http://thecatacombs.org/thread/2378/catalog-compromise-change-contradiction-sspx

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |

In a recent thread titled “Addition to CCCC” on the forum called “CathInfo”, the original poster points out, amongst other things, that there are two conclusions that the neo-SSPX has dropped in its current FAQ regarding the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP).  The two conclusions are the following:

 

1. They are therefore Conciliar Catholics and not traditional Catholics.
2. That is why a Catholic ought not to attend their Masses.

 

Now this should be no surprise coming from the neo-SSPX.  However, it should have come as a surprise to the owner of a forum that alleges it to be the “de-facto discussion headquarters for the SSPX Resistance” that His Excellency Bishop Williamson, of whom the same forum owner dubs as the “true successor of Archbishop Marcel Lefebfvre”, negates conclusion #2 in Issue 505 of his Eleison Comments where he writes:

 

“…..in my opinion, be content to attend the least contaminated Tridentine Mass that there is anywhere near you,…..”

 

This statement of His Excellency can also be used to argue that he implicitly negates conclusion #1.  After all, if one may attend the Masses of the FSSP, how can it be claimed that its priests are Conciliar Catholics and not Traditional (true) Catholics?

 

Nevertheless, there was a not a peep at that time coming from the owner of CathInfo in opposition to Bishop Williamson’s words.  Then again, this really should come as no surprise either.  After all, the same forum owner, even before Issue 505 came out, promoted (and continues to do so) a booklet published by Mr. Sean Johnson which tries, but fails miserably, to defend Bishop Williamson’s comments that it is morally acceptable to actively attend the New Mass under certain circumstances.

 

My friends, CathInfo is a false resistance forum.  If you want a true Resistance forum, I encourage to visit The Catacombs.

 


Screenshots of CathInfo pages mentioned in this post:

 

 

 

 

 

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: , |

Questions
1. Do 95% of the USA Dioceses recognize that SSPX marriages are regularized?
2. Are all SSPX marriage documents saying they are married, automatically sent to the Diocese within which the marriage takes place, though in an SSPX church or chapel?

 

Answers
While I can’t give a precise percentage of how many dioceses acknowledge SSPX, marriages, the SSPX continues preparing their faithful for marriage as they’ve always done. Ever since the document from the CDF in 2017, the SSPX has contacted the dioceses where marriages are celebrated, seeking delegation for SSPX priests. This takes away any possible doubt about the validity of the marriage and avoids future scenarios where one party (sadly) might decide they have made a mistake…Fortunately, most bishops have been very generous in granting delegation to our priests. As with any Catholic priest, we send a notification to the local diocese after a marriage is witnessed.

 

James Vogel
Editor-in-Chief
Angelus Press
907 E. Jesuit Lane
St. Marys, KS 66536
785.321.3615

 

Published with permission.

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |

Originally, the following picture was posted on the SSPX U.S.A. website:

 

 

Due to the controversy of the women wearing pants, the picture was changed to the following:

 

 

Hilarious!

 

No.  Nothing has changed in the SSPX under Bishop Fellay.  Of course not.  Neo-SSPXers, keep repeating this to yourselves.

 

Source

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |

Reference: http://www.ecclesiamilitans.com/2018/03/20/sspx-canada-implicitly-admits-state-of-necessity-no-longer-exists/

 

The Novus Ordo priest conducts the marriage ceremony while Fr. Richard Vachon, SSPX, looks on.

 

 

P.S., I am in no way trying to denigrate the couple. I wish them a happy marriage with many children.

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |

St. Raphael’s Priory of the SSPX in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada has published its March 2018 Bulletin in which there is a picture of a married couple standing beside a Novus Ordo priest and Fr. Richard Vachon, SSPX.  It seems that the couple were married by the Novus Ordo priest in his parish and Fr. Vachon celebrated the Traditional Mass afterwards.  By this act, the SSPX Canadian District has implicitly admitted that the state of necessity no longer exists.  Therefore, it can no longer resort to using the argument of supplied jurisdiction for the validity of its marriages.

 

Wake up SSPX faithful in Canada!  Your district has been Novus Ordoized!

 

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |

Today is the sixth anniversary of that infamous sermon given by His Excellency Bishop Bernard Fellay at St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary in Winona, Minnesota.  The following is the quote that really caught my ear back then:

 

“We told them very clearly, if you accept us as is, without change, without obliging us to accept these things, then we are ready.”

 

By these words Bishop Fellay publicly opposed the old SSPX adage of “no canonical agreement prior to a doctrinal resolution”.  In other words, he publicly adopted a position in opposition to that of the SSPX founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who from the 1988 Consecrations onward clearly and firmly held the position that Rome must accept the pre-conciliar Magisterial teachings prior to the resumption of discussions regarding a canonical regularization.  It is true that there were almost two years of doctrinal discussions between Rome and the SSPX prior to this sermon, but the conclusion reached was that each party could not convince the other of its position.

