There is a new book just published called “The Impossible Reconciliation: Documents on Operation Suicide of Bishop Fellay (2000-2013)” written by Fr. Olivier Rioult, SSPX, and translated into English by Sr. Mary Reginald, Third Order Secular of St. Dominic.  You may purchase it at this link:

 

http://www.amazon.com/The-Impossible-Reconciliation-Documents-Operation/dp/1492348309/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380715323&sr=8-1&keywords=The+Impossible+Reconciliation

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

The September/October 2013 issue of the Recusant is now available here for download.

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

You can directly listen to the audio by left clicking on the “Play” button.  If you prefer to download the audio file to your computer, right click the “Play” button and then left click the “Save audio as” option.

 | Posted by | Categories: Sermons |

In a sermon given by Fr. David Hewko on Sunday September 1, 2013 he tells us that we ought not to go anymore to SSPX Masses because the neo-SSPX has compromised.  Here is the relevant extract from that sermon (left click to the left of the 00:00 marker to play) along with a downloadable mp3.

 

 

Fr. David Hewko Sermon Extract – Sept. 1, 2013

 

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |

In a conference given by Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer on Saturday August 31, 2013 in Levis, Quebec, he explains again and in a bit more detail how the first condition, officially determined by the 2012 SSPX General Chapter as essential prior to a canonical regularization, offends the Faith and is therefore morally unacceptable.  The relevant extract (14 min 0 s to 17 min 50 s) of that conference is below.

 

Two previous postings on this matter are here and here.

 

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |

Here is a sermon given by Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer on August 25, 2013 in Danbury, Connecticut.  Father speaks about the evil of remaining silent in the face of evil.  This is a good sermon for SSPX priests to listen to since most of them have remained silent in the face of the evil against Catholic Tradition propagated by Bishop Fellay and the SSPX superiors.

 

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |

In a conference given by Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer on August 14, 2013 in Veneta, Oregon, he elaborates on the topic of continued attendance at Masses offered by priests of the SSPX.  The SSPX is dead because its principles have moved away from Catholic Tradition.  This places the SSPX in the same theological boat as the FSSP (Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter) in that one error in principle makes a group pseudo-Traditional.  Therefore, objectively speaking, we should no longer be attending SSPX Masses.  The faithful do come to this understanding at different times, but it is true in reality nonetheless.  Here is the relevant extract of that conference (left click to the left of the 00:00 marker to play):

 

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |

My my how times have changed.  Below is a sermon given by Fr. Patrick Girouard on August 4, 2013 in Aldergrove, B.C.  In it he reads a district letter written by Fr. Jean Violette in December 2003 when Fr. Violette was SSPX District Superior of Canada.  Fr. Violette used the same arguments then against Fr. Aulagnier, who was expelled from the SSPX by Bishop Fellay for wanting a canonical agreement with Rome, that the Resistance now uses against Bishop Fellay and the SSPX leaders.  But where is Fr. Violette’s voice to be heard today?  Nowhere!  Rather, he has chosen to follow his superior, regardless.

 

This is another piece of evidence of the betrayal of the memory and mission of Archbishop Lefebvre on the part of Bishop Fellay and company.

 

For those who haven’t already, join the Resistance!  It is in the Resistance where the spirit of the Archbishop lives.

 

Here is the link to Fr. Girouard’s website:

 

http://www.sacrificium.org/article/come-right

 

Here is a link to the letter:

 

http://sspx.ca/en/publications/newsletters/december-2003-district-superiors-letter-1210

 

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |

In a conference given by Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer on August 14, 2013 in Veneta, Oregon, he essentially confirms what I wrote in a previous post that the first condition determined as necessary to be granted by Rome prior to the SSPX accepting a canonical regularization contains non-Catholic variants of ecumenism and religious liberty.  Here is the relevant extract of that conference (left click to the left of the 00:00 marker to play):

 

 

Knowing that this official SSPX policy is unacceptable, one ought not to assist at SSPX Masses any longer.

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |

Bishop Bernard Fellay’s Doctrinal Declaration of April 15, 2012 is the worst act of His Excellency as Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X. With this Declaration, he was willing to sell the farm to Modernist Rome; however, for some reason or another, Rome refused. Against those of the Resistance who claim that the mindset of this Declaration has infected the SSPX from the top down (and it certainly has) and therefore one cannot remain silent, many priests and faithful who remain within the SSPX and refuse to speak out against the Declaration counterclaim that the Declaration has not become SSPX policy; therefore, there is no need to speak out. Since principle seems to be so important to these priests and faithful (and it should very well be), let us then look at what has indeed become official SSPX policy.

 

The SSPX General Chapter Statement of July 14, 2012 states that the SSPX superiors have “determined and approved the necessary conditions for an eventual canonical normalization”. The Statement itself does not outline these necessary conditions; rather, Fr. Christian Thouvenot, Secretary General of the SSPX, sent an internal letter to all SSPX priests in which the necessary conditions (and unnecessary conditions???) were outlined. The first condition is as follows:

 

“Freedom to keep, to transmit and to teach the sane doctrine of the unchanging magisterium of the Church and of the unchangeable truth of Divine Tradition ; freedom to defend, to correct and to reprove, even in public, those responsible for the errors or novelties of modernism, of liberalism, of The Second Vatican Council and their consequences.”

 

This necessary condition is the only one directly related to doctrine; hence, it is the most important. With this first condition, the SSPX is basically willing to set its doctrinal differences with Rome aside, so long as Rome gives the SSPX the right to teach the Faith and condemn the errors of Vatican II against the same Faith. The first fundamental problem with this position (while overlooking the fact that to ask for the right to do what is commanded by God is itself nonsensical) is that doctrine here is not given primacy; hence, what we have is a non-Catholic variant of ecumenism. The second fundamental problem is that since the SSPX does not demand from Rome the same as part of the agreement (that is, to teach the Faith and condemn the errors of Vatican II against the same Faith), contained within this position is an implicit but intrinsic proposition that Rome has the right to teach those errors it currently holds; hence, what we have is a non-Catholic variant of religious liberty. These two problems reduce the Faith to the level of opinion as is evident within the conciliar church and in its relations with the world. Unity for the sake of unity, whether intended or not, becomes the primary focus; however, a unity not based on the Faith is not of God.

 

Given the serious flaws with the first necessary condition, the SSPX leaders and the priests who explicitly consent to it are co-operating in objective grave sin against the Faith, at least on the level of principle. For those SSPX priests who remain silent, we can conclude without rash judgement that they let the SSPX leaders speak for them; therefore, they too co-operate in objective grave sin.

 

Let us pray and hope that good-willed priests come to realize the grave position of their society’s official policy and take the necessary course of action, that is, to speak out against it no matter the consequences.

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |