Author Topic: Worst enemies of the American brand of resistance. (Read 25075 times)

Nobody · « **Reply #60 on:** March 15, 2014, 03:06:41 PM »

Quote from: stgobnait

i dislike the term 'celebrity' priest. do you mean, the ones who are in the forefront of the resistance? someone has to be, and i would guess, there are not too many takers!

I did not invent the term "celebrity" priest. While you may be able to come up with a better term, I believe everyone understands what is meant by it. In this thread, reference is made to those who make imprudent and unproven claims in order to attract people's attention. That's what makes a priest a "celebrity" to certain people, while it will repel others.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #61 on:** March 15, 2014, 03:33:56 PM »

Quote from: BlackIrish

Quote from: Neil Obstat
.

I hope I'm not offending any Jews by saying these things. I wouldn't want to be 'anti-Semitic,' you know.

.

No offense taken . . .

Looks like the tassels, or whatever they are called, might have been dipped, symbolically :shocked:, something red.

from their website: http://www.orderalhambra.org/

I would expect the red tassels to imitate or be reminiscent of blood spilling OUT of the fez.

There is a ritual public display of blood-frenzy that Mohammedans practice, where by women and children line the streets, eating festival foods, and watching their men and even boys running around in the street. They strike each other on the scalp with a long knife or a sword, enough to cause lacerations in the skin, and bleeding. Anyone who knows about head wounds knows there is a LOT of blood that erupts from any scalp cut. The blood flows down their faces and drips on their shirts, spilling over their shoulders, and they run around jumping up and down, shouting their creepy slogans like "Allahu akbar" and other things.

The women, girls and boys under 7 watch this like it's some kind of entertainment.

The red tassels shown in your photo seem to spill over the shoulders, too.

.

stgobnait · « **Reply #62 on:** March 15, 2014, 03:37:54 PM »

so if you will invite a resistance priest to visit, will that invitation specify, no celebrity need apply... just asking...

BlackIrish · « **Reply #63 on:** March 15, 2014, 03:42:37 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Quote from: BlackIrish
Quote from: Neil Obstat
.

I hope I'm not offending any Jews by saying these things. I wouldn't want to be 'anti-Semitic,' you know.

.

No offense taken . . .

Looks like the tassels, or whatever they are called, might have been dipped, symbolically :shocked:, something red.

from their website: http://www.orderalhambra.org/

I would expect the red tassels to imitate or be reminiscent of blood spilling OUT of the fez.

There is a ritual public display of blood-frenzy that Mohammedans practice, where by women and children line the streets, eating festival foods, and watching their men and even boys running around in the street. They strike each other on the scalp with a long knife or a sword, enough to cause lacerations in the skin, and bleeding. Anyone who knows about head wounds knows there is a LOT of blood that erupts from any scalp cut. The blood flows down their faces and drips on their shirts, spilling over their shoulders, and they run around jumping up and down, shouting their creepy slogans like "Allahu akbar" and other things.

The women, girls and boys under 7 watch this like it's some kind of entertainment.

The red tassels shown in your photo seem to spill over the shoulders, too.

.

Good work, Neil Obstat! See, it pays to know thy enemy.

Bloody gore and all!

Centroamerica · « **Reply #64 on:** March 15, 2014, 06:58:16 PM »

Quote from: Nobody

Quote from: stgobnait
i dislike the term 'celebrity' priest. do you mean, the ones who are in the forefront of the resistance? someone has to be, and i would guess, there are not too many takers!

I did not invent the term "celebrity" priest. While you may be able to come up with a better term, I believe everyone understands what is meant by it. In this thread, reference is made to those who make imprudent and unproven claims in order to attract people's attention. That's what makes a priest a "celebrity" to certain people, while it will repel others.

Here in Brazil there is a Novus Ordo Fr. Paul Ricardo that has a YouTube channel and Facebook and poses as a conservative or some sort of Novus Ordo regard up guy. He is most probably a plant for the NWO and what I would call a "celebrity" priest in the strict term since every Brazilian knows wh he is.

The resistance doesn't take it that far so please excuse the use of the term in reference to the resistance.

Nobody · « **Reply #65 on:** March 15, 2014, 09:46:42 PM »

Quote from: stgobnait

so if you will invite a resistance priest to visit, will that invitation specify, no celebrity need apply... just asking...

