Author Topic: There Is No Red Light (Read 10668 times)

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #30 on:** March 16, 2013, 10:05:50 PM »

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans

Quote from: Seraphim
If you think I am wrong to claim the scandalous preamble is not official SSPX policy, you should have no problem quoting it as such.

Could you produce that for me please?

The evidence is that Bishop Fellay submitted this to Rome in April 2012 as the doctrinal basis for a canonical regularization.

The evidence is that he never retracted it.

The evidence is that Fr. Thouvenot said it was going to be published in March 2013 Edition of Cor Unum.

The evidence is that it will be defended with backup docuмentation in the same edition of Cor Unum.

Of course, Bishop Fellay et al will say that it is line with the Archbishop's position, but we all know that that defence is a bunch of crock!

Still waiting for you to show me where the rejected preamble has become official SSPX policy.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #31 on:** March 16, 2013, 10:07:41 PM »

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans

Quote from: Seraphim
So if Dom Thomas in Brazil went liberal, all his monks would have to flee, on the basis of what he would LiKE TO DO IN THE FUTURE.....despite being unsuccessful doing it.

The monks would not necessarily have to flee, but openly oppose him after trying to do it privately.

Good.

Then you do not back Fr Pfeiffer's red light, since the rejected preamble is no SSPX official policy at all, but mere intention and desire of Menzingen.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #32 on:** March 16, 2013, 10:09:27 PM »

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans

Quote from: Seraphim
Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
Quote from: Telesphorus
The SSPX priests shouldn't be regarded as being subject to Bishop Fellay as though he were really an ordinary with legitimate authority.

What matters is that the priests consider themselves subject to him.

No.

What matters is that they are looked to fight until a formal policy against the faith forces them out.

They should fight openly and stop being anonymous.

So they can be picked off and neutralized.

Not a very good plan, tactically.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #33 on:** March 16, 2013, 10:13:22 PM »

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans

Quote from: Seraphim
Quote from: Jerome
Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
Seraphim,

The Doctrinal Preamble is the mindset of the SSPX leadership, and they are going to defend it in the next issue of Cor Unum as announced by Fr. Thouvenot himself.

If the priests decides that he needs to speak out, then be prepared to support him materially.

This is the whole crux of the matter. We can put whatever shades of light we want to interpret the situation is and even look through pretty pink glasses, but it doesn't change the spirit, mindset, & agenda of the neo-SSPX.

It's either fighting for the whole Truth, nothing but the Truth in defending the Traditional Catholic Faith or not.
Anything else is a compromise, deviation, and deception of the Truth.

It's either your with God, or you're against Him.

I see.

So the 41 French District priests who are fighting Menzingen are against God.

Got it.

The letter was written BEFORE the doctrinal preamble became public. Now they need to start going public as doctrine has been directly attacked.

Can you please quote me some doctrine to back that groundless opinion?

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #34 on:** March 16, 2013, 10:14:51 PM »

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans

Quote from: Matthew
Is +Fellay's approved Doctrinal Preamble, which was never ratified into the official SSPX position, the official position of the SSPX today?

Keep in mind these points:

1) Most of the superiors have probably known about the Preamble for quite some time now and have said nothing against it.
2) The Preamble has just now been published thereby impelling priests to soon make a decision to accept or reject and act accordingly.
3) The Preamble will be published in the March 2013 Edition of Cor Unum and will be defended.
4) The SSPX leadership will claim that the Preamble does not change the position of the SSPX - that it is close to what the Archbishop signed.

Of course, we know that the Preamble needs to be burned along with the docuмents of Vatican II and the New Missal. But unfortunately, most people will swallow it hook, line, and sinker, and hence the need for priests to act openly.

Please answer Matthew's question.

Guga · « **Reply #35 on:** March 16, 2013, 11:45:28 PM »

What is an acceptable situation in your parish?

1-   Does your priest speak against the modernists, even if it is the Pope?
2-   Does your priest show the reality of who Bishop Fellay is and what he is doing? If yes, does he condemn it?
3-   Does he update people’s minds on the danger of what represents the actual position of the SSPX leadership?

If the answer is no I might consider it as a yellow light, but depending on the others circuмstances it still could be red light.

