returningtheticket said: so are you not with the SSPX anymore and joining the break off?
If you had read the dedication of my blog you would have seen this:
And because now there is a threat, a crisis, to lose all of the above, I also give my full support to the Resistance within SSPX led by His Excellency Bishop Williamson. By doing so, I know I am doing my part to slow down the Society’s very real slide toward Conciliar Rome. I do so because I love SSPX and the undefiled Catholic Faith. Rome must return to Tradition!
So not really. The Resistance solidly continues the line of Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX. It hopes to expose these tricks and prays to God for a great miracle. it is most certainly not a “break off.” It is just like the situation between the SSPX in the 70’s and the Conciliar Church. Archbishop Lefebvre held fast to Catholicism while the rest of the churchmen abandoned Christ (willingly or under the pressure of blind/false obedience). Like I said to a few others on here, the SSPX is fallible and can fall with the rest of them but I will not fall with it.
Bishop Fellay and his “yes-men” have diverted off the tracks and are now heading towards Conciliar Rome, that desert of faithlessness. He has committed grave scandals and has punished good priests, and even laity, that have spoken out against his new orientation. There is no shortage of evidence:
The list is rather long but it is by no means exhaustive! Bishop Fellay has caused the division many now see today. For none of the above can be blamed on Bishop Williamson or on the Resistance. After all, it was he that wrote to then Pope Benedict XVI that he was going to carry on with his plans, despite the fact that he knows it will cause division. I quote him exactly: “I committed myself in this perspective despite the fairly strong opposition in the ranks of the Society and at the price of substantial disruption. And I fully intend to continue to do my best to pursue this path to reach the necessary clarifications.”
I cannot openly support this new direction nor can I remain silent. I now offer my full support and prayers His Excellency Bishop Williamson, Frs. Pfieffer and Hewko, et al, I am trying to help the SSPX to get back on the right track. I attend Fr. Hewko’s masses when he visits NC (once a month). I do go back to St. Anthony’s on all Holy Days of Obligation and on the Sundays I can make it (I live an hour anyway and am currently unemployed so i don’t have much money to travel every weekend). But other than that, I refuse to donate my money and my time to parish projects (which are now very few in number).
I currently administer a Facebook group, which has two goals 1) to keep people informed of what is going on in the crisis and 2) to collect donations for the Resistance priests who have left or were abandoned by Bishop Fellay. I am also in the process of writing my own Open Letter to Bishop Fellay. It is currently being proof-read by a Resistance priest so I don’t sound unprofessional or childish. In it, I touch on few of the more recent scandals mentioned in the above list (with appropriate citations).
And before anybody claims that my acts are unjust, unwarranted, or un-Catholic, let me remind them of this:
I will still defend the position of the SSPX since it was founded canonically and unjustly suppressed. Indeed, it is extremely difficult nowadays, but the facts of history remain and Canon Law is still on our side. Archbishop Lefebvre is in Heaven because of his profound faith and heroism and it is clear that Bishop Williamson is his loyal son. Of course, he has his faults like any man, but he is doing the right thing. The SSPX is still a work of God and somehow, by His grace, it will carry on in someway.
I pray that Christ the King, the Immaculate Heart of Mary, St. Joseph, St. Pius X and the soul of the Archbishop watch over us and keep us in the Faith during these terrible crises. I pray to always refuse Conciliar Rome, even unto death.
Pray for me!
Tradidi quod et accepti.
Hello again I was doing some reading the other day and found something that I thought you might find very enlightening. You have made it very clear that you believe strictly in Ecclesiocentrism, which means that you have to be a member of the church to recieve salvation. Only here’s the thing in 1949 Pope Pius XII flat out rejected that idea. Thought you would want to work that in to your thought process, as its part of the teachings of Mother Church.
First off, I have never used the term “Ecclesiocentrism.”
Secondly, what is your source? What book, encyclical or article were you reading to determine this? I could not find the term in the Catholic Encyclopedia. Nor could I find an encyclical of Pius XII dating from 1949 on the Papal Encyclicals site.
What I have found is this:
248. The members of the Church are those who have validly received the Sacrament of Baptism and who are not separated from the unity of the confession of the Faith, and from the unity of the lawful communion of the Church. (Sent. certa.)
249. Membership of the Church is necessary for all men for salvation. (De fide.) - Dogmas of the Faith
And this very sad quote from a heretic:
The most unpardonable sin, therefore, is ‘ecclesiocentrism,’ the Church concerned above all about herself, her growth, her unity, instead of being concerned about serving the growth and unity of men. - Cardinal Yves Congar (Yikes…sounds like Pope Francis!)
