Last week, I commented upon an article written by Fr. Jean-Michel Gleize, SSPX, an English translation of which was published online by the Remnant under the title:
A MAJOR SSPX CLARIFICATION: Towards a Doctrinal Agreement?
In the article, Fr Gleize articulated his objections to any possible agreement with Rome that would result in its canonical regularization apart from “a correction of the Council’s errors.”
Prior to publishing my post, I requested confirmation from my contacts at the SSPX District House here in the U.S. as to whether Fr. Gleize’s statements reflect the official position of the Society itself, or if they stand in contrast to it; i.e., against the position currently held by Bishop Fellay.
Thus far, I’ve received no response, which seems to all but confirm my initial impression that it is the latter and not a “major clarification” from the Society itself.
If anything changes in this regard, I will let you know.
At this, I’d like to take a closer look at certain of the propositions that Fr. Gleize set forth in support of his argument to see just how reasonable they are, or not.
Perhaps the most critical point; the one upon which his entire argument rests, is the following:
“As we have already explained, our goal is for Tradition to recover all of its rights in Rome. This goal is first in our intention…”
I’m not so sure that the primary “goal” of the Society is the conversion of Rome.
Certainly, the conversion of Rome is a goal, but at least insofar as I am aware, the SSPX has never articulated this as its raison d’ê·tre.
On its website under the heading, What is the Society of St. Pius X, we find:
“The Society of St. Pius X is an international priestly society of common life without vows, whose purpose is to train, support, and encourage holy priests so that they may effectively spread the Catholic Faith throughout the world … Together they seek the goal of the priesthood: the glorification of God, the continuation of Our Lord’s redemptive work, the salvation of souls. They accomplish this by fidelity to Christ’s testament, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
Indeed, striving for Tradition to recover all of its rights in Rome is intimately related to the Society’s mission, but the bottom line purpose of its existence is the salvation of souls.
This also happens to be the supreme law of the Church and the very reason why the SSPX can legitimately lay claim to supplied jurisdiction.
In support of his position, Fr. Gleize provided the following quote of Archbishop Lefebvre:
“What interests us first of all is to maintain the Catholic Faith. That is our combat. So the canonical question, which is purely exterior and public in the Church, is secondary. What is important is to remain in the Church… in the Church, that is to say in the Catholic Faith of all time and in the true priesthood, and in the true Mass, and in the true sacraments, in the Catechism of all time, with the Bible of all time. That is what interests us. That is what the Church is. To be recognized publicly, that is secondary. So, we mustn’t seek secondary things by losing what is fundamental, what is the primary object of our combat.”
First, let me say that I am not a proponent of proof-texting with quotes lifted from the Archbishop’s various statements (an attempt to play the WWMD card that I wrote about some time ago).
That said, I find this citation rather odd given that it in no way supports Fr. Gleize’s argument.
If, indeed, what interests the Society “first of all is to maintain the Catholic Faith,” including all of the things Archbishop Lefebvre listed, how exactly is regular jurisdiction opposed to it?
Obviously, it is not; that is, not directly so.
Fr. Gleize, however, would argue that it does so indirectly as follows:
“The bad effect [of accepting a canonical recognition] is itself double: firstly, the risk of relatavizing Tradition, which would thenceforward only appear as the particular good and the personal theological preference of the Society of Saint Pius X; secondly the risk of betraying and abandoning this particular good because of the ambient favens haeresim which characterizes the Conciliar Church per se.”
Let’s look at these two risks separately.
Question: To whom would Tradition “appear” as little more than a matter of personal preference as opposed to the Faith of all time?
Answer: The ignorant.
Let’s be honest, there are numerous ignorant persons to whom, thanks to the status quo, the SSPX appears to be rebelling against the Church, and even as “schismatic” and somehow less-than-Catholic.
Is it really the case that one form of ignorance is preferable to the other?
Sorry, I’m not buying it.
The second risk, on the other hand; namely, that of the Society somehow “betraying and abandoning” Tradition deserves consideration.
Until rather recently, I had no reason to question the Society’s resolve. Today, however, I must admit that I am deeply concerned about it.