I will happily accept and welcome any priest of the resistance because, as I said, I can look past the appearances and faults of the messenger. If I had the choice, I would have chosen a more diplomatic and gentle priest, because it is a lot easier to catch flies with syrup than with vinegar. But I know God is in control and knows better which are the right tools for the right job.

Sigismund · « **Reply #66 on:** March 15, 2014, 10:00:29 PM »

Quote from: holysoulsacademy

Catholics hate ~ SIN!

Sin is not a person. Viva Cristo Rey said Catholics shouldn't hate anyONE, not anyTHING.

crossbro · « **Reply #67 on:** March 15, 2014, 11:46:31 PM »

Quote from: Mama ChaCha

We need Archbishop Lefebvre...

I don't pay much attention to one or the other or the inside politics.

But as far as the current leadership of SSPX goes, if they now have policies that do not reflect the actions and views of AB Lefebvre, not only do they not have the right to ask people to leave or rid priests, they themselves should be the ones who leave and who are ostracized because they are counterfeits.

stgobnait · « **Reply #68 on:** March 16, 2014, 06:15:04 AM »

fr pfieffer is a rough diamond, il grant, but certaintly, a diamomd! we owe the swift formation of the resistance to his tirelessness, and love for souls, so if i was curt, its because i am aware of some of his 'bad' press. it appears, he is to be given no quater, while, the smooth talkers who have designs on rome, use him as stick to beat 'the resistance' while secretly, i believe, they are terrified of him.

hugeman · « **Reply #69 on:** March 16, 2014, 09:55:36 AM »

Quote from: Sigismund

Quote from: holysoulsacademy
Catholics hate ~ SIN!

Sin is not a person. Viva Cristo Rey said Catholics shouldn't hate anyONE, not anyTHING.

Certainly, this thread has been through some convoluted turns and twists. Hopefully, the Bishop's latest Eleison Comments will put to rest some of the mis-information, and will quiet some souls-- ensuring them that the "resistance" has a purpose beyond just "resisting". See here:http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/ELEISON-COMMENTS-cccxlviii-348-15TH-March-2014-AD
If the link doesn't work, look on CathInfo for Eleison Comments of March 15th, 2014.

Bear in mind that there is no "leader" or "personality" or "folk hero" of the resistance. They are simply Catholic faithful, laity and priests and sisters and brothers (and Bishop), who woke up one day and found that the SSPX was lying to them, and was in the process of selling their Catholic faith out to the conciliar religion (I didn't make up that name-- that's the name they called their religion). Hopefully, as this Eleison Comments may indicate, more time will be spent on spreading the truths of the Catholic faith, and less time spent on regurgitating the lies of Fellay and Co.

It is true, Catholics look for a leader. This has proven to be the sticking power of Archbishop Lefebvre. Even when he was (at he urging of traitors within his organization) 'dancing with the Romans', traditionalists still wanted to see him as their 'leader.'

For right or wrong, the good bishop has decided that such is not his place. Certainly no one else has yet stepped up. All the other 'independent' bishops in the world have, thus far, confined their apostolate to their own little hamlets and corners of tradition. In God's good time, He will send a leader to the Catholic faithful, if He so pleases, and if we be worthy. Surely tradition has been littered with a plethora of false shepherds and ill-formed leaders. We don't need more of those. www-sos-save-our-sspx.

holysoulsacademy · « **Reply #70 on:** March 16, 2014, 10:07:21 AM »

Quote from: stgobnait

fr pfieffer is a rough diamond, il grant, but certaintly, a diamomd! we owe the swift formation of the resistance to his tirelessness, and love for souls, so if i was curt, its because i am aware of some of his 'bad' press. it appears, he is to be given no quater, while, the smooth talkers who have designs on rome, use him as stick to beat 'the resistance' while secretly, i believe, they are terrified of him.

Well said, stgobnait!
Thank God for Fr. Pfeiffer and Fr. Chazal and their tireless efferts to bring sacraments to all of us, just like St. Patrick.
Unfortunately, the SSPX is quite happy to sit in their neighborhood and cater to their group, instead of seeking out souls that need to hear the Truth.
All of you who know about the story of St. Patrick ought to realize that St. Patrick never wasted time mincing words and playing nice with the evil wizards. He called out evil when he saw it!

