As governments around the world presume to suspend public Mass, who’s standing up for the Sovereign Rights of Christ the King as made manifest in the eminent freedom of the Holy Catholic Church? If you guessed SSPX, you’re wrong.
And yet, Archbishop Lefebvre could not have spoken more plainly about what lies at the very heart of the Society’s mission and purpose in light of the Modernist takeover of Rome:
“The real fundamental conflict is the reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ. St. Paul tells us, Our Lord came to reign. They say no, and we, we say yes with all the popes.”
In a recent letter to Fr. Davide Pagliarani, Superior General of the SSPX, I implored his intervention on behalf of Catholic tradition. In the video below, I share the contents of that letter and tell you how you can do your part.
For more on this topic, see previous posts HERE, HERE and HERE
More proof that the conciliar heretics in Rome and in the Novus Ordo sect are not Catholic and Frankie is not a catholic pope.
Brother Louis, your statement on Christ our King is a wonderful, bold statement.
Several articles that i have read, state that many of the hireling bishops in England and the Disunited States are more insistent of keeping the faithful from the Holy Sacraments than the state authorities.
There were priests presiding over the Holy Mass, on the battlefields during WW2. Yet, false bishops have locked the Churches throughout the world for the 40 days for repenting, Good Friday and the Celebration of our Lord Jesus’ Rising, overcoming death for us sinners.
One Catholic replied on the Gloria tv site, that this has never happened with the Church, since our Lord Jesus rose from death. Between this unprecedented attack from the numerous imposters, posing as bishops and this satanic false pope, these strongly seem to be apocalyptic signs and events.
The Talmud Jew Media has played their part, 24/7 deceitful propaganda, for a virus that causes death for very few people. The overwhelming amount of people, 75%-95%, that have died, have died from cancer, heart disease, lung disease, obesity… many had two or more serious diseases. They also had covid-19.
This is the same ruthless TJM that did their significant part to inflict us with: homosexual marriage, homosexual men adopting young boys, transgender mutalations, worthless paper money, Muhammadans/diversity, killing babies within their mothers…
Almighty God please strengthen us who love Jesus, to get through this vile world, amen.
This should be addressed to ALL traditional priests.
Louie, I dare say you will go down in the big book at Heaven’s gate as one of the laity who saved the Church in our time By respectfully approaching the priests of the SSPX regarding Christ’s Kingship you will keep that holy order of priests on track to, as Father Zuhlsdorf says, “save the Liturgy, Save the World”.
Your work is so important. Your love of Truth inspires. God Keep You. A Blessed Holy Week be yours.
Louie, I agree that the message should be sent that the Church has decided that the virus demands extreme caution, and that that’s why we are accepting the governors’ recommendations. In fact, I think your letter could improve in that way by saying very plainly, “We aren’t doing this because the governors have told us to, but because we believe the governors are correct in their call for extreme caution.”
But I’m surprised you don’t emphasize the matter of baptism in your letter. Masses are still being said, and it’s the saying of Masses that the world needs. But by not having baptisms until the crisis permits, even though they could be held within government commands in all but the most restrictive states, isn’t that teaching that baptism as soon as possible after birth isn’t all that important?
Yes, we can baptize an infant who is in danger of death, if we have clean water on hand and enough time before the baby dies to baptize him or her which in the case of Chicago unbelievably includes time to contact Cupich and ask for permission.
But babies die of SIDS. Knowing that, can you clarify what the Church would say about an unbaptized baby, or about any unbaptized person? I looked in the CCC and it references a Vatican II document in saying that God can lead someone to faith without the sacraments. I will say that that is still what I believe. I believe that a Muslim of “good faith”, in the sense he is honest in his belief even if heretical, could be rewarded by God with eternal life in heaven for doing the best he could in this life. Is that what the Church taught before Vatican II? Did the Church ever say before 1965 that unbaptized people might get into heaven? I’m honestly not clear on that and I want to know what I am supposed to believe. If the Church says baptism is necessary, then shouldn’t your letter focus on that? Shouldn’t the SSPX correct itself and say that they will baptize infants, without extended family participation if the Church deems it necessary, regardless of what any governor or bishop says?
It has come to my attention that Bishop Fellay (SSPX) is in the hospital with an undisclosed sickness (NOT Covid 19). No other info was given. Prayers are requested.
You may find the following words from Archbishop Lefebvre helpful. I did.
There are three ways of receiving it [baptism]: the baptism of water; the baptism of blood (that of the martyrs who confessed the faith while still catechumens) and baptism of desire.
Baptism of desire can be explicit. Many times in Africa I heard one of our catechumens say to me, “Father, baptize me straightaway because if I die before you come again, I shall go to hell.” I told him, “No, if you have no mortal sin on your conscience and if you desire baptism, then you already have the grace in you.”
The doctrine of the Church also recognizes implicit—baptism of desire. This consists in doing the will of God. God knows all men and He knows that amongst Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists and in the whole of humanity there are men of good will. They receive the grace of baptism without knowing it, but in an effective way. In this way they become part of the Church. . . .
The error consists in thinking that they are saved by their religion. They are saved in their religion but not by it. There is no Buddhist church in heaven, no Protestant church. This is perhaps hard to accept, but it is the truth. I did not found the Church, but rather Our Lord the Son of God. As priests we must state the truth.
(Letter to Confused Catholics, p. 86)
Are you telling me that when a person begged Archbishop Lefebvre for baptism he said not to worry about it, he’d get to it some other time?
This should bring up the next generation of SSPX episcopal ordinations. Will they risk another “excommunication” from modernist heretics?
Yes. The catechumen was kindly educated by the Archbishop’s explanation, eliminating the unwarranted fear which led to thinking there was any reason not to calmly finish the program he was in. We’re not talking about an infant in danger of death.
Yes they will Tom, when they decided the time is right. Both Bishop Fellay and de Mallerais have said so.
Personally, I think the right time is NOW—-but, then again, I’m just another Confused Catholic.
Why doesn’t the SSPX just accept NO ordinations as valid and let NO bishops ordain their priests like the FSSP? Why do they need their own bishops? Won’t episcopal ordinations without Rome’s approval set the SSPX back decades in their quest to be recognized by the heretics in Rome? It’ll be 1988 all over again. I do not think Bp. Fellay is willing to be excommunicated twice by the modernists.