Recent posts

#1

The Coffee Pot / Re: Started Book 3

Last post by ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez - Today at 12:31:25 PM

Lemme guess; Cope LC, black coffee, and IPA.

Close.  Substitute Bellhaven Black Scottish Stout.

Dammit lol.

I like an IPA every now and then, but I have no problem admitting it:

When I hear "IPA", I don't think "man's man."  I think "man bun."

#2

General News and Discussion / Re: SSPX Press Release on Fr. ...

Last post by Melkor - Today at 11:37:34 AM

That's a very valid point.

#3

General News and Discussion / Re: SSPX Press Release on Fr. ...

Last post by Bonaventure - Today at 10:46:55 AM

Yeah my bad Bonny I didn't see the other thread. What a sickening mess. I truly hope he wasn't enabled as that is far worse than just a random pedo operating in secret. Makes them culpable almost moreso than him.

Makes me question a lot about the SSPX, while I will still support them (as they have done nothing but good in my own and my families' lives) it does leave some serious questions and doubt.

No worries.

I just want to add that I entirely disagree with this point:

making it a huge public thing will only draw souls away from the sspx and the TLM. I dunno, just my 2 cents.

It's this type of mindset that allowed and allows abuse to happen.

I've worked in education and Law Enforcement. There are precautions, protocol, and background checks that everyone needs to undergo, especially when it involves minors.

Just because a man has had hands laid upon him and says a Mass in Latin, should not give him a different standard.

Especially when we are talking about Trad priests who are operating on the principle of Epikeia and supplied jurisdiction. We should be even more vigilant.

#4

General News and Discussion / Re: SSPX Press Release on Fr. ...

Last post by Melkor - Today at 10:40:15 AM

Yeah my bad Bonny I didn't see the other thread. What a sickening mess. I truly hope he wasn't enabled as that is far worse than just a random pedo operating in secret. Makes them culpable almost moreso than him.

Makes me question a lot about the SSPX, while I will still support them (as they have done nothing but good in my own and my families' lives) it does leave some serious questions and doubt.

[even intellectually.]

#5

The Sedevacantist Thesis / Re: Sedevacantists and Akita

Last post by Bataar - Today at 10:00:18 AM

Whatever theory ends up being correct, ultimately, only God will be able fix and solve this crisis. He will do so in such a clear fashion, that no men will be able to take even a morsel of credit.

That's why my days of being a keyboard warrior are mostly behind me. Bergoglio will continue to spew heresy. I will still have to fulfill my duties of state.

Convincing others that my position is the correct one, and stating that FSSPers, SSPXers, and even the Archbishop himself, are taking a position that is aligned with enemies of the Church - where does that get anyone? That savors of Dogmatic Sedevacantism, and goes contrary to the policy and rules of this forum - which is officially opionist.

If everyone on this forum, every single member, embraced Sede Vacante tomorrow, would that change anything?

Let's say that tomorrow, the Superiors General of the SSPX, FSSP, ICRSS, and all "regularized" trads embraced SV. Let's then say that all SV clergy - SGG, CMRI, even SSPV, all met up, conditionally consecrated and ordained everyone so that there were 0 doubts as to validity, did the same to all of the "Ecclesia Dei" or "motu" clergy, and we have all trad clergy officially Sedevacantist.

Would that solve the crisis? No - only God would. The NO apparatus would still continue on, and will continue on, until God decides to end this.
 

And not only will such a scenario not (by itself) solve the crisis in Rome, it will have no effect on our personal salvations. A few of us have said the latter repeatedly.  It will do no good at my Personal Judgment to claim that any sins of mine are excused by a rotting papacy ("because" I had no decent Pope to follow, and supposedly I was deserving of a better one). I have the exact same moral culpability  that I would have if Pope St. Pius X or some other reliable pope were in office during my lifetime.

(1) Lay people have zero responsibility to solve the crisis in Rome even intellectually.
(2) Lay people have no responsibility to resolve the crisis on a personal level, either.  If it is God's judgment, at my death, that I should have "made a decision" about PF or whoever, He will surprise me with that news at that time, and until then, no one is authorized to tell any other Catholic about a manufactured moral responsibility to "figure it all out."

We are responsible to comply with divine positive law and the precepts of the Church whether or not PF is doing so and whether or not he imagines (wrongly) that he is at liberty to change divine law, such as the Sixth Commandment -- and whether or not we make a public statement about what he is doing and the state of his office and his soul.