Let me be clear: I do not believe for a moment that Bishop Fellay will ever allow the SSPX to adopt the modernist mindset of the “Conciliar Church;” e.g., positively arguing in support of the Novus Ordo, ecumenism, religious liberty, inter-religious dialogue, etc.
There is, however, more than one way to betray Tradition, and one of them concerns the failure to condemn blasphemy and heresy for what they truly are – loudly, clearly and plainly.
Ironically, it is thanks to Fr. Gleize and his series of articles presenting the official position of the SPPX on Francis and Amoris Laetitia that I am no longer convinced that the Society has the resolve to speak with clarity and conviction moving forward.
Unless they do, being regularized would be like going on a bear hunt while leaving the rifle at home.
I have always maintained that the granting of regular jurisdiction to the SSPX is a matter of justice; one that boils down to the fundamental question:
Is the Society of St. Pius X Catholic?
The truth is they are, and Rome has an obligation to acknowledge as much and to treat them accordingly.
While I still believe this, I also believe that it is reasonable to wonder whether or not the Society has the wherewithal to uphold their own obligation to the truth.
In other words, if already the SSPX is treading lightly in the face of the unprecedented danger to souls represented by Amoris Laetitia and its “humble” author, how can anyone be confident that they will do any better if regularized?
The fundamental question is not “Is the Society of St Pius X Catholic?” The fundamental question is “Is the conciliar church Catholic?” How one answers that should determine how one should then act.
Bishop Tissier de Mallerais gave a conference in Syracuse, New York last year. He said that when Archbishop Lefebvre proposed candidates for a Bishop, all were turned down by Rome. Bishop Tissier said Rome said no four times because they were looking for a liberal candidate. He said they will also try to get a liberal for the personal prelature and again they will turn down proposals.
Fr Gleize vs Louie again… the theologian who believes the Pope is the pope says the SSPX should not regularize with him, and Louie who says the Pope (probably) isn’t the Pope says the SSPX should regularize with him!
Irony aside, I think Louie, that Fr G, in expressing the ‘main goal’ of the SSPX, is not to state it’s raison d’tre per-se, but to state it’s ‘main goal’ in dealing with Conciliar Rome. In point of fact both relate because to foster the Priesthood and the Faith requires first, that we PRESERVE them both, then, secondly, that we encourage the return of the Conciliar Church to the Faith. For the first, we only need the Aid of God to preserve us, but for the second, it has been ordained by God that we need the Aid of the Pope who once converted, will ‘confirm his brethren. So ‘restoring the rights of Tradition in Rome’, which must begin with the conversion of the Pope, is important.
Yet what does the phase ‘for Tradition to recover all of its rights in Rome’ mean. Truth can not co-exist with error, so it would be a gross injustice for Tradition (A.K.A Catholicism) to be placed side by side with Conciliarism (especially in a spirit of ‘accompanyment’ which is the way Pope Francis see’s an agreement with the SSPX). This is why the SSPX has always maintained (up until recently) that Rome must convert first. The legal status of the SSPX is irrelevant if Truth is abused to acquire it.
For a complete explanation of why, please read the 3rd Chapter of +Lefebvre’s ‘Spiritual Journey’: Ecumenical, Conciliar Rome is not only in open contradiction with Eternal Rome, it is, by that very fact, in open contradiction with the very essence of the Divine Triune Life, that is Charity. To unite with Conciliar Rome before it’s return to the Faith would be to directly deny God, therefore, we can’t.
Is it worth the risk? No.
The SSPX were presented with a golden opportunity to support traditional Catholic teaching (Marriage, the Eucharist & Penance) when the four Cardinals issued their Dubia & they flunked it. Regrettably they apparently viewed the personal prelature being offered by PF at the end of ‘slow accompaniment’ to standing-up for the Deposit of Faith, Magisterium & Tradition of the One Holy Catholic & Apostolic Church. If they & their alleged supporters within the Hierarchy had done the right thing, the formal correction would have been made by now & either the Dubia answered or PF’s resignation accepted. They fell well short & that will be remembered, especially in those areas where their presence is prohibited by NO Bishops. They could have turned the tables on this wretched heretical, blasphemous & anti-Catholic Papacy ever known but took the cowardly way out, putting back the possibility of a Papal Election by quite a margin & cementing their general public perspective as being an elitist group within Catholicism. They have badly disappointed Orthodox Catholics everywhere who have been praying for this scourge to be lifted & the wholeness of the True Faith to be genuinely administered in every parish throughout the universe as it used to be prior to VII. That council will have to be revisited & denounced as a bad council by a future pope for the Apostasy it has led to. It is a crying shame that the process of doing so has been stalled by selfish, inward-looking men.
