My minimalist, back-to-basics "Trad Checklist" for evaluating a chapel:

1. Is the priest properly ordained in the old rite (by a bishop who himself was ordained/consecrated in the old rite)?
2. Was the priest FORMED in a Traditional seminary, or at least has the priest fully converted to Tradition? Does the priest defend Tradition, and attack Modernism, Vatican II and the Conciliar religion sufficiently to teach/warn his congregation of their severe, grave dangers?
3. Does the priest say the pre-Vatican II Tridentine Mass in Latin, and only give/recommend the other Sacraments according to the Pre-Vatican II form as well?

If a chapel fails any of these 3 points, it's not a Traditional chapel and is not a safe place for us to park our families during the Crisis.

On the other hand, if it passes these 3 tests, it is SAFE ENOUGH TO TRUST WITH AT LEAST OUR SUNDAY MASS ATTENDANCE.

If you're looking for a place to donate your life to, swear lifetime allegiance to, buy T-Shirts for, etc. then you might want to add other points.

But I, for one, am not interested in THAT kind of Traditional Catholicism. I only want to be a simple Traditional Catholic, keeping the Faith during this Crisis in the Church. I don't need a team to root for, or a priest to sign over my Intellect and/or Free Will to.

Oh brother.

"I don't need a priest to sign my intellect over to."-Matthew


Matthew knows this that I have been one of his critics, and I just want to add that this is the stupidest thing that I ever read from Matthew and one of the dumbest things ever posted on Catholic info period.  He deserves some sort of special recognition for that because frankly, it isn't easy to do.

edit- And everytime someone makes a sort of comment of constructive criticism to matthew he starts a new thread where he does a rant so that all readers can't really connect the two threads and the comments end up far separated from each other in the long run on different threads so that in the future noone can connect the dots but I'll put it out there...this thread and this "rant" was started after suggesting that Matthew should speak with a priest about recommending Feenyite chapels.  Let's put it into context shall we.

We got only one Society chapel, here in Tulsa, and there's so little money that they only have Mass every other week.

I try to go to it, basically because it's a TLM that starts at 3pm, and I'm on the night shift.

What is wrong with you Matthew?  The faith of the priest is somehow missing from your infallible list of commandments.

Furthermore it seems intentional, because you go on to say that it doesn't matter if the priest is feeneyite. Feeneyism is a heresy.

It's seems pharisaical to complain about the Ambrose charlatan but to encourage people to attend feeneyite masses.

And here is the full bloom of SSPXism........

Quote from: Centroamerica

edit- And everytime someone makes a sort of comment of constructive criticism to matthew he starts a new thread where he does a rant so that all readers can't really connect the two threads and the comments end up far separated from each other in the long run on different threads so that in the future noone can connect the dots but I'll put it out there...this thread and this "rant" was started after suggesting that Matthew should speak with a priest about recommending Feenyite chapels.  Let's put it into context shall we.

I disagree with your presumed motives, but it does make it rather difficult to follow a conversation.

For the record, a priest was asked, as you recommended.

I didn't state it as a motive but merely an effect (that a comment on one thread leads to a rant on another).

Quote from: Centroamerica

"I don't need a priest to sign my intellect over to."-Matthew

this thread and this "rant" was started after suggesting that Matthew should speak with a priest about recommending Feenyite chapels.  Let's put it into context shall we.

I don't beat around the bush. If I believe something, I'll just come right out and say it. Don't accuse me of being deceptive.

I believe we should all have a spiritual director if possible, frequently consult with faithful Traditional priests on various topics and highly value their opinion over our own.

What I *meant* was I'm not looking for a cult leader -- a priest to serve up Kool-aid which I am to drink, with my brain shut off.

I should have been more clear on that. It's true that obedience (which is subjugating one's own will, opinions, and ideas to another) is an important virtue, and it's a good idea to take a position of humility and obedience with a priest of God -- assuming he's Traditional of course.

There are different kinds of obedience. Blind obedience, for example. I don't believe that kind is called for from rational creatures. Or else why did God give us an intellect, if we weren't to use it?

Judas was one of the twelve chosen by Christ. And we were warned that wolves would be among the chosen flock from the beginning starting with Judas.

Therefore, we must discern whether our priest or our bishop is of God.

However, first we must pray for them that they may repent and follow Christ.

It's pretty clear that Matthew covered the "faith of the priest" in point 2b:

-- "Does the priest defend Tradition, and attack Modernism, Vatican II and the Conciliar religion sufficiently to teach/warn his congregation of their severe, grave dangers?"

If a priest is defending Tradition and attacking the errors of the day (i.e. Modernism and V2), you can bet his Faith is solid.  I agree with the "checklist" 1000%.  If all the traditionalists had agreed to this 40 yrs ago, we'd be quite a force!  But alas, we have allowed petty arguments to keep us divided.  We are just as much to blame for the Church's situation as the modernists in Rome!