I am wondering if you are accusing me of being a Feenyite. They only believe in the Baptism of Water, whereas faithful Catholics believe in the Three Baptisms: of Water, of Desire and of Blood. Or that you are accusing me of denying the possibility of Invincible Ignorance. I could be wrong about what you are saying, tho.
But yes, to be saved, one must be, in some way, a member of the Catholic Church (Baptized and in the State of Grace at the moment of death). This excludes the new teaching of Full/Partial Communion. I do deny that Modernist teaching. You are either fully in the Ark, in some way, or you are not. Simple as that. Pope Pius XII would not have condemned this dogma. Perhaps he condemned a more extreme position than this.
And just in case anybody wonders what is wrong with Card. Congar’s quote above, I will explain. Ask yourself this: Can the Church say to humanity, “I will dissolve myself in order to promote the unity of man.” or, “I will cease to grow to liberate man.” No. She cannot say that. All other cults can but the Catholic Church cannot. God will not even allow it. Congar suggests that the Church’s growth and unity is totally independent of the growth and unity of men. This is heresy! It is Humanism! The growth and unity of the Church IS the true growth and true unity of men. The freedom of the Church IS the true freedom of man. They are all inseparable. Men grow and are unified by the profession of One Lord, One Faith and One Baptism. And this poor soul was influential at Vatican II. His modernism can be seen in all the major documents.
Hey again I had a non-theological question for you about your views on the church. I know how much you love the papacy and while we differ on how the papacy should apppear to the church we both love it. One thng I’ve always struggled with is the massive and open corruption that the church went through during the renaissance and the middle ages. How do you deal with that? - Nexttoicarus
I am sorry that I have been slow in my reply.
This is a no brainer. We are human. We are inclined to corruption. Prelates can sin and err in teaching. The Church has had plenty of scandals before Vatican II and today. It is simply history and we must learn from it. And the more we know the more we can defend the Church from those who will use the bad parts of our history as “proofs” that it is not the true Church of Christ (this mostly comes from the Protestants). Regardless of all those poor events, the Deposit of the Faith was handed down faithfully through the ages and epochs.
We cannot, of course, apologize and do penance for it, as John Paul II tried to do. Anybody who follows his example is silly. I won’t apologize to the Muslims today for the sins of the Crusaders.
What I can’t stand is the fact that the Conciliar Church (not the Catholic Church) uses our history as a springboard for false ecumenism. It is mind boggling! None of our episodes of corruption or decadence is responsible for any past schism (as JPII said), which is often a result of some heresy. Those who are in schism (many of the Orthodox and all Protestants) are ultimately responsible for cutting themselves off from the Mystical Body of Christ. Nor would it be the fault of the Roman Catholic Church that Liberals, Modernists and Conciliarists cut themselves off from the Mystical Body. Actually, this is the position of the SSPX and its allies! The Holy Father today may be a material heretic, he acts very very badly and privately teaches so many terrible things but we do not cut ourselves off! We resist but we are not in schism, despite the unprecedented crisis. Obviously, there is so much more to it than this but I will leave it here.
This is one of the reasons why the TLM is far superior than the vainly created Protestant liturgy called the Novus Ordo (which is 100% illicit). One waa given to us by Christ and the other by Freemason. They cannot possibly be considered equals. Anybody who does is simply irrational.
Archbishop Annibale Bugnini (Freemason and creator of the Novus Ordo Missae) speaking about the changes that were, unfortunately, made to the Requiem Mass. I quote from the document Sacrosanctum Concilium in order to show what was to be revised.
81. The rite for the burial of the dead should express more clearly the paschal character of Christian death, and should correspond more closely to the circumstances and traditions found in various regions. This holds good also for the liturgical color to be used.
82. The rite for the burial of infants is to be revised, and a special Mass for the occasion should be provided.
That doesn’t sound bad at all…until you dig a bit deeper. The key phrase is “paschal character of Christian death.” This is clearly connected to the very distorted, if not heretical, Paschal Mystery which the Conciliar Church of Modernist Rome adores so much (treated extensively in SSPX’s Problem of the Liturgical Reform study). No longer is the Sacrifice of the Cross the sole act of Christ that effected our Redemption, but His whole life, including His Resurrection and Ascension. This has been condemned by the Council of Trent, which dogmatically affirms that the Sacrifice of the Cross is the supreme act of Christ. The Paschal Mystery gives the New Order of the Mass a different feel to it, a more “positive” spirituality…but at what costs??? Clearly it costs us several important doctrines and it took away hymns and prayers and rubrics that lifted our hearts and minds to the contemplation of those sacred doctrines, as attested by the Freemason above.