Dear Louie, does bishop Williamson’s stance now makes more sense?
I don’t think Fr. Gleize is doing anything other than trying to help Bishop Fellay to make the right decision. The Society has been expecting Pope Francis to recognize them and give them a Prelature without a doctrinal declaration. The Pope’s lack of interest in doctrine and his “pastoral” approach supported this belief. Now they have to accept and sign a doctrinal declaration before being given a prelature. I would also think that the threats of “excommunication” will again be used to encourage them to sign.
I believe they won’t sign.
Being “excommunicated” from Modernist Rome’s New Order mess should be considered a compliment not a threat.
Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin
Prefect of the Congregation
for Bishops
July 6, 1988
Ecône, July 6, 1988
Eminence,
Gathered around our Superior General, the Superiors of the Districts, Seminaries and autonomous houses of the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X think it good to respectfully express to you the following reflections.
You thought it good, by your letter of July 1st, to inform Their Excellencies Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer, and the four Bishops whom they consecrated on June 30, at Ecône, of the excommunication latæ sententiæ.We let you judge for yourself the value of such a declaration, coming from an authority who, in its exercise, breaks with all its predecessors down to Pope Pius XII, in worship, teaching and government of the Church.
As for us, we are in full communion with all the Popes and Bishops before the Second Vatican Council, celebrating precisely the Mass which they codified and celebrated, teaching the Catechism which they drew up, standing up against the errors which they have many times condemned in their encyclicals and pastoral letters. We let you judge on which side the rupture is to be found. We are extremely saddened by the blindness of spirit and the hardening of heart of the Roman authorities.
On the other hand, we have never wished to belong to this system which calls itself the Conciliar Church, and defines itself with the Novus Ordo Missæ, an ecumenism which leads to indifferentism and the laicization of all society. Yes, we have no part, nullam partem habemus, with the pantheon of the religions of Assisi; our own excommunication by a decree of Your Eminence or of another Roman Congregation would only be the irrefutable proof of this. We ask for nothing better than to be declared out of communion with this adulterous spirit which has been blowing in the Church for the last 25 years; we ask for nothing better than to be declared outside of this impious communion of the ungodly. We believe in the One God, Our Lord Jesus Christ, with the Father and the Holy Ghost, and we will always remain faithful to His unique Spouse, the One Holy Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church.
To be publicly associated with this sanction which is inflicted upon the six Catholic Bishops, Defenders of the Faith in its integrity and wholeness, would be for us a mark of honor and a sign of orthodoxy before the faithful. They have indeed a strict right to know that the priests who serve them are not in communion with a counterfeit church, promoting evolution, pentecostalism and syncretism. In union with these faithful, we make ours the words of the Prophet: “Præparate corda vestra Domino et servite Illi soli: et liberabit vos de manibus inimicorum vestrorum. Convertimini ad Eum in toto corde vestro, et auferte deos alienos de medio vestri–Open your hearts to the Lord and serve Him only: and He will free you from the hands of your enemies. With all your heart return to Him, and take away from your midst any strange gods” (I Kings 7:3).#
Confident in the protection of Her who has crushed all the heresies in the world, we assure Your Eminence of our dedication to Him Who is the only Way of salvation.