VinnyF · « **Reply #71 on:** March 16, 2014, 11:32:04 AM »

Quote from: Wessex

And, yes. there may be a tendency to backtrack a little and resurrect a common bogeyman in sedevecantism when they discover the 'outside' is a little lonely and very different from before. But Fr. P and Bp. W must surely realise there is no going back. They may claim to be the authentic heirs of ideological Lefebvre but it is his institution that the pragmatic laity prefer to engage with. They should establish a new mission with a more positive goal than resistance before they fade from memory.

I think Wessex is on to it here. With the accession of Francis to the papacy, it is clear to most (outside of the resistance) that there will be no SSPX canonical regularization for many years. The highly insulated escape pod that Archbishop Lefebvre negotiated with CDL Ratzinger in the '88 Protocol whereby an autonomous SSPX hung like an extra leg from the Consiliar Church governed (frighteningly) by some non-distinct committee of orthodox Bishops did not happen then and did not happen in 2012 for +Fellay. The SSPX will develop a hard shell around itself, further separate itself from the modern Catholic structure, and go about its business as it has since the first suppression in 1974. It will ordain priests in its seminaries and consecrate new Bishops after another dozen years go by. They have the resources and a good food supply to wait for the conversion of Rome. There will be ZERO contact with Rome since Rome has nothing to offer if it does not offer the faith.

The resistance already falters among the remainder of at least most, if not all, of the U.S. SSPX priests (thats all of them less 2). FRS Pfeiffer and Hewko may continue to be deluded by the hope/belief that more than a handful of the staunchest priests in the U.S. are teetering on the brink of joining them. They don't recognize that they are merely being treated politely, if you can call it that.

Where there is nothing tangible and solid that you can hold up to the young families or old ladies to 'resist', you will not get new converts - except for the occasional new nutter or former sacristan who's been pissed off at some pastor in a chapel. Add to that, you have priests telling folks not to participate in a rosary crusade because it is nefarious and then have to defend the evil intent of the intentions - which look fine to those with a Fatima devotion, or telling folks to stop attending SSPX chapels in favor of a bi-yearly visit by one of two priests on the circuit.

To Wessex' point, for the Resistance to survive, they have to be demonstrably different from the SSPX and be able to make that distinction in stark terms understandable by both the young families and the old ladies. This gibberish about Max K. plays well on CI but not at the chapel level. The we-are-not-them route will not be sustainable. And similarly, +Williamson's tact of We-are-not-them and We-are-also-not-them(SV) will similarly bear no converts.

Unless you present a reason to abandon the SSPX that is convincing enough to put the near term fear of the loss of one's soul in the balance, then you will continue to see Mrs. Crumpit's curio cabinet in the background of every 'resistance' Mass because it will remain a parlor novelty.

Nobody · « **Reply #72 on:** March 16, 2014, 02:57:09 PM »

VinnyF,

I think you are getting a bit mixed up here.

Quote from: VinnyF

The SSPX will develop a hard shell around itself, further separate itself from the modern Catholic structure, and go about its business as it has since the first suppression in 1974.

If the inside is starting to rot, then that shell will only make the SSPX sound hollow and empty. The hard shell you may refer to is the culpable ignorance and sloth of the average parishoner, who is too cozy in his/her little corner and doesn't want to be disturbed from his/her slumber. You can't go to war with this type of person and there is no value in this type of hard shell. It is exactly this hard shell that allows the inside to keep rotting.

And the whole issue here is that the SSPX is not keeping itself "separate" as you seem to think. Everything is pointing towards the SSPX NOT wanting to be separate anymore from the heretics in Rome.

Quote from: VinnyF

They have the resources and a good food supply to wait for the conversion of Rome.

Again, the problem is that they are NOT waiting for the conversion of Rome. They are converting THEMSELVES so they can buddy up to Rome and be defrauded of their "good food supply".

Quote from: VinnyF

There will be ZERO contact with Rome since Rome has nothing to offer if it does not offer the faith.

I think Bishop Fellay disagrees with you here. And if he did agree, ask him what he has been doing the last couple of years ? Ask him what were the intentions of the Rosary crusades ? Ask him why he has been weaseling so much ?

Quote from: VinnyF

The resistance already falters among the remainder of at least most, if not all, of the U.S. SSPX priests (thats all of them less 2).