 

My friends, does this make any sense?  The SSPX starts the doctrinal discussions with Rome in 2009 with the position that the doctrinal differences between the two parties must be resolved prior to any canonical regularization.  Then almost two years of discussions are held after which both parties cannot come to an agreement on the doctrinal discrepancies.  Nonetheless, soon after Bishop Fellay is willing to accept a canonical regularization so long as Rome accepts the SSPX “as is”.  Huh?

 | Posted by | Categories: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre | Tagged: |

Today is the fifth anniversary of that infamous sermon given by His Excellency Bishop Bernard Fellay at St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary in Winona, Minnesota.  The following is the quote that really caught my ear back then:

 

“We told them very clearly, if you accept us as is, without change, without obliging us to accept these things, then we are ready.”

 

By these words Bishop Fellay publicly opposed the old SSPX adage of “no canonical agreement prior to a doctrinal resolution”.  In other words, he publicly adopted a position in opposition to that of the SSPX founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who from the 1988 Consecrations onward clearly and firmly held the position that Rome must accept the pre-conciliar Magisterial teachings prior to the resumption of discussions regarding a canonical regularization.  It is true that there were almost two years of doctrinal discussions between Rome and the SSPX prior to this sermon, but the conclusion reached was that each party could not convince the other of its position.

 

My friends, does this make any sense?  The SSPX starts the doctrinal discussions with Rome in 2009 with the position that the doctrinal differences between the two parties must be resolved prior to any canonical regularization.  Then almost two years of discussions are held after which both parties cannot come to an agreement on the doctrinal discrepancies.  Nonetheless, soon after Bishop Fellay is willing to accept a canonical regularization so long as Rome accepts the SSPX “as is”.  Huh?

 

You may also listen to the Feb. 2, 2012 sermon here.  Start at the 39:50 mark if you want to hear Bishop Fellay’s statement quoted above.

 | Posted by | Categories: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre | Tagged: |

With the canonical regularization of the neo-SSPX looming, below are links to two articles I wrote a while ago related to this subject:

 

The Society of St. Pius X and the Diocesan Bishops

 

“No Canonical Agreement Prior to a Doctrinal Resolution” Is a Catholic Principle

 | Posted by | Categories: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre | Tagged: |

SSPX and Visiting Priests

12 August 2016

Recently I received the following e-mail:

 

“St. Mary’s, KS recently has had separate visits by two priests, Fr. Tilosanec and Fr. McLucas.

 

“Fr. McLucas offered mass there a few weeks ago.

 

“Fr. Tilosaec offered masses, (one on a Sunday), heard confessions, and left ciboria of consecrated hosts in the tabernacle.

 

“Both priests were ordained in the dubious New Rite. Both have not been conditionally reordained, as was the requirement of Archbishop Lefebvre and the ‘Old SSPX’.

 

“Needless to say this has caused quite a stir in St. Mary’s.

 

“District headquarters was contacted by several people to no avail. The response was that conditional reordination is no longer necessary. Parishoners were told to ‘trust the SSPX’.

 

“Attached are two handwritten letters (see here and here) by the Archbishop about apostate Rome and conditional reordination.

 

“Be aware of ‘visiting priests’ at the SSPX.”

 

My postface:

 

The neo-SSPX is sinking more and more into the Novus Ordo world.  It was toast years ago, but its colour becomes more like charcoal with each passing day.  And yet there are those who claim to be part of the Resistance who still try to justify their attendance at neo-SSPX Masses!  Even worse there are supposed Resistance bishops and priests who tell these attendees that it is okay to attend the Masses of certain neo-SSPX priests despite the fact that these same neo-SSPX priests have failed to publicly speak out against their leadership’s betrayal (now for over four years) of Catholic Tradition and the mission and memory of their saintly founder, Archbishop Lefebvre!  Incredible!  What exactly are these so called yellow lighters resisting?  The common justification given is that these neo-SSPX priests are doctrinally orthodox in that they don’t teach heresy or errors, but only the truth.  My counterargument is that, even if it true that they teach only the truth, is it really sufficient to teach the truth, but avoid condemning errors being taught by your own superiors?  No!  The flock need to be warned.  These superiors have been given plenty of opportunity to publicly retract their errors, but they have not done so.  Bishop Fellay, for example, still thinks that there is nothing wrong with his abominable April 15, 2012 Doctrinal Declaration.

 

My friends, we must follow the mind of the Church in teaching the truth AND condemning errors contrary to that truth.  These “doctrinally orthodox” neo-SSPX priests need to publicly condemn the errors of their superiors.  Otherwise, they are really no better than the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter priests who do the same in teaching the truth, but remain publicly silent against the errors of their own superiors and consequently place their flock in spiritual danger.  And the yellow lighters need to become red lighters.  They can’t scream and shout against the errors of the neo-SSPX superiors, but then unite in the greatest act of public worship with priests who remain publicly silent against the same errors of these same superiors.  Rather, they should get in the trenches, forgo the sacraments if they have to, and feed instead on the Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Spiritual Communions, traditional devotions, etc.  May of us have done so for years and, by the grace of God, are still going strong.  Deo gratias!

 | Posted by | Categories: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre | Tagged: , |