Fr. Franz Schmidberger, Superior General
Fr. Paul Aulagnier, District Superior, France
Fr. Franz-Josef Maessen, District Superior, Germany
Fr. Edward Black, District Superior, Great Britain
Fr. Anthony Esposito, District Superior of Italy
Fr. François Laisney, District Superior, United States
Fr. Jacques Emily, District Superior of Canada
Fr. Jean Michel Faure, District Superior of Mexico
Fr. Gerard Hogan, District Superior of Australasia
Fr. Alain Lorans, Superior, Seminary of Ecône
Fr. Jean Paul André, Superior, Seminary of France
Fr. Paul Natterer, Superior, Seminary of Germany
Fr. Andrès Morello, Superior, Seminary of Argentina
Fr. William Welsh, Superior, Seminary of Australia
Fr. Michel Simoulin, Rector, St. Pius X University
Fr. Patrice Laroche, Vice-Rector, Seminary of Ecône
Fr. Philippe François, Superior, Belgium
Fr. Roland de Mérode, Superior, Netherlands
Fr. Georg Pflüger, Superior, Austria
Fr. Guillaume Devillers, Superior, Spain
Fr. Philippe Pazat, Superior, Portugal
Fr. Daniel Couture, Superior, Ireland
Fr. Patrick Groche, Superior, Gabon
Fr. Frank Peek, Superior, Southern Africa
Agreed! *Even if* there were no other problems with the “agreement,” having this “pope’s” fingerprints on the deal would alone sink the whole deal under murky waters. Nothing he touches can be trusted, so it’s not a place to begin. A regularization should provide clarity, not confusion.
“Is The conciliar Church catholic?” Well, to me most of the diocese priest I know of believe the Eucharist is the actual Body and Blood, believe all the dogmas about the Blessed Mother, talk about and have great reverence for the angels and saints. The Church’s have statues of the Blessed Mother and the saints all over the place, the Stations of the Cross, etc. Today we recognized the feastday of St. Peter and Paul, Apostles. We said the Confiteor, the Gloria, The Creed which I believe are all still totally Catholic prayers. There’s more I could add but these few things I just mentioned are some of the most important and fundamental dogmas, doctrines and teachings of the Catholic Church. So despite the disastrous errors of VII , ecumenism, religious liberty, etc. mostly by the visible hierarchy (popes, bishops) , when you ask if the conciliar Church is still Catholic I have to answer yes based on the things I just mentioned above that only the Catholic Church still believes and practices even to this day. Dominus Vobiscum
Marylover thank you for the 1988 profession of faith and worship. A timely reminder that there is no turing back by SSPX from that declaration.
What is there to Sign?
Pride has blinded the mighty who must stumble & fall as they lead the blind followers. Jorge the fallguy by design.
Wow. I wonder if JPII saw this letter.
Johnjobilee–“most” believe? I find those words very disturbing. Shouldn’t “most” be “all”? The Catholic Church is not a franchise. Must Catholics go in search of a priest who is one of the “most” who believes. Should a Catholic priest who believes in the Real Presence, still allow Communion-in-the hand, Eucharistic Ministers, standing to receive Our Lord and all the other abuses? Do they kneel at the Consecration instead of a dutiful bow? How deep is their faith? If your answer is based on “most”, maybe it’s time to rethink this position? Is the conciliar Church ALWAYS CATHOLIC? Or is it SOMETIMES “Catholic” depending upon the beliefs of the priest?
John, what about contraception and same sex “marriages” and even abortion? Is taking communion in the hand a Catholic thing or a protestant thing? Does your local NO parish priest believe that the Catholic Church is the True Church established by Christ and all others are false churches established by Satan himself? Does your average NO pewsitter believe in “religious liberty” as commonly expressed in todays corrupted culture or do they believe that the State has the duty and obligation to defend the True Church from false religions? I would say the conciliar church no longer believes these Catholic teachings and is no longer Catholic but has fallen into protestantism. The litmus test for Catholicism is not simply the Eucharist and sacraments. Its all of revelation. Todays NO pewsitter firmly rejects what our granparents and great grandparents accepted as Truth. Both cannot be right. Either they had it wrong and we evolved into the truth, or our generation has generally apostasized.
Even if Francis were to unilaterally recognize the SSPX, I would urge the SSPX to reject it and say, “thanks, but no thanks.” No good can come of exposing oneself to such spiritual contagion as propogated by the conciliar church.
Dearest Louie,
As maryiloveher has again edified vis a vis this open letter from Econe, the Society has always remained within the Church of Jesus the Christ and has always referred to the “conciliar church” as a false church, teaching a false religion with false sacraments, and celebrating a false mass. Our Blessed Lord and our God commanded His Apostles, “Let your yea be yea and your no be no, anything else is from the devil.” Further, He commanded, you are either with Me or you are against Me. There can be no partial Ecclesium. There is the Church of Jesus the Christ, Son of the Living God, which is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, and then there is the church of the Antichrist; as to whom else would a church all dressed up Catholic in its physical edifice, yet be utterly void of anything Sacramental of Christ Jesus from its deepest interiority, pay homage to but Lucifer himself, as the “religion of man”?
To suggest that the “conciliar church” is the Catholic Church, is from its very essence, nothing other than a metaphysical absurdity, as it suggests that being can both be and not be, at the same time and under the same respect. The “same respect” here relates to the authentic Church of Jesus the Christ. What occurs ontologically, when it is suggested that the “conciliar church” is somehow yet the Catholic Church, is first to suggest that the pre-conciliar Church is not the Church of Jesus the Christ, as they exist in contradistinction and this is understood as res ipsa loquitur. What this absurd suggestion (that the “conciliar church” is the Catholic Church) accomplishes in reality, is that it places an affront to the law of non-contradiction, and by doing this it suggests that within the metaphysical “potency” of the “conciliar church”–as a creation of man– is contained some iota of metaphysical “act”, such that from its immanence, this “conciliar church” creature beast thing from hell, holds its own creative “potency” comingled with some iota of “act”, which allows it “to be” both the Church of Jesus the Christ and the church of the Antichrist. This metaphysical contradiction/absurdity lies at the very heart of the “conciliar church”, which believes from its very essence, in the “evolution” of Truth in dogma. If dogma evolves, then Truth cannot be as Truth Himself, the divine Person Who Is the Son of God, made true man; two intellects, two wills–one divine and one human– yet One Essence as Being Himself. This can only remain as the very wellspring for the utter existence of the “conciliar church”, which these minions of Lucifer who have called themselves “Pope” since 1958 firmly believed and believe. Otherwise said, the Church simply cannot be as Church in the pre-conciliar reality, which the Church Herself still is and can only remain until the end of time, and yet at once be the “conciliar church”, whose teaching is not of Christ Jesus but of the Antichrist, as Christ commanded, you are either with Me or you are against Me; there being then no “synthesis”, no syncretic reality, which can only exist in being as deception, which is distorted truth, whose wellspring is the Father of Lies, Satan.
These metaphysical proofs attest to and affirm the reality that, the church since 1958 when the first Freemason as Roncalli declared the Papacy as his own, this “conciliar church” which Roncalli initiated, simply cannot be with metaphysical certitude, the Church of Jesus the Christ, as this thing itself speaks. As this “conciliar church” is the creation of man, under the preternatural guidance of Lucifer, which binds man to himself and not to God, it can only be then as it exists, the “religion of man”. This “religion of man” preaches a gospel contrary to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This gospel of man nurtures man in his flesh with all that pleases him, not in his soul which remains, as it only can this side the veil, in opposition to his flesh. This gospel of man, whose exegesis and consequent catechesis, is straight from the bowels of hell, and as such can only then lead souls to hell, not assisting them Sacramentally in their ultimate metaphysical end, the Beatific Vision.
In closing, a “conciliar church” which holds as its religion–“the religion of man”–preaches as its gospel—the gospel of man—holds as its faith—the faith in man—expresses its exegesis from its catechesis as the authority of man in his evolution to finally become God as God, can only have as its pope—a pope established by man—a metaphysical fallacy in its absurdity, leading souls in their last end to hell and not to Heaven. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Your opinion In Caritas, if you would:
The SSPX’s only issue, and why they must be declared schismatic, is not because they broke with the new conciliar church (thats what they were supposed to do), but rather because they still deemed the conciliar church the Catholic Church…and THEN refused to obey it.
This above is my opinion, and I think the common sense opinion…as we all must always defer to the magisterium of the Catholic Church. This is why I had to abandon the SSPX; it quickly became a contradiction of reason to me.
Who in the SSPX would sign this letter today?
Out of the original signers I would think Fr. LaRoque, Fr. Francois, Fr. Faure, and maybe some others would still sign it.
Good Friday night rich,
Do not trust in men. Do not trust in princes. I have recently found my Catholic home, receiving the authentic, holy Sacraments as ministered by the validly ordained priests of the SSPX, provided as commanded by our Blessed Dominus Deus Sabbaoth and Savior, Jesus the Christ. There is a great mystery in all of this. I’m certain that maryiloveher can speak volumes more than I, as it regards the history and specific positions which the SSPX holds, relative to the “conciliar church”. Maryiloveher posted here at akaCatholic just recently, a part of the sermon that Bishop Tissier de Mallerais gave to the ordinates at Econe in June, 2002. In it, he fully condemned the conciliar church as not being Catholic, rather being a Gnostic Sect. I will offer one closing comment of his sermon now, quoting the bishop (emphasis his):
REJECT WITH HORROR, my dear faithful, my dear ordinands, THIS NATURAL RELIGION, THIS INTELLECTUALIST RELIGION, WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CATHOLIC RELIGION, and be on the contrary very firm, always more firmly persuaded of the reason of our combat, of the reason of our priesthood.
Find the link to the sermon here: http://www.fsspx.com/Communicantes/Oct2002/Ordination_Sermon.htm.
I do not understand how any men using this kind of language, calling the “conciliar church” out for what it is, as being antithetical to the Catholic Church of Jesus the Christ and His Gospel as a “Gnostic Sect”, can then approach that creature beast thing from hell as though it holds the authority of Christ’s Church. This in itself is a metaphysical absurdity, placing an affront to the law of non-contradiction, as that which is not Christ’s Church cannot somehow also be Christ’s Church as it holds the governing authority of Christ’s Church. This “conciliar church” is understood ontologically as holding the metaphysical “form” of the Catholic Church in Her physical attributes, while at once remaining devoid of Her metaphysical matter, which in truth must fit the form perfectly to hold metaphysical “being” in reality. What this “conciliar church” object does in reality is to distort the reality of Christ’s Church and as thus, the “conciliar church” only exists as a deception without actual being. It is a syncretic synthesis of truth in its appearance as its “form” with the lie in its substance as its “matter”. This is the “diabolical disorientation” of the mind made manifest, which allows for accepting this creature beast thing from hell, the “conciliar church”, as the Church of Jesus the Christ in Her authority. Saint Paul spoke of it as the “deceiving influence” which is received in lieu of grace, for those who reject Truth, lacking love for Truth, for sake of the lie which they believe to be true.
It would seem rich, that the time is now nigh when most Catholics who seek the true Sacraments of Christ’s Church (a paltry few in number the world over) will be manifestly without all of the Sacraments of Christ’s Church, as we keep watch over the remnant Church. This is patently understand, albeit mysteriously, in the deeply contemplative prayerful discernment of Saint Paul’s Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, chapter 2, with particular attention to verses 3-11. May Almighty God allow for our reception of His grace of fortitude and perseverance in these darkest of times. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Thank you for your response.
Yes it does, 100%.
Thank you, maryiloveher. So few in number! Do you think +Fellay would sign it?
I’m inclined to agree. Though of course Fr. Faure is now Bishop Faure (consecrated bishop by Bishop Williamson). Archbishop Lefebvre originally wanted to consecrate then Fr. Faure a bishop, but Fr. Faure declined.
Next year, there will be an election for Superior General of the SSPX. My hope is that Bishop Fellay will not be re-elected. Certainly he won’t be approved by many in the French district of the SSPX.
Exodus 23:1-2
Thou shalt not receive the voice of a lie: neither shalt thou join thy hand to bear false witness for a wicked person.
Thou shalt not follow the multitude to do evil: neither shalt thou yield in judgment, to the opinion of the most part, to stray from the truth
Good Saturday morning rich,
I was reading an essay by the wonderful, late, and great Solange Hertz over at The Remnant this morning. May Almighty God rest her beautiful soul and please pray for us Solange, those of us who yet remain in exile here, that we may each live Almighty God’s Will perfectly in accordance with Him, as we are in Him, as the Eternal Triune Godhead. Amen.
What occurred to me in the midst of this, reflecting once again upon the inerrant words of Saint Paul in the first chapter of his Epistle to the Romans, as Solange wrote about it, is the profound and beautiful teaching of two great Mystics of Holy Mother Church: Saints Theresa of Avilla and Catherine of Siena. This in the context of your query of me. The profound and specific teaching that overcame me, is their teaching of “perfect creaturely detachment”. This detachment must find its wellspring in praxis from within our very innermost interiority, as to perfectly detach is to perfectly love. As to love perfectly is to give perfectly, even to the point of the shedding of one’s own blood, within the confines of the perfectly imperfect capacity that we each aspire to, this side the veil.
That understood, it seems that this absence of perfect creaturely detachment, on the part of the leadership of the SSPX at least today, may account for what can only be known as the intellective embrace of a metaphysical absurdity, as it relates to the rhetorical distancing of the SSPX from what it calls the false, “conciliar church”, and even refers to it as a “Gnostic Sect”, while at once seeking this creature beast thing from hell for its approval, as if this false church of the Antichrist has any power over the Church of Jesus the Christ, which the SSPX is founded in, by virtue of Truth through faith, in grace. This detachment of the human person from all that is created, both animate and inanimate, is implacably necessary, such that we can glorify Almighty God in His external glory as perfectly imperfectly as we are capable of, by virtue of the reception of grace alone. Whenever we hold to that which pleases us or gives us solace in this world, even those things which are perceived to be Ecclesial, to the point of embracing that which is absurd, we know that we are in error. We were warned by Saint Paul in his Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, for all those with eyes that see and ears that hear, that the day would come when the Successor of Peter would be, “taken out of the way”, and the man of perdition would present himself, as the restraint on the spirit of Iniquity in this world would be lifted. We were not told that there would be this deception as the Successor of Peter, who would present himself to the Church, with this deception made manifest as the Vicar of Christ Jesus in this world. That understood, we were forewarned by the Mother of God, as Our Lady of LaSalette, that the day would come when, “Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist”, “The Church will have a frightful crisis”, and “The Church will be in eclipse, the world will be in dismay.”. The Mystery of Love as Deus Caritas Est, the Infinite One in Three divine Persons, remains as He only can, fully and utterly in control of His cosmos. He has allowed all of this from all eternity in His Mind first and then as He placed it into being in time and space. Praise be to Almighty God. Thanks be to God. Amen. Alleluia. In caritas.
Bishop Tissier de Mallerais would sign. I believe Bishop de Galarreta would, too.
If Rome “excommunicates” the Society then I think Bishop Fellay would sign a very strong statement. His idea right now seems to be that God is using the Society for the restoration, or maybe that the recognition of the Society is the catalyst for the restoration.
Archbishop Lefebvre wanted to give the Sacraments to the faithful, help them to be saintly and as souls in the State of Grace, encourage them to restore all things in Christ everywhere. They were to be witnesses for Our Lord and risk and suffer persecution defending His Honor publicly.
Archbishop Lefebvre:
“Today we must pray to Our Lord Jesus Christ, we must pray to the Blessed Virgin Mary to remain true Catholics and to do everything possible to become saints.”
“…may our presence here in Rome be an occasion for us to strengthen our faith, to have, if necessary, the souls of martyrs, the souls of witnesses (for a martyr is a witness), the souls of witnesses of Our Lord Jesus Christ, witnesses of the Church.”
“And shall we be afraid to affirm our faith? We would not in that case be the true descendants of the martyrs, the true descendants of those Christians who shed their blood for Our Lord Jesus Christ in affirmation of their faith in Him.”
“We have no other honor than the honor of Jesus Christ. We have no other fear in the world than to offend Jesus Christ!” They went to their death to defend their God singing this! We also, let us sing with courage, wholeheartedly: “We have no other love than Our Lord Jesus Christ, no other fear than to offend Him!”
“May St. Michael the Archangel inspire us with his zeal for the glory of God and with his strength to fight demons.