The people who may very well be held responsible are the clerical personnel involved in a refusal to lead and a refusal to clarify -- a refusal to complete the duties of their own ecclesiastical state in life, which are not a lay person's state in life. We don't have to internalize other people's responsibilities to act on heresy, let alone take the blame for the sins of confused hierarchy or outright heretics. We have plenty of our own sins, and we will be responsible only for those.

Completely agree with Bonaventure that only God can solve this, and even most N.O. priests at this time, not to mention all trad priests I'm acquainted with, are convinced that both the Church and the world are too far gone at this point for either to repair itself without divine intervention.

Lay people do have an obligation to know the truth so they can act on it accordingly. Let's say that sedevacantists are right for this argument. Bishops consecrated in the rite of Paul VI are not valid and therefore, none of the priests they've ordained are valid. Therefore, none of the priests in question are actual priests and none of their sacraments are valid. Lay people have an obligation to receive valid sacraments. If they are going to these lay priests, they are not receiving valid sacraments and are therefore, in unknowing disobedience to God. If the above scenario is true, would you agree that lay people do have an obligation to make a change to ensure they receive valid sacraments?

[enabled]

#6

General News and Discussion / Re: SSPX Press Release on Fr. ...

Last post by Bonaventure - Today at 09:37:35 AM

It is interesting that Fr. Rostand's name is not mentioned in the SSPX USA article and that it is said that the superiors did not cover up the situation.

Even if they did not cover it up, Menzingen/Fellay enabledit, according to Rostand himself.

It is even more interesting that this claim has not been denied or repudiated.

I'm sure, if Rostand indeed wrote these letters to his superiors admitting that he had a problem with underage homosexual vice, on at least four different occasions, and then, was made US District Superior, this will all come out during discovery. If that is indeed the case, the SSPX is no better than the Novus Ordo/Conciliar Church/New Church/Bergoglian/Ratzingerian/Garrulous Carolous's/Montinian Sect. In fact, they are worse, if this is true.

How did they enable it?

I highly doubt he was made superior with them knowing it. That wouldn't make any sense. This thread kinda seems like sspx bashing. While the abuse is sickening and sad, it seems going out on a limb to accuse the sspx of enabling it.

Side note I actually met Fr Rostand when I was a youth, served Mass for him I think, and he came over for supper as well during his tenure as superior. Needless to say nothing happened to me, nor have I ever heard of a thing concerning him in Canada/US. It seems the abuse was relegated to France; hopefully. Still a terrible and sickening thing, both because it may draw people away from the society and because I knew him slightly on a personal letter.

But let's exercise prudence here; he's not associated with the sspx after his abuse became known, and making it a huge public thing will only draw souls away from the sspx and the TLM. I dunno, just my 2 cents.

As the other thread I created states:

In his court testimony, the 58-year-old priest admitted to his crimes and apologized to victims, saying he has "always struggled against this attraction" to adolescents.

Significantly, Rostand made his SSPX superiors aware of his struggles as early as 1998, writing a letter to his superiors admitting his attraction to children. He repeated his concerns to superiors in 2000, 2006 and 2016.

https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=31634.0

Again, if that is true, Fellay and Menzingen enabled it.

#7

General Catholic Discussion / Re: Fr Shannon Collins suspend...

Last post by crossingtherubicon - Today at 09:29:52 AM

https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=31401.0

Original thread I missed.  Mods may want to merge.

#8

General News and Discussion / Re: WW3 Has Begun - Iran launc...

Last post by james03 - Today at 09:17:49 AM

Sophisticated evasion move by Iranian guided ballistic warhead.  That's pretty high tech.

#9

General News and Discussion / Re: "Israelis" plan to sacrifi...

Last post by clau clau - Today at 09:14:24 AM

#10

General Catholic Discussion / Re: Fr Shannon Collins suspend...

Last post by crossingtherubicon - Today at 09:05:40 AM

This is a couple months out of date. The incident was covered extensively here on SD when it happened in January.

My first-hand experience was that I attended a wedding at this chapel, and the sermon given by Fr. Collins was by far the best I ever heard on the subject of marriage.

As for second-hand experience, I have heard very good things about these priests from acquaintances in Northern Kentucky.

Yea agreed.