Posted on 07/07/2004 7:16:03 AM PDT by ultima ratio
Doesn't matter. The locks were changed after Pius XII.
It is nothing like SSPX. SSPX is not a group lay people join or from which they are expelled. Anyone can attend Society Masses and receive outstanding spiritual direction. While many good people may be involved with Opus Dei, the tree from which it sprung was rotten. Escriva advocated pulling down women's panties and spanking bare bottoms. Most of his fascist oriented writings are locked away unfit for public consumption. He had an out of control temper and was abusive in several ways to himself and others. His so-called miracle, attested to by only Opus Dei physicians, was healing a rash. As a RN, that is a joke. Many rashes go undiagnosed and go away without treatment.
Opus Dei and SSPX are light years apart. But you knew that already, didn't you? You were simply posting a drive-by insult towards the SSPX.
Funny stuff. Are you speaking Ex Cathedra?
Indeed I do.
Countless hours on these boards reading the writings of those who claim to be its spokespeople.
One of your apologists called Opus Dei "a cult". I'd call that a "drive by insult" but of course that can't be so. SSPX members don't insult. They tell the truth. Only rebuttals by non-SSPXers can be classed as "insults".
Anyway, the description which he gave of Opus Dei, to support his jibe, sounded remarkably like his own organization. I said so.
Outrage from you and others.
Unsurprising really. The overwheening pride which characterises the writings and proclamations of your organization is easily wounded.
I attend the indult (Fraternity of Saint Peter).
No, I cited facts, history and accounts from specific experiences. You cite nothing but offer condescension, insults and the Novus Ordo holier-than-thou judgmentalism rampant on these threads.
Your church is imploding. The facts are not on your side. And I say your church because something which has become a mixture of psychobabble, paganism and Protestantism under a veneer of Catholicism sure as heck isn't the Church of 40 years ago. The only difference between the N.O. and the Episcopal service is the N.O.s can usually make a valid consecration.
Keep going. In ten years the SSPX will be the only option for many of you who desire the services of a priest over a community "service" lead by your local nun or lay administrator.
You are obviously ignorant of SSPX and are simply repeating nonsense. The typical SSPX parish is no different from any pre-Vatican II parish. I know, because my family attends an SSPX chapel. The priest is a good young devout and devoted man. He is cheerful and commonsensical--and hard-working.
Is this because SSPX (or perhaps something even more extreme) is unavailable to you?
The reason I ask is because on this very thread you cast doubt on the legitimate election of JPII.
This is far from the FSSP position and even a little extreme for SSPX, if I may say so. It flirts with sedevacantism.
Having the keys doesn't mean a pope may act as a law unto himself. He may not oppose the faith. If he does, he needs to be called on it.
"Countless hours on these boards reading the writings of those who claim to be its spokespeople"
Still hasn't cured your ignorance. I suggest you read some more. And by the way, nobody on these threads has ever claimed to be the spokesperson for the Society. Some of us defend the Society from gratuitous slurs from uninformed people like yourself, but we don't represent the SSPX.
I do have an SSPX Mass available. For your information, the FSSP priest at my parish last Sunday criticized John Paul II unlike I have ever heard from the SSPX, for "doing nothing while bishops prey like wolves on little children". He was also very critical of John Paul II for his "false ecumenism".
More ignorance. Nobody here is a "member of SSPX." The SSPX is a fraternity of priests.
I'll be the first to admit that I flirt with sedevacantism. Not because I want to be a sedevacantist, but because I cannot ignore the evidence.
I'm unconcerned whether your priest is cheerful or glum. I'm acquainted with many modernist heretics who are equally as cheerful. It means nothing.
As for my familiarity with SSPX, I read the writings of its ambassadors and apologists. That includes you. So if I've been deluded into thinking that SSPX is a little extreme, then take a bow my friend.
The incessant and uncharitable insults directed toward the Holy Father do not convey the aspect of a reasonable group of people. Just because I haven't been to your church does not mean that I'm unfamiliar with your organization.
Ask anyone who reads these boards. Writings from a good number of SSPXers, read over a considerable period of time do enable one to construct a picture and get a feel for exactly what you're all about.
My only criticism of JP II is he’s not a strict disciplinarian. But then again, not many Popes have been. To suggest he opposes the faith is simply not true. This attitude is similar to some of our Protestant friends who get a new preacher then decide his preaching doesn’t line up with their view of scripture. They either form a committee to run him off or simply find another Church that line up with their view. Seems to me you’ve found another Church.
So you "defend" SSPX but don't "represent" them? Let's stop playing with words, shall we?
I am a Catholic. My behavior, my words, my actions are noticed by those not of the faith, my neighbors, work colleagues etc., and whether I want it or not, I do represent the Catholic Church to those with whom I come into contact. I'm suppposed to be it's ambassador and an ambassador for Christ. That is the heart of the Christian gospel.
You can't have it both ways my friend. You can't spend every waking moment on these boards putting forth the merits of SSPX and then say you don't represent them. You have made yourself a spokesperson for SSPX. As have your colleagues. You've written plenty. And I've read plenty.
If you don't want to represent SSPX, then lay off the apologetics.
You have to believe that God would leave us without a shepherd. Do you think that He would really do that?
C'mom, have a little faith.
I feel like an orphan, completely ignored and marginalized. I have to struggle with my own Church just to practice the Faith as its always been practiced. I have to shield my children from Catholic priests. I can't find Catholic schools that actually teach Catholicism.
If this is what happens when the seat is occupied, I sure don't want to be around when it's vacated.
BTW, I don't think Christ ever promised that we wouldn't be without a Pope. Every time a Pope dies the seat is vacant.
Incidentally, the church shown on this page is my local NO parish, Holy Trinity, here in Augusta. You will note that the altar rails, high altar and sanctuary are intact. It's a beautiful church.
It's going to be a lot more than 10 years before we're in you're chapel.
Mind you, SSPX might follow Campos and then we'd all be friends again, right?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.