This is a poor remark. Even if there were no one in the US resisting, there are others that are making up for it. I believe there are at least 80 priest/religious that have spoken up now and that support the resistance. If there's only two from the US, then maybe there are other conclusions you can draw from that.

Quote from: VinnyF

Where there is nothing tangible and solid that you can hold up to the young families or old ladies to 'resist', you will not get new converts

I think you are using the wrong words here. The Resistance is not about getting converts, they are not starting a new mission. They are doing what the SSPX was created for and what the SSPX has always done (until recently) : remain Catholic and fight modernism. It is Bishop Fellay and his cronies who are now changing direction. The Resistance is trying to wake people up.

I am grateful that someone stood up and warned me about what is happening. I have just distanced myself and my family from the SSPX, for the same reasons that I have distanced myself from the Novus Ordo in the past. Even if the Resistance disappeared from sight, I will still not attend the SSPX, unless and until they resume the course that Archbishop Lefebvre set out for them. Even if I am the only one left to resist, that would not justify me to join the betrayal of the SSPX.

Quote from: VinnyF

To Wessex' point, for the Resistance to survive, they have to be demonstrably different from the SSPX and be able to make that distinction in stark terms understandable by both the young families and the old ladies.

The Resistance only exists for two reasons :

1. To point out that the captain of the SSPX is changing course, in the wrong direction.
2. Keep doing what the SSPX has always done, as much as is possible with their limited resources, until the SSPX is heading back in the right direction.

Do you notice the parallel with the Conciliar Church ?

Apart from that, the Resistance has no other "must do's". If you can't convince people about the seriousness of the situation in the SSPX, maybe that is more because most people have given up the fight. They have found a cozy corner and will not give it up, not even for the Truth. They just want to be left alone.

Please don't take anything personally. I could not discern from your post on which side of the fence you are (or on the fence). I just found that so many people in the SSPX focus on their own little world and don't care about the big picture. I find this very selfish. If Archbishop Lefebvre had been like that, we would have never had the SSPX in the first place.

holysoulsacademy · « **Reply #73 on:** March 16, 2014, 03:35:19 PM »

:applause: :applause: :applause:

You hit the nail on the head Nobody.
My dear friend who is still at the SSPX, her first reaction was shock and then outrage.
She was so ticked off and upset, feeling that she had been duped.
She wanted so much to say something she started to prepare a "Declaration from a Third Order SSPX" renouncing the new direction of the SSPX and pledging adherence to the position of ABL.

But then she got scared, and worried and realized she was going to have to make a decision.
So she decided to call her superior Fr. Purdy and ask his advice.
He then went ahead and accused the resistance priests of being ignorant and misinterpreting the AFD.
And how they were expelled and she should not listen to them.

She was then told to study Sacrosanctum Concilium and get back to him citing what is wrong with that docuмent.
By the end of the conversation she was complaining of having a headache and now being confused and just wanting to go to Mass.
And guess what, she has since stopped calling me and barely even responds when I text her.

She told me she would stay in the SSPX until she begins to see any modernism being taught.
One day she calls and tells me about their sermon and how Fr. SSPX preached that divorce was allowed in cases of adultery and that this was taught in the bible, citing the passage from Matthew. I warned her this was a sign of modernism, but she then said ~ well, that doesn't apply to me as I am 74 and have no plans to marry.
Then they taught about the fasting rules under the new code ~ I warned her, she said, well, that doesn't apply to me as I am 74 and do not fast or abstain (she's already a vegan). She will not see what is happening around her.

It seems that I have to find a sign of modernism that pertains to her life before she realizes what is happening, & maybe even then she won't, because she is cozy and comfy and scared.

Quote from: Nobody

VinnyF,

I think you are getting a bit mixed up here.

Quote from: VinnyF
The SSPX will develop a hard shell around itself, further separate itself from the modern Catholic structure, and go about its business as it has since the first suppression in 1974.

If the inside is starting to rot, then that shell will only make the SSPX sound hollow and empty. The hard shell you may refer to is the culpable ignorance and sloth of the average parishoner, who is too cozy in his/her little corner and doesn't want to be disturbed from his/her slumber. You can't go to war with this type of person and there is no value in this type of hard shell. It is exactly this hard shell that allows the inside to keep rotting.

And the whole issue here is that the SSPX is not keeping itself "separate" as you seem to think. Everything is pointing towards the SSPX NOT wanting to be separate anymore from the heretics in Rome.

Quote from: VinnyF
They have the resources and a good food supply to wait for the conversion of Rome.

Again, the problem is that they are NOT waiting for the conversion of Rome. They are converting THEMSELVES so they can buddy up to Rome and be defrauded of their "good food supply".

Quote from: VinnyF
There will be ZERO contact with Rome since Rome has nothing to offer if it does not offer the faith.

I think Bishop Fellay disagrees with you here. And if he did agree, ask him what he has been doing the last couple of years ? Ask him what were the intentions of the Rosary crusades ? Ask him why he has been weaseling so much ?

Quote from: VinnyF
The resistance already falters among the remainder of at least most, if not all, of the U.S. SSPX priests (thats all of them less 2).

This is a poor remark. Even if there were no one in the US resisting, there are others that are making up for it. I believe there are at least 80 priest/religious that have spoken up now and that support the resistance. If there's only two from the US, then maybe there are other conclusions you can draw from that.

Quote from: VinnyF
Where there is nothing tangible and solid that you can hold up to the young families or old ladies to 'resist', you will not get new converts

I think you are using the wrong words here. The Resistance is not about getting converts, they are not starting a new mission. They are doing what the SSPX was created for and what the SSPX has always done (until recently) : remain Catholic and fight modernism. It is Bishop Fellay and his cronies who are now changing direction. The Resistance is trying to wake people up.

I am grateful that someone stood up and warned me about what is happening. I have just distanced myself and my family from the SSPX, for the same reasons that I have distanced myself from the Novus Ordo in the past. Even if the Resistance disappeared from sight, I will still not attend the SSPX, unless and until they resume the course that Archbishop Lefebvre set out for them. Even if I am the only one left to resist, that would not justify me to join the betrayal of the SSPX.

Quote from: VinnyF
To Wessex' point, for the Resistance to survive, they have to be demonstrably different from the SSPX and be able to make that distinction in stark terms understandable by both the young families and the old ladies.

The Resistance only exists for two reasons :

1. To point out that the captain of the SSPX is changing course, in the wrong direction.
2. Keep doing what the SSPX has always done, as much as is possible with their limited resources, until the SSPX is heading back in the right direction.

Do you notice the parallel with the Conciliar Church ?

Apart from that, the Resistance has no other "must do's". If you can't convince people about the seriousness of the situation in the SSPX, maybe that is more because most people have given up the fight. They have found a cozy corner and will not give it up, not even for the Truth. They just want to be left alone.

Please don't take anything personally. I could not discern from your post on which side of the fence you are (or on the fence). I just found that so many people in the SSPX focus on their own little world and don't care about the big picture. I find this very selfish. If Archbishop Lefebvre had been like that, we would have never had the SSPX in the first place.

VinnyF · « **Reply #74 on:** March 16, 2014, 04:13:56 PM »

Quote from: Nobody

The Resistance only exists for two reasons :

1. To point out that the captain of the SSPX is changing course, in the wrong direction.
2. Keep doing what the SSPX has always done, as much as is possible with their limited resources, until the SSPX is heading back in the right direction.

Do you notice the parallel with the Conciliar Church ?

Apart from that, the Resistance has no other "must do's". If you can't convince people about the seriousness of the situation in the SSPX, maybe that is more because most people have given up the fight. They have found a cozy corner and will not give it up, not even for the Truth. They just want to be left alone.

Please don't take anything personally. I could not discern from your post on which side of the fence you are (or on the fence). I just found that so many people in the SSPX focus on their own little world and don't care about the big picture. I find this very selfish. If Archbishop Lefebvre had been like that, we would have never had the SSPX in the first place.

Thanks Nobody, I certainly am not offended by anything you said. The problem is that all of things that have contributed to the resistance mindset are not, in my experience, evident at the chapel level. I have not seen any modernistic tendencies introduced or hinted at in my chapel or in any other I have had the opportunity to visit in my travels. Most of it appears to be issues with what +Fellay does or says and that get's translated into the SSPX slipping into modernism.

Can you give me some examples of changes that I might be missing in my chapel or that might have happened in your chapel that are mandated by the District Superior and indicate a modernistic move?