Rewind – Fr. David Hewko Sermon – First Sunday of Advent – December 2, 2012 – Caledon, ON

Note:  Fr. David Hewko is no longer associated with Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer.  You may find Fr. Hewko’s statement of departure here.

This sermon was given during Fr. Hewko’s first visit to the Toronto area after leaving the neo-SSPX.


Rewind – Fr. David Hewko’s Open Letter to Bishop Fellay – November 8, 2012


Rewind – Fr. David Hewko on the Red Light Position – January 21, 2015

Note:  Fr. David Hewko is no longer associated with Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer.  You may find Fr. Hewko’s statement of departure here.

Where are the Fake Resistance bishops and priests publicly teaching the red light position after 6 years of the neo-SSPX falling into the hands of Modernist Rome?


CathInfo Thread on Neo-SSPX FAQ Dropping Conclusions regarding FSSP

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:


March 2019 Question and Answer regarding SSPX Marriages in the United States

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.


SSPX Canada Implicitly Admits State of Necessity No Longer Exists

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!

 


6th Anniversary of Infamous Sermon of His Excellency Bishop Bernard Fellay

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?