Let us not forget also the abuse which allows for the suppression of black vestments and Christian burials of those who committed suicide or even for heretics. But of course that would follow given the suppression of doctrine. Why not give a heretic or a man who committed suicide a proper burial if we no longer believe or profess the doctrine of the Last 4 Things, or even Purgatory? Such things are offensive to Protestant, Jewish and Muslim ears! Remember this is that SAME man who said this:
We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren that is for the Protestants.
How can anybody go to the Novus Ordo Mass after knowing these embarrassing facts? How can anybody rightly say that the TLM and the NO are essentially the same? How can anyone even defend Summorum Pontificum that makes this new order, an illicit, “banal,” “on-the-spot,” creation by a Freemason and 6 Protestants, the de jure norm for the whole Latin Church, over and above the Mass of All Time? It is mind boggling to say the least.
DON’T attend the illicit Novus Ordo Mass! There is a chance that it is invalid. Find yourself an SSPX chapel or, if there are none around, buy yourself a 1962 (or older) Roman Missal and follow it daily, praying that you receive the graces from all the masses said around the world. Send your Guardian Angel to Mass daily or every Sunday in your stead. Do not compromise for nothing.
Fr. Denis Fahey C.S.Sp. (The Kingship of Christ and Organized Naturalism, pg 33)
I cannot count how many times I have found Catholics in the camp that wishes to destroy Christendom and the faith. What is even more sad is that they truly believe that they work for Christ! 99% of the Catholic I meet have been either been born into this ignorance or have been lured in. Either way it is immensely upsetting to me.
You know you are in the Devil’s camp when you attack me when I only repeat what the Church has said for ages, especially if what I repeat opposes what you tend to believe. You know you are in the wrong camp when you are quick to defend heretics and schismatics than those who hold to Tradition in these dark times of crisis. You know you are in the wrong camp when you promote ideas that have never ever been found in the Church before Vatican II. You know you are in the wrong camp when you can look at all the abuses and sacrilegious acts of our prelates and not see the inklings of heresy, schism and even apostasy (or at least a very sick soul).
No, Joshua, those of us on tumblr who have criticized you are not in the Devil’s camp. Stop being so arrogant as to assume you are a great defender of true Catholic orthodoxy against the marauding hordes of heretics, and that every word you speak is the pure gold of Catholic Truth.
YOU do not get to decide what Catholic doctrine is or isn’t.
YOU do not get to declare prelates of the Church heretics.
YOU do not get to call the Pope a material heretic, or accuse him of being mentally sick, or call him a Modernist. That is not your place. Suffer in prayerful silence when you believe such things, not run your mouth on every thought that springs to your mind.
You’re not some great crusader for truth. You are a 22 year old man who blogs about the depravity of Jews and engages in calumny against your fellow Catholics. It’s really quite sad, especially with how earnest you are.
If your goal is to convert people to Tradition, you are doing a horrible job at it.(via digitalpapist)
You clearly don’t listen to any of the saints who have said the exact opposite of you. But then again your church was founded in the 1960!
The Church has already determined what is truth and what is heresy for me. When I see a layman or a prelate hold to what has already been declared anathema then I do nothing wrong. Simple as that.
Pope Francis rejects attack on old rite and says “treasure tradition”
Then it was the turn of the bishop of Conversano and Monopoli, Domenico Padovano, who recounted to the clergy of his diocese how the priority of the bishops of the region of Tavoliere had been that of explaining to the Pope that the mass in the old rite was creating great divisions within the Church. The underlying message: Summorum Pontificum should be cancelled, or at least strongly limited. But Francis said no.
Mgr Padovano explained that Francis replied to them saying that they should be vigilant over the extremism of certain traditionalist groups but also suggesting that they should treasure tradition and create the necessary conditions so that tradition might be able to live alongside innovation.
One thing that jumps out of the story is that the bishops of this region judged that their main pastoral priority - to be communicated to the Pope on a five-yearly visit - was to attack Summorum Pontificum. Forget abortion, embryo experimentation, the push for same-sex marriage throughout Europe, the loss of faith of many Catholics and our failure in catechesis and evangelisation. No, the really big problem is a small number of priests legitimately saying the old Mass.
I have already said something on this but I will say it again. Pope Francis is mentally sick. He is sick with the disease of Modernism. Do you think St. Pius X would have suggested that those bishops create conditions so that tradition can coexist with innovation??? Which pope from our beloved pre-vatican II history would have said such a thing? Not a single one, not even the immoral ones! Tradition and innovation, especially regarding our religion, oppose each other. They cannot coexist. Even if you try to force it they simply will not fit together. One must go and it must be innovation.