection itself doesn't cover the monthly expenses (or sooner!), but that doesn't mean that there isn't a savings account which could be used.
Now, if the chapel's savings were being depleted on a monthly basis, would they consider closing the chapel? I have no idea, but doing so wouldn't be justified.
It might be the case that your chapel has no savings and that the collection is needed to continue operating as normal. If that was the case, I'd consider ways to support your local Mass without also sending money upstream.
Ah, a most intuitive and thoughtful woman!
She's used to watching the check-book...
While discerning the Father's "hype" (for good or bad) about the family budget.
-
I've read all the comments on this thread and totally agree. It goes against every fibre of my being to put money into the collection basket...BUT if we don't give enough to support our chapel won't +Felley just follow Rome's example and CLOSE THE CHAPEL????? After all the property is worth far more than what we contribute in the short term. With all the priests leaving or going to be dismissed +Felley will just repeat New Rome's pattern "not enough priests, not enough parishoners to support the chapel CLOSE IT" Could this be what he really wants?
I hope I'm totally wrong, so instead of hitting the disagree button please tell me why I'm wrong and if you see a solution. Please tell me why we should give or why we shouldn't.
Thank you.
If they close the chapel, both chaplain and flock will be looking elsewhere for organization. In all likelihood, this will be the nascent "hardliner" SSPX. Seems fine to me, the sooner the current Menzigen "apparatus" collapses, the better. The "imported" chaplains will tend to go to their respective homelands, and those who like Menzigen's leftward drift will find themselves packed 3 or 4 to a chapel, serving ever dwindling flocks.
-
I'd try and ask your chapel's treasurer for a more complete picture. "Not meeting expenses" isn't the same as "can't pay the bills". Depending on the priest, they might start trying to guilt people into contributing more the minute the collection itself doesn't cover the monthly expenses (or sooner!), but that doesn't mean that there isn't a savings account which could be used.....
That has always been the M.O., so I see no need to ask. I assume that there is plenty of reserve. I am content to see them spend down the reserves. If I am wrong and there are no reserves, so much the better. Over a plate of dog food they will see so much sooner where their path of perfidy leads.
-
If they close the chapel, ...
Good for us:
The SSPX leadership doesn't want to close chapels, but open more chapels, build and buy new buildings, etc. Because they feel big and important (see their caviar lawyer and consultant Krah), and that's why they undertake too much, actually, and are very wasteful compared to the times under Archbishop Lefebvre.
See Bishop Williamson's Last Cardrige (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=20991&min=35#p1) Eleison Comment.
So I think you US Catholics by decreasing or stopping the funds to the SSPX, do exactly the right thing. This is the "language" they understand. They won't change their liberal course until the leadership would be replaced (not likely in an hierarchy), but at least you fight.
-
The colon between "Good for us:" and on the next line "The SSPX leadership" is maybe not very clear, so what I mean is:
If they close the chapel, ...
Good for us is the fact that the SSPX leadership doesn't want to close... but...
-
Ultrarigorist said:
If they close the chapel, both chaplain and flock will be looking elsewhere for organization. In all likelihood, this will be the nascent "hardliner" SSPX. Seems fine to me, the sooner the current Menzigen "apparatus" collapses, the better. The "imported" chaplains will tend to go to their respective homelands, and those who like Menzigen's leftward drift will find themselves packed 3 or 4 to a chapel, serving ever dwindling flocks.[/quote]
_________________________________________________________________
An interesting comment.
How does the average SSPX American view their French governor?
The Catholic Church network operates much like an international business.
The more sophisticated international companies learn the culture and customs of their markets and develop local talent to grow their business.
The Japanese and French are notorious for being culturally insular.
They are always slow to figure out what's really going-on in their overseas markets.
The SSPX should have known their French contingent weren't well suited for managing the colonies. Historically, except for Tahiti, the French haven't assimilated, but have eventually been kicked-out of their overseas territories.
Menzingen's staffing priorities are obviously based on another agenda.
When I listen to the young French SSPX priests residing in the US, I'm a bit puzzeled by their attitude. They believe we should be grateful that they are here. For the Sacraments, Yes!... But for understanding and being part of the faithful... give me an American, or Anglo-Saxon priest anytime.