Now, dos the priest forbids you to take the actions mentioned above? If the answer is no you have two options:

1-   Speak it out anyways and wait for them to take the decision
2-   Leave and create the resistance yourself even if there is no priest, even if there is no one else with you.

You should never put yourself in a situation where you can’t speak out loudly no matter what. And it does not count to speak out anonymously on the Internet and not speaking out on your real life.

Ecclesia Militans · « **Reply #36 on:** March 17, 2013, 06:39:51 AM »

Quote from: Seraphim

Still waiting for you to show me where the rejected preamble has become official SSPX policy.

It is official SSPX policy de facto.

Ecclesia Militans · « **Reply #37 on:** March 17, 2013, 06:41:12 AM »

Quote from: Seraphim

Then you do not back Fr Pfeiffer's red light, since the rejected preamble is no SSPX official policy at all, but mere intention and desire of Menzingen.

From what I remember of last Sunday's sermon, Fr. Pfeiffer said the priests now need to speak out. I believe that priests need time to read and digest the Preamble, but then they must act for or against.

Ecclesia Militans · « **Reply #38 on:** March 17, 2013, 06:44:00 AM »

Quote from: Seraphim

So they can be picked off and neutralized.

Not a very good plan, tactically.

The more that do come out, the more will be encouraged to come out. Even if they are picked off, there will be laity who will follow and support them. The past several months have had very little effect. The superiors are becoming more bold. The intended defence of the Preamble in Cor Unum shows how far their boldness goes.

Ecclesia Militans · « **Reply #39 on:** March 17, 2013, 06:45:22 AM »

Quote from: Seraphim

Can you please quote me some doctrine to back that groundless opinion?

What?

Ecclesia Militans · « **Reply #40 on:** March 17, 2013, 06:46:49 AM »

Quote from: Seraphim

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
Quote from: Matthew
Is +Fellay's approved Doctrinal Preamble, which was never ratified into the official SSPX position, the official position of the SSPX today?

Keep in mind these points:

1) Most of the superiors have probably known about the Preamble for quite some time now and have said nothing against it.
2) The Preamble has just now been published thereby impelling priests to soon make a decision to accept or reject and act accordingly.
3) The Preamble will be published in the March 2013 Edition of Cor Unum and will be defended.
4) The SSPX leadership will claim that the Preamble does not change the position of the SSPX - that it is close to what the Archbishop signed.

Of course, we know that the Preamble needs to be burned along with the docuмents of Vatican II and the New Missal. But unfortunately, most people will swallow it hook, line, and sinker, and hence the need for priests to act openly.

Please answer Matthew's question.

It is official SSPX policy de facto.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #41 on:** March 17, 2013, 07:03:18 AM »

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans

Quote from: Seraphim
Still waiting for you to show me where the rejected preamble has become official SSPX policy.

It is official SSPX policy de facto.

No.

The whole argument is Fr Pfeiffer's contention that the rejected doctrinal preamble is official SSPX policy, which precludes all attendance at all SSPX chapels.

You have backed that perspective.

Your response in this post is an admission that there is no such policy, in which case attendance at SSPX chapels cannot reasonably be prohibitive, except on a case by case basis.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #42 on:** March 17, 2013, 07:04:27 AM »

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans

Quote from: Seraphim
Then you do not back Fr Pfeiffer's red light, since the rejected preamble is no SSPX official policy at all, but mere intention and desire of Menzingen.

From what I remember of last Sunday's sermon, Fr. Pfeiffer said the priests now need to speak out. I believe that priests need time to read and digest the Preamble, but then they must act for or against.

This is another admission that, as of this moment, there can be no red light.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #43 on:** March 17, 2013, 07:07:07 AM »

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans

Quote from: Seraphim
So they can be picked off and neutralized.

Not a very good plan, tactically.

The more that do come out, the more will be encouraged to come out. Even if they are picked off, there will be laity who will follow and support them. The past several months have had very little effect. The superiors are becoming more bold. The intended defence of the Preamble in Cor Unum shows how far their boldness goes.

Depends on your motive:

If the goal is to save the SSPX, internal resistance is the primary and most effective method.

If your goal is to fleece the SSPX of as many clergy and laity to start an independent organization, your method is best.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #44 on:** March 17, 2013, 07:08:07 AM »

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans

Quote from: Seraphim
Can you please quote me some doctrine to back that groundless opinion?

What?

Repeat.