May St. Pius X share with us a part of his wisdom, of his learning, of his sanctity, to discern the true from the false and the good from the evil in these times of confusion and lies.”
(death of Bishop de Castro Mayer)
“How lonely I shall be without my elder brother in the episcopate, without the model fighter for the honor of Jesus Christ, without my one faithful friend in the appalling wasteland of the Conciliar Church!”
It seems another approach is to compile a Traditional Declaration containing the Principal departures from the Faith and submit that to Roman negotiators to Sign. Cut to the chase. Since the abuses of V11 are on going have the Roman negotiators sign up for the return to Tradition.
One way or another it might cut down on airfares and accommodation for SSPX who trudge the Roman pavements.
Chances are that will bring matters to head.
With Mueller gone I wonder if talks between the SSPX and Rome will go better.
But then again, considering his Jesuit replacement is the all-men-are-saved hell-could-be-empty kind of guy…
Sure maybe the SSPX will get what they want… but is this the guy they want to agree with? What if the conditions are precisely justified by the ‘no-one-in-hell’ logic so why not let the SSPX do whatever?
Wouldn’t it just feel dirty?
My2cents and Tom: just went to a First Saturday T.L.M this morning in a beautiful traditional looking Church said by a devoted, dedicated young priest who not only heard confessions 1/2 hour before Mass but also offered to stay afterwards for those who missed. So zilch, nada, none of the heresies or abuses that you guys mentioned above took place. The same exact Mass that so many of the great pre-VII saints attended that helped make them into saints is still available today. The Gates of Hell have not prevailed. Amen.
Johnjobilee–Thanks be to God you found one of the “most” you mentioned. Not every Catholic is as blessed as you. That’s the problem. What you described is the birthright of EVERY Catholic. Happy for you–sad for the rest.
My2cents: We are very fortunate here in Phila. diocese/area where we have probably, I guess, around ten priests very dedicated to the T.L.M. Its NOT available all the time but like the old wise saying goes “sometimes we have to try to make lemonade out of lemons.”
We live in a time of diabolic disorientation. Let us give our suffering to God to use it for His Holy Will. God bless and preserve us in the One True Holy Faith.
Dear MaryILoveHer, I think all of us are constantly experiencing that loneliness, expressed by Archbishop Lefebvre on the death of Bishop Castro de Meyer, in the apostate world we live in. Ever time I read a quotation of the holy bishop in your comments, I get excited thinking it’s from a current bishop only to get to the end and sigh and say, “of course, it’s from the deceased true defender of the Faith, Archbishop Lefebvre”. God bless you.
When you claim Christ’s enemies-the Modernists-have the authority to determine the status of your legitimacy, therein lies the problem.
Will the SSPX eventually be recognized by Christ’s enemies as legitimate?
With the election of Francis as head of the group of Christ’s enemies who have control in Rome, with his commitment above all else to ensure the Modernist enemies of Christ remain in positions of power and authority for the next generations, and the fact that the Modernist’s have not only succeeded I imagine, beyond even their expectations in establishing their false religion into the minds and hearts of the majority of Catholics, and clearly have everything to lose if they admitted they erred, is it reasonable to expect them to allow a remnant of the true Catholic faith a voice and give that voice “permission” to continue opposing them?
It will be the death knell of the SSPX if they sign any agreement with modernist Rome
You ask a very good question above, Katherine. Indeed, why would the Modernists in Rome allow the SSPX a voice and give them permission to continue opposing them (the Modernists)?
Well, we don’t know that the SSPX, with its current leadership, will actually oppose the Modernists in Rome, if they are regularized. The leadership of the SSPX has been quite hesitant in the last few years in directly opposing the errors of current Modernist hierarchy in Rome.
However, the SSPX of old would have taken a strong stand in defense of the Truths of the Faith, while at the same time not denying that the Pope is the Pope. The SSPX of old would know that it would be folly to regularize with the enemies of Christ, because, as Archbishop Lefebvre stated, the SSPX works to Christianize the world, while the Modernists in Rome work to deChristianize it. The SSPX represents what the Modernists oppose. Or at least it used to.